I detest solipsism. It is the idea that probably struck you as a child, and did so as an amusing observation. Perhaps you were a child when you saw something like The Matrix, or better yet, Dark City, or any other of the innumerable sci-fi "the world isn't what you think it is" thingamajigs, and you realized, "hey! I don't really know if what I see is real! What if I'm, like, just a brain in a jar, or something?! Whoah!" As a general rule, if any sentiment sounds like it should be followed by, "whoah, man, that's deep..." it isn't deep. It's childishly shallow.
Hopefully you realized how shallow this observation was by, say, 13 or so. If not, you're probably a philosopher. The scientific response to this childish musing is, "you can't test that hypothesis, so who the fuck cares?! Live your life." And please don't try the Inception test.
No, you can't be sure that what you see as reality is real, or whatever. Who cares?
Unfortunately, were that not a rhetorical question, the answer would be, "philosophers." A lot of them are basically solipsists. They wouldn't admit it because many of them are soft solipsists, but even soft solipsism is annoying as all hell. On the extreme end, there's David Hume. I hate that guy. He essentially argued that we should dispense with the idea that there is any such thing as "causation." Causation is central to any scientific endeavor, but applying the concepts of cause and effect to the real world requires a kind of non-solipsistic world view that Hume wouldn't accept, so, you know, fuck that guy.
Or, move a bit towards soft solipsism and you've got Kant. Most people wouldn't classify Kant as a true solipsist, and he wasn't as much of a solipsist as Hume, but his insistence on discussing the difference between what we perceive versus the world beyond our perceptions and...
Head in a jar. And yeah, we can take that back to Plato's cave. Bored now. If you spend your time worrying about perception versus reality in an epistemological debate with yourself, you are in soft solipsism territory, as far as I'm concerned. Kant was trying not to slide down that slope, and he was better than Hume, but head in a fuckin' jar. I hate solipsism, and that's a big part of why I'm not a philosopher. Also, I didn't want to spend my life contemplating the moral and ethical quandaries of the question, "do you want fries with that?" Or, contemplating the ennui of being replaced by a robot that does it better.
Anyway, moving on to Anthropology, I'm not an anthropologist either. As fun as Indy-style grave-robbing looked when I was a kid, you know who really gets under my skin? Clifford Geertz. I hate that guy. His whole schtick is the notion that scientific inquiry into things like culture is bullshit, there is no such thing as generalizability, and any one person's observations are as valid as any other's, so we should all just observe and absorb and whatever we see and write is, like, cool, man! 'Cuz, really, what is truth?
And that's where I'm going with this. Rudy Giuliani. "Truth isn't truth." The interesting thing about philosophy and Geertzian anthropology is that they aren't exactly bastions of Trump-love. The kind of objective reality-denying, solipsistic world views that are required to support the lying-est liar who ever lied a lie are actually the same ones that you find in the leftiest of the left-leaning disciplines in the already left-leaning academia. Not universally, of course. Not even close. Most of academics are not solipsists, and the physical sciences have become partisan as the GOP has pushed climate denial for the last couple of decades, but it is worth remembering that the actual academic landscape is more complex. Just try talking to a Hume-ian. Or better yet, bang your head against a wall. They will have the same educational effect on you. Learn the scientific method. You need to read Hume to be an educated person, but really. Fuck that guy. Geertz too.
In this, I take comfort. Once upon a time, as a child, I realized that I couldn't be 100% certain that everything was as I perceived it to be. Then, I got distracted by a misshapen booger, because at 12 or so, there's nothing cooler than a booger! Not even solipsism, but if you are still a solipsist past 13... grow up. I have no need to reject any of my philosophical underpinnings in order to reject Trump and everything that his defenders say. I already hated solipsism, post-modernism, and all of that crap.