I think therefore I am?

Question

Every time, and it seems quite frequent, someone asks about “I think, therefore I am” there are always some people who say that it means one of:

-If I don’t think then I am not (either morally, or factually)
-If I think I am something (eg I think I can do x) then I am that thing (I can do x)
-The only real thing is thought
-You should think before you speak
-Thinking describes the sort of person you are

My question is for those who have answered like the above: why did you think that?

-Did you guess?
-Is there a site or book somewhere saying that? (reference please).
-Is that what you want it to mean?
-Have you come to that conclusion after reading Descartes?

Mistral, I looked up an extract of the passage you wrote of. I did a search and couldn't find Descartes anywhere.

Given that Descartes did not mean what you write is the reason you give that meaning to his words that he SHOULD have meant it?

Answer 1

I would have ansered...i do not think , therefore i am not...
I would have answered this way as a mere play of words...no other deep psychological reason.

Answer 2

The phrase "I think therefore I am" is translated from the latin "cogito ergo sum". Rene` Descartes came up with it. This phrase means that because I think, I am.. in the sense that no other animal reasons things out. We are the highest form of animals: animal rationalis which means an animal which can think, with logic. I guess that's all

Answer 3

Hi Anthony,

It's interesting that others have offered all of those different interpretations of Descartes. In fact, they're all wrong. What Descrates was trying to do was validate his own existence; and his "proof" for his existence was that he was conscious of his own thought processes.

Consciousness proves existence. To read into Descartes' statement any more than that would be going to far (even though Hume eventually went that far).

Cheers, mate

Answer 4

I think therefore I am - I exist because I am a thinking conscious being. If did not exist then i would not be concious of my existence. I love Rene Descarte - If he was still alive I would have been a celebrity stalker!

Answer 5

Descartes means that no being can come without consciousness. To be is to have consciousness. Consciousness is thought, as everything that enters to your brain, all those processing of electric signals, is thought. And although that consciousness is lost when we sleep or when we faint, it will come back as long as we are alive. A being is anything alive. When you die, when you eternally part with your consciousness, you stop being. Simple as that.

I think, therefore I am (alive, or human).

If you need resources, read Atlas Shrugged, particularly the chapter "This is John Galt Speaking." This chapter is a monologue of a man, and the monologue began with him explaining consciousness and identity (being).

Answer 6

I think Descartes only wanted to prove that he can feel his existence.

You cannot "not think that you are not"
You can think, that validates your existence, so you are.

I do not think he meant to prove his existence as a non- conscious object can also exist, on the contrary, he meant that his existence is meaningful only because he can think.

I think therefore I am and that makes my existence meaningful.
If I could not think my existence would be meaningless.

EnJoy

Answer 7

Just to second Jack's answer, really. That is indeed what Renee Descartes was doing.

Answer 8

I think to answer, and immediately debilitate the greater part of the nothingness of being without thought.
Thought is an expressed by product excreted from the unknown, untapped mental resources of the brain.
The " I am." because " I think." is a flatulent process of thought.

Answer 9

The easy way to conclude such a discussion is the same way as it was done 300 years ago.
First there was descartes
who said I think thus I ma
along came Rousseau who argumented that
I feel thus I am(awareness due to our senses)
Then Kant stuck his nose in and argumented that it was a combination of the both.
Finally George berkeley shut them all up by argumenting that you should first try to prove that we are.
Just try it, try to find a proof that we really exist
It's harder than you think

Answer 10

I think wikipedia came in handy for a lot of you...