How does the phrase "I think,therefore i am" prove i(the mind) exists?

...for all that I know, any time "data" is transferred from a "system" to another, something is being "observed" whatever that system might be...

you assuming "agent" clarifies anything...but you can't even be certain of "agency"..."process" is all you have...to my view a far wider and sobering term...

...another one to party about is "awareness"...but yet again, if I say Earth is "aware" at all times of sun's gravitational pull am I lying, or saying something utterly wrong ? of course not...

The “i am” is aware of a lot of things one of which is thought.We are not thoughts we just have conscious outward thoughts and are aware (consciously or subconsciously) of incoming thoughts to varying degrees.

The cogito is based on an observation. It says, "I am thinking or perceiving. Even if I am utterly fooled, such that there is nothing but a mind in a vat, then I must conclude that I exist, as there is someone having this thought or perception." As long as there is a perception, there is a perceiver, or else we would not be having a perception, but we are, and so we must exist, at least as a perceiver. Thus, I think (or perceive), therefore I am.

The “i am” is a presence that has awareness of many things... one of which is consciousness states.One can alter the consciousness state from autopilot to manual at leisure.As most people are not that familiar with consciousness types....they generally only live in the autopilot state and are controlled mainly by autopilot thoughts rather than manual thoughts.Thoughts cause emotions.Constant negative thoughts cause anxiety and depression.

That has nothing to do with the topic, but we can discuss it if you like.

Well ...I was just making things a bit clearer...Some people get confused you see.

I disagree with Descartes "Cogito ergum sum"!

The problem on the axiom he proposes starts with the "I" itself.

He rather should have focus in a more abstract manner in the Experiencing itself which cannot be dismissed out of existence even if the kind of experiencing we have in our domain is just a "dream" or "matrix" of some kind.
Dreams are real dreams...while that which is doing the dreaming we don't know what is or if it is at all.

Maybe pure experiencing is all there is, and nothing of the sort we imagine it means. Experiencing does not entail a subject, free will, volition, and other supposed fundamentals...
Experiencing is just a 4D movie!

A better axiom is an axiom which cannot be contradicted and Experiencing cannot be contradicted as experiencing is required to attempt to dismiss Experiencing itself, which is paradoxical.

SELF is AWARE of many things one of which is thought types (inward/outward).SELF is not thought types however .SELF is aware of which consciousness state it is in (autopilot or manual) and can alter that consciousness state if that is SELF is aware enough to do so.In other words self has the option to consciously take up the CONTROLS.SELF experiences emotions as a result of thought types or information coming in from the senses.

Descartes got the statement “I think therefore I am “ the wrong way around because he was trapped in consciousness and hadn’t moved on into awareness....he hadn’t cognised himself sufficiently.This is because he hadn’t consciously taken up the controls and therefore only ever subconsciously existed in the ........autopilot = autopilot or non active 0,0 state.

I would agree with you when you mention the word AWARE.Tbis word is not recognised in the sciences yet because scientists don’t understand the importance of it

Thoughts are merely a combination of internal sounds and visualisations created by vibrations,

PRESENCE,is separate from but AWARE of these combined audio/visual combinations.

PRESENCE is not a thought therefore because AWARENESS separates PRESENCE from internal sound and visualisations.

Varying Frequency but Balanced & Symmetrical (+/-=+/-) Vibrations create sound and visualisations within the brain.

PRESENCE which exists hears and sees these combined audio/visual combinations in the form of thoughts because PRESENCE is AWARE.

It doesn't. The only thing it really proves is that there is "experiencing" and that includes the sense of self and the impression there is one "I"...

Give the Time the claim was made at, it is understandable, tho Descartes "Cogitum ergum Sum" was criticized later on by various renown Philosophers, if I am not mistaken on the top of my head, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and some others.

I myself have made the exact same point half a dozen years back or so here on the forum before later I came to know the same argument had been used way way back.

Experiencing of what though?

I doubt you know the experiencing that enables you to introduce control of consciousness or the science behind it.

You require true AWARENESS for that which only comes from sound philosophy not a hopeful philosophy of which +=- and -=+ is the foundation.

All sciences are interconnected you see and adopt exactly the same philosophy.

“I am, therefore I think” is the correct philosophical statement.

A thought is created due to the interaction of vibrating electrical signals within an electromagnetic vibratory balanced system (+/-=+/-).The electrical signals are pushed and pulled as they pass through these symmetrically balanced electromagnetic fields.

The resultant varying frequency vibrations create visual and audible images that we know as thoughts.

We are not those visual or audible images (thoughts).

We are AWARE of them.

Awareness is not a term used in science yet.

Awareness separates PRESENCE from thoughts which are merely sounds and visualisations created by vibration.

I maintain that there are two ways in which to explain vibration in nature. The first is how accepted modern day science explains it which I totally reject on the grounds that this scientific theory is of no use whatsoever in explaining the psychological (brain/mind) interface. The specific reason I reject it being that this science adopts two completely different theories to explain attraction and repulsion forces and is therefore an unsymmetrical/unbalanced theory.

The second way to explain vibration in nature is by way of equal but opposite electromagnetic force pairs interactions of which there are 4 types in nature -/-.......+/-........-/+.........+/+

If you combine these 4 off electromagnetic force pair interaction combinations together into one formula you get +/-=+/-

I maintain that it is this formula that provides the correct vibratory and symmetrical balance that is required in order to explain the psychological (brain/mind) workings/interface.

We need to separate PRESENCE from thoughts because we are not thoughts which are merely internal sounds and visions created by electrical signals interacting with balanced and symmetrical electromagnetic vibrations.

We need to position ourselves directly in the middle of these interacting and vibrating electrical signals and vibrating electromagnetic force combination interactions but remain separate from them.

PRESENCE just needs to be AWARE of them and their purpose in providing the necessary sounds and visons required for thought.