(July 29, 2012 at 5:47 pm)Perhaps Wrote: By conscious I meant simply something ascribed as a property of thought. More specifically, Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum. I cannot assert the existence of an 'I', merely the existence of a doubt (categorized earlier as a conscious thought).
Does this mean the Cartesian cogito fails to prove the existence of an "I"?
It wouldn't prove, as you have noted, a temporal or physical area for an "I" to exist in. Doesn't the existence of a conscious thought prove that there had to be something thinking it?
"The thought proves the thought, and nothing more" seems to be what you are saying.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
