The Self-Evident

[Resha Caner]

OK. Let me clarify: ..demonstrate that a self has properties consistent with selves.

But what if all things are consistent in that way? Don't we need a test that distinguishes self from other things?

 

[Lethe]

The empiricist might take the Turing test and just keep asking questions until all people who've taken the test are identifiably distinguished.

 

[Upisoft]

Model or real, what the difference in this context? At the least, its a real model.

I beg to differ, no model is the same as the thing it represents. Only the model of something can be evident, because without one the brain has no access to it.
When something is being evidenced the model of it is processed by the brain. Thus the model of "self" is different than "self", because "self" has ability to process information, but the model of "self" does not.

 

[Lethe]

I also agree that our self-model is not the same as what it represents. We frequently mischaracterize ourselves, usually to our detriment. Whether it is being too optimistic or pessimistic about our abilities or effect on others, it's obvious that people make incorrect assessments about themselves all the time.

 

[Upisoft]

I also agree that our self-model is not the same as what it represents. We frequently mischaracterize ourselves, usually to our detriment. Whether it is being too optimistic or pessimistic about our abilities or effect on others, it's obvious that people make incorrect assessments about themselves all the time.

Good point.

Everything that is self-"evident" is necessarily qualia thus it cannot be evident to anyone else.
Like the sensation you call seeing "red". It is self-"evident" to you and you only.

If we twist what "evidence" means then qualia is self-evident.

 

[Resha Caner]

Good point.

Everything that is self-"evident" is necessarily qualia thus it cannot be evident to anyone else.
Like the sensation you call seeing "red". It is self-"evident" to you and you only.

If we twist what "evidence" means then qualia is self-evident.

I thought someone might go here, and it's the one thing for which I don't have a refutation. It does seem this might be an answer to the question. But of what value is it given Lethe's comment in post #15?

 

[essentialsaltes]

I didn't say it was an assumption about self, just that it was an assumption.

I would deny that it is an assumption. His doubt was simply his research program, ironically the same one you're carrying out. Trying to figure out what, if anything, is so self-evident that there can be no way to deny it.

Cogito ergo sum is a self-evident truth.

Others perhaps would be truths that follow from definitions. "All bachelors are unmarried." This would also perhaps include all of mathematics, which may put a pretty odd flavor to self-evident, since it may not be 'obvious' that the sum of the first N cubes is the square of the sum of the first N numbers.

 

[Upisoft]

Cogito ergo sum is a self-evident truth.

That would require learning Latin at least as much as to know what that means.
Therefore it is not self evident. It is a model in a extinct language.

 

[durangodawood]

I beg to differ, no model is the same as the thing it represents. Only the model of something can be evident, because without one the brain has no access to it.
When something is being evidenced the model of it is processed by the brain. Thus the model of "self" is different than "self", because "self" has ability to process information, but the model of "self" does not.

Sure

Its self evident to me that I have a modeled self. Thats saying something.

 

[Resha Caner]

That would require learning Latin ...

You assumed he was referring to the Latin phrase. I happen to know that in the Vl'hurg tongue this means "black jewelled battle shorts".

 

[Upisoft]

I thought someone might go here, and it's the one thing for which I don't have a refutation. It does seem this might be an answer to the question. But of what value is it given Lethe's comment in post #15?

Well, assumptions and definitions are subset of the language we use. The language itself is a model. So, there is no way to escape of it.

 

[Upisoft]

You assumed he was referring to the Latin phrase. I happen to know that in the Vl'hurg tongue this means "black jewelled battle shorts".

Well, that's self evident
Who does not know Vl'hurg after birth? Even before birth...