"I think, therefore I am"
Can you spot the fallacy?
Is/ought?
>>857026
Oh Socrates himself was permanently pissed.
no but i can see this clever man has a clever phallus for which to give to those around him who dont have a clever phallus of their own to share with the world haha
>>857026
Anecdotal?
JOHN STUART MILL OF HIS OWN FREE WILL ON HALF A PINT OF SHANDY WAS PARTICULARLY ILL
>>857026
"I am, and I think, therefore I am"
Hint:
"I"
"We wuz, therefore kangz"
>>857026
yes. your lack of understanding of latin shows very much.
well done, undergraduate.
>>857026
assuming "I think" assumes "I" exists, and therefore cannot be proof that "I" exists
circular logic
an expanded version is "I am and I think, therefore I am", which makes no sense.
Fallacies are a fallacy you fallacious faggot
>>857026
>>857227
How are you understanding the Cogito? It might not have been meant to be a standard argument; it might have been intended as a kind of performative argument (Jaako Hintikka argues something like this); the point is that it leads to a performative contradiction to deny that I exist, since denying is (by Descartes definition) a kind of thinking; to deny that I exist is to think, and to know at the very least that I am (a) thinking substance.
Regardless, no matter whether you interpret it in this performative way or not, the argument is intended to establish that the thinker of the Cogito exists as a thinking thing, as a particular kind of substance (mental substance--or what is typically called mind).
I think there are plenty of interesting problems with the Cogito, but the expanded version spelled out by (>>857227) doesn't seem right. I don't think it's broken down into the premises, "I am; I think" and the conclusion "therefore I am". It's just, "I think" "therefore I am (a thinking thing); the expanded version seems to be more like: "If a thing is thinking, then it exists; I am thinking [as evidenced by this very mental activity of constructing an argument]; therefore I exist." Here it's a simple argument that starts with a conditional and then affirms the antecedent. Under this interpretation of the Cogito, it takes the form of modus ponens.
>>857263
Do you speak French?
>>857280
Alas, I do not. I do know that Descartes famously wrote in both French and Latin. The Cogito of *The Meditations* is typically quoted in the Latin (and is NOT "Cogito, ergo sum.") and if I recall, the "I think therefore I am" formulation comes from *The Discourse on Method*; and now I'm really stretching my memory, but I thought Descartes wrote *The Discourse* in both Latin and French, but I'm not at all sure about that.
Someone chime in if my memory completely fucked that up.
There isn't one, he needs at least three propositions to make a valid argument, there are at most two, and there might even only be one.
>>857047
fuck off with your memes
>>857227
By replying you just proved that you exist.
