Cogito ergo Sum.

[Robbie_James_Francis]

You would agree that "I" exist, because "I" think? How do you suppose we prove the existence of self through presupposition of the self? It makes no logical sense.

Yes, I agree. In that formulation and taken out of the context of Meditations, the proposition is begging the question. Unless of course we take existence to be an attribute (which it clearly is not, and Descartes doesn't argue that it is). However, when considered in the entirety of Descartes' reasoning, it would seem to make logical sense, IIRC. If it were to be formulated as 'consciousness equals existence' would that be logical? Either way, it would certainly seem to me that his conclusion, that I can say with certainty that I exist, is a definite fact.

But, as I said, I'll have to go back to the book and re-read that section as I didn't find it the easiest thing to understand on first reading!

 

[Danhalen]

Yes, I agree. In that formulation and taken out of the context of Meditations, the proposition is begging the question. Unless of course we take existence to be an attribute (which it clearly is not, and Descartes doesn't argue that it is). However, when considered in the entirety of Descartes' reasoning, it would seem to make logical sense, IIRC. If it were to be formulated as 'consciousness equals existence' would that be logical? Either way, it would certainly seem to me that his conclusion, that I can say with certainty that I exist, is a definite fact.

Even in context, "Cogito" is circular. I don't know if you have read anyone speaking of "Cartesian Circles," but I suggest you do. Try this link, and then read up on critiques of Descartes' philosophy from other philosophers. My personal opinion of Descartes in general: brilliant mathematician, alright philosopher. He takes rationalism too far. With Descartes, you must make too many presuppositions a priori to justify his conclusions. I have the opposite problem with Hume.

 

[Danhalen]

Not to derail your thread, but this is of course of particular interest to me. What are your findings and impressions?

I tried to PM you, but you don't empty your messages. Here is the PM I was going to send:

So far, my impression is German is a verb driven language. That is, one can almost discern the entire meaning of a sentence from the verb. I think this plays out in the perception of the German people as industrious and always on the move. Furthermore, I see the German language using words I would not think of in English for particular actions. For instance, Germans do not clean their houses, you clear your houses. This makes perfect sense, but it is not the way English speaking people think of it. If I were to clear my house, I would remove everything from it. Similarly, Germans would never "pick up" their house. We English speaking people "pick up" our houses all the time. I think this may be the reason Germans are also viewed as precise (that whole German engineering thing).

I'm sure I've forgotten many things I have noticed, but these two things are the most prominent in my mind.

Tchüss,

Danhalen

 

[nadroj1985]

Nietzsche pointed out what I think is the most important critique of this little move: that a thought comes when it wants, and not when I want. The statement "I think" contains a great deal of assumptions, not the least of which is that the "I" somehow must control the "thinking."

"I experience thinking, therefore thinking exists for me." That might be fair. It's a bit more phenomenological. But it doesn't quite do what Descartes wanted.

 

[quatona]

I tried to PM you, but you don't empty your messages. Here is the PM I was going to send:

Yes, sorry. I hate to delete private messages, because they are, well, private. Been out all day, and just today I received the 70th message....

So far, my impression is German is a verb driven language. That is, one can almost discern the entire meaning of a sentence from the verb. I think this plays out in the perception of the German people as industrious and always on the move. Furthermore, I see the German language using words I would not think of in English for particular actions. For instance, Germans do not clean their houses, you clear your houses. This makes perfect sense, but it is not the way English speaking people think of it. If I were to clear my house, I would remove everything from it. Similarly, Germans would never "pick up" their house. We English speaking people "pick up" our houses all the time. I think this may be the reason Germans are also viewed as precise (that whole German engineering thing).

Interesting observations, thanks. I have to think about this a little more.

 

[Danhalen]

Nietzsche pointed out what I think is the most important critique of this little move: that a thought comes when it wants, and not when I want. The statement "I think" contains a great deal of assumptions, not the least of which is that the "I" somehow must control the "thinking."

Thanks for pointing that out. Nietzsche has a lot to say about a lot of people. I think he nailed this one

"I experience thinking, therefore thinking exists for me." That might be fair. It's a bit more phenomenological. But it doesn't quite do what Descartes wanted.

I haven't studied much phenomenology, and your paraphraze of Cogito pretty much explains why.

I miss you over in GA. Your thoughts on subjects drive a lot good debate.