I think therefore I exist?

Question

Descrates Cognito Ergo Sum.

I think therefore I exist - First we must understand Descrates is proposing a property for existence. Thinking is this property. The second property Descrates Proposes is doubt - for he said that since we can`t doubt that we have a mind, which would be entertaining a thought, it must be true it exist. Accoding to Descrates Thinking and Doubting are necessary condtions for existence. Thought + Doubting = Existence

This is an dangerous propsotion for it can be said that anything that fails to meet this critea fails to exist or is not of induitable existence. I disagree. Thinking and doubting are not necessary condtions for existence. Energy is the necessary property for existence. Everything Exist! For everything is a form of energy. Even imaginative thougths exist for it uses the electrochemical charge in your brain to produce such thoughts. The only thing that does not exist is Nothing. Which would be the absence of any and all energy.

According to Descrates, people who are unconcious, braindead, or in a coma are not of induietable existence. Because If you can`t doubt that you have a mind then it can`t be said that you exist indefintely. I see no reason to accept that. Though there are many to reject it. Obviously are bodies, foremost our Brains are connected to our mind. I even propose that the Brain and the Mind are one and the same object but that is a seperate arguement. How can we use our brain to produce thoughts, and yet say it does not exist indefinelty? Descrates is Wrong! His famous pharse sounds nice but has no merit. What he is actually saying is that only the mind exist. Yet the mind came from mother nature, came to be in existence after millions of years of evolution. Descrates arguement is Cognito Ignorant Dumb!

TheProf - You dont what your talking about. Read Descrates Philosophy! His foundationalism is based on his "Method of Doubt Test" which he designed to be a system for building any and all knowledge on. He proposes that which you can`t doubt in your mind exist indefintely and is knowledge. Whatever you can doubt cannot be said to be knowledge. Pick up a philosophy book and "READ" b4 you make a statement! His philosophy has nothing to do with choices what the hell are you talking about?

Tim W - Although I respect your position as you have obviously read up on the subject you are wrong. I think therefore I exist is not an arguement for dualism it is a by-product. I think therefore I exist is an arguement to attain knowledge.

Definiton from Answers - ergo sum cogito by René Descartes as a first step in demonstrating the attainability of knowledge.

Just to clarify - I think therefore Iam or exist or whatever is the first propostion in Descartes Foundationalism. His Foundationalism was built on introspection "Doubing" and was intended to be the system which he termed his "method of doubt system" which we build any and all knowledge on.
Dualsim - Is an by-product an afterthought of foundationalism. Yes he uses the propostion " I think therefore Iam in each arguement" but this proposition is intended to be that which we build any and all knowledge on hence, it is more closely related to foundationalism than dualsim.

Answer 1

The proper equasion is You think therfore you CREATE

Answer 2

Cogito ergo sum is part of an argument for dualism, the epistemological concept that the mind is non-physical and in Descartes view is thus an ontologically distinct substance from the physical realm that the body is a part of. It is not an argument saying that oly thinking things exists as you seem to be suggesting. He is not arguing that thinking is a necessary requirement for existence, but that by thinking we necessarily confirm that we cannot DOUBT that the mind exist because the very act of thinking confirms the mind exist. He argues that on the other hand we can reasonably doubt the existence of our material body (this is not the same as saying that therefore our bodies do not exist). We cannot rule out that our mind which we use to perceive the material world is being manipulated by an evil demon (see also the brain in a vat debate or the more popular how do we know we are not in the Matrix argument). His argument can be summed up as:

1. I can doubt whether my body and my physical brain exist.
2. I cannot doubt whether I (that is my mind) exists.

Therefore

C1. My mind is not my body, it must be a non-physical entity.

However this is not a valid argument as Descarte's logic has committed a modal fallacy as doubt is necessary subjective and dependent on the person. An argument of the same format as Descarte's could be:

1. I can doubt whether Eric Blair wrote 1984.
2. I cannot doubt whether George Orwell wrote 1984.

Therefore

C1. George Orwell is not Eric Blair.

The premises could reasonably be true (many people know the author named on the cover of 1984, but do not know that it is a pseudonym) but the conclusion is false and so by the standard definition of validity in logic the argument is invalid.

Of course there are many more arguments in this debate. Hume attempts to argue that even Descarte's premise that introspection means we cannot doubt the mind existence by arguing that all thinking does is identify a stream of consciousness and not a unified mind. Carruthers identifies an argument or dualism that avoids Descartes' modal fallacy which you can find in The nature of the mind: an introduction (Routledge 2004) or Introducing persons: theories and arguments in the philosophy of mind (Croom Helm 1986/Routledge1989).. An refutation of the new dualism argument is also offered in his work.

Answer 3

I think the best translation is "I think, therefore I am."

"I am" is the same words used by Jesus in the Bible (for those who follow such things).

"I am" is much more powerful than "I exist". If my body were laying in my living room, and for some reason "I' wasn't in it, would my family still feel that "I" exist?

Perhaps I've died. Perhaps somehow someone managed to create my body, but wasn't able to put the real "me" in there. Perhaps I've figured out how to have an out of body experience. Doesn't matter. The point I'm bringing up is this. Though my body exists, that isn't even close to the same thing as saying, "I am."

I. Am.

I is an amazing concept, whether you are Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Athiest. What is I?

And the fact that "I am", well, that's truly awe inspiring. Look at it from an Athiest point of view. Life spawned, and developed to the point that we were intelligent enough to create the Internet, and communciate across the globe, across cultural boundaries, on a simple board called Yahoo Answers, and debate the very essence of our being.

Even if you think this is just chemicals interacting within us, it's still an amazing concept.

Much deeper than "I exist". A rock exists. A tree exists. I am.

Answer 4

Are you even asking a question here, or just ranting?

You are trying to reduce philosophy to science, and you can't really do that. Descartes was making a philosophical argument, not a scientific one. I think, therefore I am..... I am what I am because I think. I exist in the form that I am because of the thoughts and doubts that I have. That is absolutely true. If you thought differently or doubted differently, you would have made different choices in your life, which means you would not be the person you currently are. Every choice you have made, every thought you have had, and every thing you have doubted all add up to the person you are this instant. One micro-change, and you'd be someone else.

So, thinking and doubting are necessary conditions for existence.

Answer 5

What you have to remember about Descartes is that he was the first person to try to apply the scientific method to philosophy, and he really meant to apply it to ethics, which he failed at miserably. his cognito ergo sum, was merely a way to prove his own existence, he was a scientist first, which meant you could also know other things existed through physical observations. I believe that you took his saying i think therefore I am too literally when applied to the rest of the world. It was meant only for the person thinking, everything else can be know through experience, and experiment. The doubting came in because in the scientific method, which his book was named after , Discourse on Method, doubt is the position that must be taken by any good scientist if he wants to find truth.

Answer 6

I remember the quote as "I thing therefore I am", If I am understanding your statement correctly, you would change that to "I am, therefore I think". Is that correct?
I'm not questioning your thinking, just trying to understand, I plead ignorance.
Are you telling me that energy preceded, matter, or is it the impetuous for the movement of matter?
Please feel free to email me your thinking, I am sincerely interested. It's really a great subject for thought.

Answer 7

lol srry for not reading the whole thing and i know im going to say something stupid cause of it but anyway.. if you are saying that onlly things that can think exist this would be "false" since other things like rocks cannot ( to the best of my knowledge) think

that was probably not what u or the philosipher ment tho =p

Answer 8

You exist simply because God exists. God created the heaven and the earth. he created man in his own image.

Isaiah 45:18

Answer 9

You exist, therefore you think.

Answer 10

I am that i am.(and in the image of the creator )