To quote Nietzsche, "I am therefore I think".

The other one is just a bunch of crap. I mean, what is thinking?

Consciousness creates the physical body by spiraling itself in like a string being wound around and around itself, such as you would if you wanted to make a ball out of string (the metaphor of modern physic's string theory comes into play here).

Hi all,

I always felt that Descartes famous statement is imbued with great irony. When Descartes famously said:

I think therefore I am

he basically described the continuum that exists between the Mind (what I call Consciousness) and the physical body.

onsciousness creates the physical body by spiraling itself in like a string being wound around and around itself, such as you would if you wanted to make a ball out of string (the metaphor of modern physic's string theory comes into play here).

So when Descartes exclaimed I think therefore I am he actually was describing something very, very different from dualism. Instead of being separated, Consciousness and Physical Body are a continuum of the same. All intertwined and connected like waves in an ocean.

I wonder if he realized it and was just afraid to articulate it because of the religious times. Maybe he was misinterpreted? Maybe he didn't even realize it himself. Who knows? But the irony always strikes me as being very amusing and exciting.

Rich

But you gotta love the way Descartes begs the question, huh?

There is nothing definitive about his claim. It's nonsense, contains a glaring logical flaw. His premise presupposes his conclusion. It's junk. It's hard to believe that his proposition was taken so seriously for such a long time. And I'm quite glad we have over come taking Descartes seriously.

Hi,

I love it. The irony. The ambiguity. The definitiveness. But definitiveness about what. Was he playing tricks with us? Was he trying to hide stuff so that he would not have the Church come down on him? Was his mind playing tricks with him??

This quote, for me, is like the smile of Mona Lisa.

Rich

How could he not be taken seriously? Whether or not Descartes intended the rhetorical device of arguing from authority or not that is how his arguments about self and god were received by the public. Joe Public: "well he's a world renowned mathematician and scientist, what he says about other stuff must be credible." Aside from that, its what the world wanted to hear, both seemingly rational yet undeniably religiously affirming. There is no denying, however, the profound effect he has had on modern thought. Cogito ergo sum has permeated modern western culture to the point that its being illogical doesn't really matter. It is logically accepted because it is accepted not because it is logical.

Eh, why is it not "logical" (whatever that might mean)? the Cogito is an argument (since there is a "therefore") what do you think is illogical about it?

But you gotta love the way Descartes begs the question, huh?

Thats the problem with self-evident truths.

But the thing about foundations and axioms is that in essence you are right, they are circular. But does that necessarily mean they are fallacious or wrong? I dont think so. A foundation has to be relative unto itself, which is why its circular --there is nothing to compare it or have significant reference to.

Sort of. Descartes' maxim appears self evident, but I would contend this is just appealing to what we would want to be true as opposed to recognizing what is true.


Descartes was trying to find something that he could be certain of, but he fails because he presupposes what he is trying to be certain about: he never manages to actually doubt that he exists because he presupposes his existence in the argument for his existence.

As much as I want to agree with you, I cannot even remotely imagine how doubting your own existence is logically coherent. Perhaps you can enlighten me, but I cannot come up with even a somewhat valid scenario.

Descartes said we should give it a try.

It seems to me that when we doubt that "I" exist, we are questioning the true nature of our self. It is evident that something exists, but we have to ask what that something actually is.