Forget 'I'?

Question

I believe "someone" pointed out that 'I' is in constant change and hence there is no such thing as 'I'. May i point out that this is a logical conclusion without a conclusion! It doesnt answer the question of being? considering the theories that arise out of consciousness i.e. infinity or nothing. Logically explain existence, remembering that just accepting what you couldnt possibly understand isn't an explanation,and i'll believe existence. If anyone can explain this WITHOUT the often predicated logic, then i will go up in a puff of smoke. Surely we dont just accept something as being fact, when we cant understand how it came to be fact? As i say, to have reason and not use it is not reason, is it?

And of course language is also theory. Note: the theory of language

Answer 1

the homosapien animal is just that. an animal that still glories in the kill as others dream of glorying in a kill [each other]..
the human being, that glorious spark, is our consciousness of the world around us. they are still debating this in the halls of science.
perhaps its just greed that separates us from the rest.
I am thought, reason, rage, that intangeable part of man. they can explain all of the parts we have and how they work, they can show how those parts work together, they can even determine what part of the brain makes us laugh or cry. what they cannot say is what it is that creates that consciousness.

Answer 2

I believe you are confused as to what constitutes "I".
No theory has yet been put forward to claim that there is an "I" that exists throughout time. Perhaps maybe Aristotle's idea of Formal & Material Causes. You are the same, even though all the material that makes you up has changed. (human cells are replaced every 7 years, besides brain cells; they just die.) but even Aristotles ideas have been refuted.
Even Psychological continuity (the most recent of arguemnts for personal identity), your memories & feelings does not stand up to such thought experiments as duplication & teleportation. "The problem of fission"
The closest to the argument you are mentioning is Parfit's idea of "the river of selves" whereby the only constant is the ever changing thing that makes you "I". There is no such this as personal identity, just survivors of the changes that happen in life.
Personally, I am on the fnec e as to what constitutes "I". On the one hand you could say there is no "I", but retrospection would conclude. Of course there is a "me", I am the same vessel i was 2o years ago. It is an unanswerable question, that the more you look into it, the more questions you unearth.
Perhaps what yopu are looking for is a sceptic argument; like Descarte. I can doubt everything, but I am sure i am real because something must exist to doubt everything. The only logical conclusion to Scepticism is "suppose everything is real"
Plus, you appear to be refering in your last sentence to some sort of Foundationalism. What things can we just 'know'. Perhaps you should look to Foundationalism for your answer. (although personally I see no furthering of the personal identity qquestion in using foundationalism, considering most personal identity arguments pre-suppose foundational knowledge i.e I know I exist, that the end of it)

Answer 3

We may not accept something as fact, but may presuppose some thing as true. Look at the normal understanding that exists among people, language. Language presupposes reality, though we can not say reality is a fact, we sure act like it. Every time we fly, it is highly suggested it is real.

Answer 4

Yes, I is constant changes mostly in slow motion, for that "I" would be confused to believe in existence of time. Time for different "I" perceived differently that would explain those lucky ones whom getting older in slow pace.Everything had been checked medically with this guys, no conclusion only guessing. There is impossible to verify how this individual perceived Time. No reference points...only mechanically made devices which subjected to linear logic. May be to put changes on rapid movement or allow them to occur naturally would in contrary add to our life additional years? Naturally? What is it? What exactly cause changes to occur unnaturally? It is our beliefs we forming out of obtained knowledge which is bridged by linear logic. Now, answering your question, there is plenty of other not discovered yet logics would be applied to the explanation of existence. But plainly, existence do not required a belief...in fact belief in it makes everything more and more complex without resolution. Another logic states I would add shouting: "existence just is" deep within you, but it haven't been heard under heavy burden of human intellect, which we are build upon unknown Truth we desperately looking for. Intellect as we use it leading us away from that Truth.Babilon Tower.

Answer 5

I am ME. And that's the bit that YOU'll never see.
Existence is that horrible feeling i get when i open my eyes some mornings. When my consciousness realizes there is no easy way out of this. Other than to dream of the dream state.

Answer 6

You'll never know objective reality for you'll always be looking through a human perspective. http://youtube.com/watch?v=csiAsbPxmmY
Create your reality and leave the rest to it's own devices.

Answer 7

I am because i think ,if i think, i exist, if i exist then there must be existence , if there is existence then what i see exists and is true .if there is truth , then it is true that i believe that i exist

Answer 8

There is no one here! Hey! look at all that smoke!!!!! Oh! Well, I'll go back then!

Answer 9

dti42 You are on TV now...
★ http://www.osoq.com/funstuff/extra/extra04.asp?strName=dti42

Answer 10

Ever hear of faith?