Doktor S wrote:joefromchicago wrote: And how did Descartes know that there was an "I" to begin with?
Because the 'I' can question it's existence means the questioner (the 'I') must exist. It is implausible that a question can exist without a questioner.
Ask redundant questions much?
The relation of "questioner" and "question" is a logical relation. It is, in other words, the relation of ideas, not of things. To say that there is no question without a questioner is to say something that is logically true but empirically empty. Yet Descartes's object was to prove that he existed not as an idea but as a
thing. Descartes could no more prove his own existence by relying upon the relationship of question and questioner than he could prove the existence of god by relying upon the relationship of idea and ideal.
Doktor S wrote:I am more of a Nietzsche/Wittgenstein guy, and I didn't claim decartes or anyone else had 'all the answers'.
However, nobody has been able to refute 'cogito ergo sum' in a convincing manner.
That post was not directed to you, it was directed to
crayon851. Not everything is about you,
Dok.
