I think therefore I Am?

But do we really think?

It was Descartes who said "I think therefore I am," which is an identification with ego, and it was Sartre who said "The consciousness that says 'I am' is not the consciousness that thinks,' "

Eckhart Tolle said on the subject "When you are aware that you are thinking, that awareness is not part of that thinking. It is a different dimension of consciousness." :laugh:

It is the mind that thinks, not conscious awareness. What is termed to be "thinking" is a construct of language which allows us to speak of mind and its function as the tool it is. Creativity comes through higher consciousness, as it were, rather than the thinking mind which is the avenue of the ego.

So ask yourself, "Who in my mind is aware that mind exists?" :huh:

I'm not sure if and how we 'think'. But I AM sure of this: this famous quote is backwards. :dry:

This philosophical statement should read. "I am, therefore I (am able to) think." We've got to exist in some form or another before we can think, by however definition we chose to apply it to. Thinking does make us exist. But existing allows us to think.

"I think, therefore I am" states the logical reasoning behibd Descartes' proof. It really is that we ARE therefore we THINK, but the statement is deductive and that's why it's stated like this.

The 'I' in Decartes' experiement is mere consciousness. If you subtract everything out of the world that is subject to doubt (technically almost everything is) and might as well not exist, the only thing that always remains is the subtraction and doubts you made. You can't think away your thoughts because that would only produce other thoughts to think away. However, Decartes also presumed that in order for thoughts to be there must be a thinker and deduced that one must exist if one has any thoughts. He probably didn't consider that the same creation-creator argument was frequently used to justify the belief in supernatural creator beings that he as rationalist didn't believe to exist.

Gisteron wrote: You can't think away your thoughts because that would only produce other thoughts to think away.

Does that mean that there is one entity in my head!

He probably didn't consider that the same creation-creator argument was frequently used to justify the belief in supernatural creator beings that he as rationalist didn't believe to exist

To be clear, Descartes believed in God... And I believe it was the third meditation where he considered the possibility...

He believed that he/we are created by an entity greater than ourselves, for "the creation must come from something, therefore, it is a part of the original creator"

So, it is less than the original...

Since we are from the earth, this would appear so...

And, everything can be doubted...

There is not one of your senses that cannot be fooled... If it can be fooled, it cannot be trusted, therefor, the only thing you can be certain of is that you exist, if you can question it...

I can question my existence, but I cannot question yours... Because I am not you...

A rock, not being conscience, cannot question itself in a way we understand, so, because of this, it cannot exist, to itself, lol...

The only thing, that any one of us can be sure of, is that we think, and can question it, therefore, we exist...

Everything else could be a dream...

*Points to signature below*

Who's to say that consciousness is only one thought? Maybe it's a bunch of thoughts. In fact, I'm pretty sure it is a bunch of thoughts. There needs to be at least two for consciousness.

This philosophical statement should read. "I am, therefore I (am able to) think." We've got to exist in some form or another before we can think, by however definition we chose to apply it to. Thinking does make us exist. But existing allows us to think.

You misundertand him. He states that his own ability to think proves that he exists. Not that his own thought creates him. (Which we'll agree makes no sense).

Descartes is a bit crazy though. I mean, he came up with stuff like "god created me therefore god exists", and "god is perfect, if he didn't exist he wouldn't be perfect" (I would like to say that my personal belief is that perfection does not exist ), "god exists because only his great power could have given my limited self the ability to understand his great power".


This is so fallacious I'm split between finding hilarious or sickening.

ren wrote: Descartes is a bit crazy though. I mean, he came up with stuff like "god created me therefore god exists",

Well sure, we did not create ourselves, so far as we can tell at this time, lol...

But, again, we removed the personality of the entity...

People like assigning human qualities to things to make them feel more understandable...

"mean" dog, "angry" bull...

"kind" or "wrathful" God...

Makes me laugh...lol... see?

descartes came up with the cartesian circle trying to reconcile philosophy and emerging sciences with the church, since in his time the church persecuted anyone that spoke out against god or the church (this included scientists and philosophers)...he felt if he could use philosophy to prove god's existence, then it would be possible to use science to prove god's existence, then the church would be willing to accept both fields and cease persecution...

but again the end result was the cartesian circle which is flawed...the existence of something cannot be proof of something that creates the original something...the cartesian circle gives me a headache everytime i think about it...no wonder descartes was mental...he argued with himself in circles...and we all know circles have no beginning and no end...

Jestor wrote:

ren wrote: Descartes is a bit crazy though. I mean, he came up with stuff like "god created me therefore god exists",

Well sure, we did not create ourselves, so far as we can tell at this time, lol...

But, again, we removed the personality of the entity...

People like assigning human qualities to things to make them feel more understandable...

"mean" dog, "angry" bull...

"kind" or "wrathful" God...

Makes me laugh...lol... see?

That's not the point Jestor. He says god exists because god created him. He makes the assumption that god created him before knowing if god exists.

His ideas would be like me saying "a giant cylindrical alien spaceship making whale noises created me, therefore giant cylindrical alien spaceships making whale noises exist".

"cylindrical alien spaceships make whale noises, if they didn't exist, they wouldn't make whale noises".

"cylindrical alien spaceships exist because only their great whale noises could have allowed my limited ears to hear the whale noises of the cylindrical alien spaceships".