. . . I would reply, "Right, you can't have proof that they're conscious. You can't be certain. But a great deal of strong evidence could be provided to you. That being so, it isn't correct to say that we 'lack evidence,' and so believing in their consciousness is 'pure faith'. What we lack is certainty, a different matter." — J

That's a great way to put it, definitely better than mine.

I do appreciate all of these perspectives and criticisms of my wording, they're very helpful

A world in which oneself is the only conscious being strikes me as being dangerously close to psychopathology. — Wayfarer

Perhaps I should reiterate my reason for writing this essay. It actually doesn't fit completely with my view of consciousness; indeed, I don't believe in solipsism. However, I think it is necessary to consider every argument, and then either agree or disagree with that argument. So while this post could take a solipsist standpoint, my intention was actually to disprove the idea that is possessed by some that "other people, that are believed to be projections of the mind, do not possess a consciousness." Because if we do assume that solipsism is the case and that other people are projections of our own consciousness, it is nonsensical to say that those people then lack a consciousness, which is why I made the point that that consciousness would still exist, however it would be our own.

Thank you for your response.

I am suspicious of claims of common sense, self-evidence, obviousness, or certainty, at least in a philosophical setting. — T Clark

No, you're right there. I've never written a philosophical essay of any kind before, so I'm still testing the ropes with it. I'll bear this in mind because the language used in philosophical essays certainly differs from other essays.

Are you familiar with p-zombies? — T Clark

No, I can't say that I am. There are still many things I'm yet to familiarise myself with in this area