2006-08-09 20:14:26 · 10 answers · asked by mystic_speculator 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
i think that statement was used to represent man as a rational being all of his own, that could determine and answer his own questions without relying on a higher power to explain existence. Basically man realized that he was capable of thinking for himself without having to simply accept answers and explanations passed on to them.
It drives the point home that man IS capable of thinking for himself therefore he does exist and truly lives instead of just existing and not thinking for himself. Where would we be now if we had not started seeking our own answers and just excepting the thought that things are that way because god or the king or whoever says so.
2006-08-09 20:33:39 · answer #1 · answered by Sue S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What about things that exist, but probably don't think, like the keyboard I'm typing at right now?
Remember the whole point of "I think, therefore I am." We know that we are real and we exist because we think and we are aware of ourselves. It's the first, most solid thing we can know.
It doesn't say anything about where thinking comes from. Are we physical things first -- does the "am" come first and the thinking from that --or are we minds or souls first? That's a seperate argument.
2006-08-10 04:31:20 · answer #2 · answered by Ms Sunlight 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes you are right ! Now !
Very few will agree though !
The level of consciousness that a person has evolved decides which is right FOR HIM !
A being can be centered in his body, mind or enjoy the state of being a witness of both !
2006-08-10 09:29:13 · answer #3 · answered by Spiritualseeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
why not "therefore, i think i am"? it can be used either way. Among sentient beings, the capacity for thought determines that the individual knows he exists, but the sentient being would have to exist before thnking about his existence. but it doesn't really matter. rocks exist, but they do not think.
2006-08-10 04:04:52 · answer #4 · answered by Stand-up Philosopher 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should be "Thinking is what makes me"
I don't think it is something that leads to another (the thinking leading to ones' existence or vise versa)
Thinking and existence co-exist
2006-08-10 06:41:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because to be, does not automatically = thought/the ability to think. However, if something has the ability to think, then it must be.
2006-08-10 03:38:34 · answer #6 · answered by solipsistic 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Descartes would be able to answer that if he were alive; since he said it.
2006-08-11 03:09:13 · answer #7 · answered by cecile89 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because the sayer (rene decarte) wanted to prove his existance
2006-08-10 03:27:45 · answer #8 · answered by Freigeist 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it doesn't make any blasted sense.
Words DO have meanings, you know.
2006-08-10 17:16:21 · answer #9 · answered by Keither 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because just because you are doesn't mean that you think.
2006-08-10 03:21:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋