I Think Therefore I Am!!!

Ever wondered how "I think therefore I am" proved your existence??? watch this and find out!!!

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Rene
• Descartes
• Thinking
• Being
• Existence
• Think

[Woootloops]

I actually think Descartes was wrong. If he was correct, then there should be no possible way to doubt the statement "I think, therefore I am", but there is a way:

What can be doubted is the very process by which Descartes came to his conclusion: Human reason. And so, if we can doubt human reason we can doubt all the conclusions therefrom, and thus, Descartes was wrong.

[hofisito]

tru dat!

btw... ever heard of externalism with reference to epistemology??? my epistemology prof used it in one of his famous defenses for Descartes' reasonings and our general study and approach to knowledge

[josh437781]

I've never read anything written by Descartes, but would you agree that aside from thinking, any other activity that a person is conciously engaged in could be sufficant evidence for that persons existance?

[hofisito]

Yea, Descartes actually does say that. Anything we do with our "5 senses" basically proves our existence.

This, however, does not include actions that we do/perform (however it does include the perceptions of these actions... funny enough)

[Woootloops]

@ekpil2000 "And you asserting that it doesn't matter since you doubt it none the less."

Yep. Your arguments don't matter because they can be doubted. This was my sentiment from the first comment but you kept trying to invalidate it through reason, which can't work because that's what's being doubted.

[ekpil2000]

@Woootloops

You can't have both anything (e.g. doubt of existence) and non-existence. They mutually preclude one another. Pick one.

I'm done by the way.

Our disagreement has been boiled down IMHO to.

Your conclusion invalidating the basis of your own conclusion.

My conclusion validating the basis of my own conclusion.

And you asserting that it doesn't matter since you doubt it none the less.

[Woootloops]

@ekpil2000 How many times do I have to say this: I can doubt all of that reasoning and then it isn't a problem that reason doesn't exist even though I am using it.

[ekpil2000]

@Woootloops

For reason to validate your doubt that reason must exist. For you to doubt all existence the reason validating your doubt must have a possibility of being false. If the reason validating your doubt doesn't exist the doubt is unjustified.

[Woootloops]

@hofisito But you're using a certain logic to conclude that the only way I could doubt logic is if I exist, and since I can doubt that logic, that conclusion holds no water.

[hofisito]

@Woootloops The problem is... you just said "I" can doubt your logic. The only way you could doubt someone's logic is if you exist. I think that's the point you're missing.

[Woootloops]

@ekpil2000 I define doubt as you defined it. And I can use reason to validate my doubt if I doubt all existence, because I can doubt that something can't exist if it doesn't exist, or doubt that something can't be used if it doesn't exist. This is what you're not getting. You can't defeat my position with logic because I can doubt your logic.

[ekpil2000]

@Woootloops

If you doubt all of existence you can't use reason to validate your doubt.

Then you need to define doubt as you are using it. Because as I've said before doubt expresses belief in the possibility of something being false. Disproving the possibility of something being false should eliminate the rational of the doubt.

Is doubt refusal to accept concepts regardless of reason?

[Woootloops]

@ekpil2000 "Do you doubt all existence, or just your personal existence? Could you please express your doubts?"

I doubt everything. And as to what you said below that, all of that reasoning can be doubted, as I've said multiple times. And to doubt something doesn't mean you don't believe it, in case that's what you think.

[ekpil2000]

@Woootloops

Do you doubt all existence, or just your personal existence?

Could you please express your doubts?

Do you exist? If yes you have no doubt, you exist. If no you can't pose or answer the question. If you doubt your existence does your doubt exist? If no then you have no doubt, you exist. If you doubt your doubt exists you are in an infinite self contradicting loop (have fun with that). If yes that doubt is part of you and for it to, you exist.

What do you believe about doubt?