Cogito, ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. Would this be generally true? It would stand to reason. I have been told god does not think by a few believers. So how can god exist but not think? I do not buy the 'he does not have to think, he knows' story. How can he know if he does not think? And if believers follow god, do they not think as well? Is this why many believers are close minded, because they are following god? Please explain.
2006-10-06 06:05:20 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Give me a break-you need to become a little more educated, and read many other philosophers first.
2006-10-06 06:08:12 · answer #1 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"Cogito, ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. Would this be generally true? It would stand to reason. I have been told god does not think by a few believers. So how can god exist but not think?"
Are you saying that god must think if he exists because of Descartes' Cogito? If so this is a fallacy, you are denying the antecedent. Just because if you think you must exist doesn't mean you can't exist without thinking.
I don't fully understand what you are saying however.
2006-10-06 13:09:11 · answer #2 · answered by DS 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Cogito Ergo AGNOSTIC
2006-10-06 13:09:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't understand your problem.You choose not to believe in God--fine,do what you want.But your beginning argument` I think,therefore I am' is only a copy from `as a man thinks,he is.This is the written word of God.Gods thinking is life in action.His thoughts,as the Bible says,is much higher than ours.I assume you are calling believers closed minded because we won't let man talk us out of what God has given us in His word.Well..so be it.That means Amen.
2006-10-06 23:11:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rene Descartes tried to use this philosophy to prove the existence of God. The church threw him out as a raving lunatic. Funny isn't it.
2006-10-06 13:09:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Think of it as one proof of existance. "I think therefore I am" does not necessarily imply that "I don't think therefore I am not" is true. Therefore by this logic, not thinking does not rule out existance.
In terms of proof, let's assert that:
if p, then q
This does not necessarily mean that:
if not p, then not q
If something is a person, it's a mammal. If something is not a person, it can still be a mammal.
2006-10-06 13:12:29 · answer #6 · answered by Phil 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cogito, ergo bibo
2006-10-06 13:09:30 · answer #7 · answered by Blackacre 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Whenever one tries to anthropomorphisize God, one gets into these seemingly logical contradictions. The problem is trying to limit the infinite....can't be done.
2006-10-06 13:11:42 · answer #8 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Cogito Eggo Sum" (I think, therefore, I am a waffle.)
2006-10-06 13:14:02 · answer #9 · answered by a_delphic_oracle 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
right.
COGITO , ergo sum.
everyone have a different mind.......
2006-10-06 13:10:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋