Banno

Go on, then. Here is the premise: or in my parsing Show how that is equivalent to A?B.

No, it isn't.

I'm not going over that again. Time to move on. Corvus is wrong, but perhaps not in the way folk have suggested; and that he is wrong does not imply t...

The premise is invalid. But it is not a contradiction. That is, it seems possible. (But it has been a long few days and I may be wrong). @"Corvus"' lo...

I don't know how to do that any further than I already have. P= (t?e) Q= (¬t?¬e) The first assumption: (t?e)?(¬t?¬e) I can't see how to make that any ...

Only if you misread what is writ. I certainly did not write (t?e)?(¬t?¬e) ? (t?e) That's invalid. Indeed, I am not saying anything of that sort, but p...

Ok, so (t?e) ? (¬t?¬e) is invalid. "I think therefore I am" is not equivalent to "I don't think therefore I am not". And (t?e)?(¬e?¬t) "I think theref...

Also, t?e negated is ¬(t?e)) but ¬(t?e) ? (¬e?¬t) is invalid, and ¬(t?e) ? (¬t?¬e) is invalid. ¬(t?e) ? (¬e?t)? (fixed link)

I was going to agree, but... Editing post now I have time to take a look... t=I think e=I exist t?e ¬t?¬e And the syllogism is... (t?e)?(¬t?¬e) ¬(¬t?¬...

It's a story about obeying one's master, like it or not. Abraham does what he is told, to the point of obscenity, and is rewarded.

Rescinded, see below.

That's the pat reply, softening the story for more liberal times. It's about fear, submission and obedience. Faith is believing despite the facts. It ...

, your post here: sets out a denial of the need for hyperbolic doubt, while seemingly defensive of the Cogito. But if you are saying "I am" will do, w...

But it is denied... Here's my position again. The enterprise of the Second Meditation relies on doubt, and doubt is a language game. Doubting some pro...

Yep, I can go along with that, at least as a speculation.

Well, they do if they are by definition thinking things. That's rather the point. It seems that the defenders of the Cogito now want something like "I...

I do not have access tot he full article. What do they take Russell's argument to be, and why do they reject it? Ooo I take that back. I hadn't logged...

Then perhaps you might explain it to me? Are you suggesting that the arguments in the Second Meditation are metaphors? Metaphors for what? They look v...

You said: "the cogito as a poem, rather than a complete thought" "It's not the poem that gives certainty" "this poem... implies a more complete argume...

So you are convinced by incomplete thoughts. Ok. I don't think it is I who is not being serious.

Walk away, then. The question is, what can I know with 100% certainty? You seem to be claiming the Cogito as the source of your certainty. I'm asking ...

So it's a poem and an argument? In your own words, it's not You were convinced by an incomplete thought? All of them, or just the incomplete ones?

How's that, then? Can you set it out?

So you think of the Cogito as a poem, and are not convinced by it, but by the argument you find in it? I don't follow that. So what grants certainty? ...

Then what?

Yep. It sits in the foundational story of Abraham, who would sacrifice his son because god wills it, glorifying doing what one is told to do over taki...

Is the poem sufficient to give you 100% certainty?

How shall we fuck off, oh Lord?

Don't forget, Good Friday is a Holy Day of Obligation. You are obligated to watch Life of Brian.

Here's a list of your replies to me. SO, if we go back to the beginning, I gather you were being ironic. Again, I find myself puzzling as to what we m...

Is that it is an intuition enough for it to be 100% certain? Folk are 100% certain about all sorts of things. Is it enough for it to be known with 100...

Well, no, but I won't do chapter and verse. See, you took over an argument from someone else - where they were claiming that to be the whole of the Co...

Thanks - Hegel as a case in point.

From a related thread... The Madfool was a now-banned individual. It might be better to say that If Descartes' argument is valid, then it is circular....

Quite right. In so far as I have a purpose here, it is to show how silly it is to rely on "I think, therefore I am". To that end, I have been at pains...

On Tuesdays and Thursdays... There is a difference between concluding that a particular individual is pink - "Fred is pink" - and concluding that some...

This is more to the case. But there is a problem here, in the move from a variable to an individual... to For clarity, let's move to free logic, adopt...

You keep doing this. I ask for a demonstration that "Whatever thinks, exists", and you reply with a demonstration that if "Whatever thinks, exists" th...

I'm not following what you say here.

Same here. Pretty much. So mathematical expressions are true only if there is a proof-path that shows it to be true. There are, one concludes, mathema...

From the Second Meditation: Descartes might have had more sympathy for @"Corvus"' argument than folk hereabouts suppose.

Thank you. That is, and this is the point being made, "I think therefore I am", if parsed as "p?q", is not a tautology, is invalid, and need not, at l...

Goodness. A wonderful topic, but I suspect that there is too much here for a single thread - it might have been better to choose one part of the issue...

Me? I would have you to question the very notion of needing an absolute foundation for what you know. I think you know plenty of things, like that I'm...

That was an honest answer: I don't know. So help me - show me that "I think, therefore I am" is 100% certain. With something more than your intuition.

I do not think the Cogito convincing, on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Monday, and Wednesday, I'm quite convinced. Friday and Saturday, I take an agnostic p...

I've answered that. Again, it is a loaded question. If you are going to claim that the Cogito is 100% certain, then you presumably are able to set out...

Can you show me that it isn't? Can you make the Cogito the result of an argument, rather than a mere presumption? You are going to need something more...

So the basis for 100% certainty in the Cogito is... your intuition? Are you happy with that?

Try to stay on topic. What is the basis for claiming that "I think, therefore I am" is indubitable?