I think therefore I am?

Descartes was questioning if anything was real at all. Why do you know the rock exists? Because you feel it,see it? What is if all your senses are faulty?

Descartes regresses this further until the point where he could be sure of one thing:His existence. From there on he constructed the rest and eventually enabled the conclusion that the rock does in fact exist. (And then went full retard because theism)

Also this:

dis

>(And then went full retard because theism)
that's actually the key component for a rationalistic philosophical standpoint. You can't say anything rationalistic if there is no metaphysical component driving your views.

>basic philosophy

Descartes is a fucking hack, the statement that he thinks presupposes the conclusion that he is. Don't know how so many people missed this.

>Descartes is a fucking hack
just kill yourself you poser

>I think, therefore I am
>I am a thinking thing, therefore I am
>I am a thing with the property of thinking, therefore I am
>I am, therefore I am
Defend this

>defend this
fuck you I don't owe you an education

Plato's allegory of the cave is the same thing
Rene Descartes isn't really a revolutionary

you are wrong. he is revolutionary. comparable to socartes by the quantity of his work

>I'm not going to explain why I'm right and you're wrong
>But I'm totally right you guys

>I'm not going to explain why
pay me and i might. peasant

>denying the antecedent this hard
Come back when you've graduated from high school, OP.

That's why I said "in some fashion"

Descartes is the man.

>lay foundation for all epistemology
>show that only a higher order in the universe can guarantee that it makes sense to believe in the existence of a physical world
>arch-Chad: shows middle finger to algebra post-stamp collectors by creating a graphical intuition of math
>law of signs
>bunch of other shit

One of the best philosophers imo, along with Leibniz, Hume, and Spinoza.

>A implies B
>Oh yeah? Well here's something that's B but not A! Checkmate!

>Affirming the consequent this hard.
Boi.

>You can't say anything rationalistic if there is no metaphysical component driving your views
I'm pretty sure that's not the case. Would you explain why you think so?

>A rock doesn't think, but it is
>being this autistic

It's "I think, therefore I am", not "I am, therefore I think".

Mistranslation? "Je pense donc je suis" or "cogito ergo sum"? Both translate really well to "I think therefore I am".

"I think therefore I am" is an excellent example of a revered, brilliant, legendary historical figure making a fundamental error in reasoning.

"Circular reasoning" is defined as "using the conclusion as part of the proof." "I think" already assumes "I am." That's textbook circular reasoning, which is amazing widespread among "great philosophers."

"I think" is meant in a much weaker sense than in usual speech. it only means "there are some thoughts around" or something like that, not "I am a person using my brain to have these thoughts". same for "I am"

"I think" does not assume "I am", you can be entirely certain that you're thinking in this moment

>I think, therefore I am
...does not mean
>Thinking is required for being

You think, therefore you are. The rock doesn't even think to be capable of questioning whether it is. It just is. But you think and are capable of questioning whether you are. So you also are, just as much as the unthinking rock

I thought you were about to say something smart but instead you said something incredibly stupid. Bravo, nigger.

You're retarded too.

>>arch-Chad: shows middle finger to algebra post-stamp collectors by creating a graphical intuition of math
Not really. Geometry is the graphical intuition of math. What he did was complete the unification of algebra and geometry. Before him, the algebra of geometry already existed. Ancient greeks like Diophantus and Archimedes had assigned algebraic expressions to geometric situations. What then Descartes did was establish the geometry of algebra. The act of assigning a geometric picture to an algebraic expression.

>conflating [math]P \rightarrow Q[/math] with [math]\sim P \rightarrow \sim Q[/math]
The absolute state of Veeky Forums.

OP is retarded, but what's wrong with the second post you quoted?

>It rains, therefore I'm wet

What kind of horseshit is this? It's wet in my gf's pants, doesn't mean it's fucking raining!!?!

When exactly did this phrase become a meme? 2 Weeks ago?

>>crushing defeat

how do you know?

>t. rock

You took the statement
>I think, therefore I am
and from that, you logically derived the statement
>I am, therefore I am
In other words, you derived "I am" from " I think". This is exactly what Descartes did, and this line of logical deduction is conveyed in the statement "I think, therefore I am".
Do you see?

>more dumbshit told by (YOU)

Fucking read Descartes before posting some stupid shit like this.

"I think, therefore I am. " is Descartes' way of proving to himself that he exists. this is his first step in proving to himself that he can trust his senses, and that the world is not a figment of a dream or some similar "nothing is real" thought

The entire premise is that he can't trust that anything really exists

Simple way of thinking of it:
Logically
p --> q
p = i think
q = i am
if i think, then I am
p is a sufficient condition for q
q is a necessary condition for p

In plainer, more understandable terms:

if you're a cat, then you're a mammal

So if 'a' is a cat, it must be a mammal
But, if 'a' is a human, it's a mammal, but obviously, not a cat, a human.

"I think, therefore I am" does not imply physical existence. The "am" this sentence is referring to is the conscious mind, as we can all agree you cannot have a person without a brain to go with them. Sure, their body may be there, but as in the cases of Alzheimer patients they're just vegetables. Same thing with a rock.

Muslim detected. Get out, Abdullah.

I'm a thumb, therefore I'm a finger
> What kind of horseshit is this? A pinky isn't a thumb, but it is a finger.

No it isnt

it isn't literal that you are you. its more of having self awareness about the world around you and about yourself and your existence.
you probably skipped every English literature class in HS

You are doing something that cannot come from nothing, so in a meta fashion, you know that "you" exist to some extent. I mean, it doesn't mean you're not some simulation, a brain in vat, or something but you still exist in some way. This is relevant because everything you "know" is generated by your psyche, you cannot know that any of it is true -- indeed it the raw sensory info filters through a lot, arguably you are not experiencing reality at all but a clouded and deluded form of it. But you can know, for certain, that you exist.

>a rock exists
prove it

You can not be absolutely certain of any of your observations or experiences. Following this line of reasoning you conclude that it is impossible to know if anything is as it seems, or if anything exists at all. The entire universe could just be a figment of your imagination for all you know.

Continuing with the realization that all experiences are suspect and that observation is untrustworthy one starts to wonder if they themselves are even real. That is where the quote comes into play, it stops in its tracks doubting ones own existence because the very act of being able to doubt you exist proves that you, in some form, must be existing. You can therefore rest assured that you exist.

If an entity is able to think, and by extension aware of its own conciousness, it is aware of its own existence, because for it to be aware of its own conciousness, its conciousness must exist
That's the meaning of the quote, the second post that guy you're replying to quoted is retarded because it doesn't understand that

Imagine being this fucking stupid

So, the dude who came up with that wanted a way to build a model of philosophy that has no weakpoints, basically finding a starting point that confirms itself in and of itself and building from that, but ended up fucking up anyways.
Basically he argued:

We can doubt anything, therefore doubting things is a certainty.
Since it is certain to doubt and we think critically we are a certainty.

However, apparently the guy didnt take one second to think about:
If it is certain to doubt, then we should doubt that statement...wait, at the same time we shouldnt doubt it, but we should doubt it, but we shouldnt.....
you see where this is going.
We run into this shit all the time when arguing about the fundamentals of logic...or are they the fundaments? yes, but no, but yes, but no, but yes....

Now we can go play pseudo intellectual and use it to bootleg-explain quantum physics.yay.

>what's an equivalence
>what's an implication

retard.

Fucking retard can you even read?

>the thumb is a finger

Found the actual brainlet in the thread.

this, pretty sad really

>t. brainlet

...

It's circular reasoning disguised. Nothing to see here.

ding ding ding, correct response

Did nobody tell you autists that the complete phrase is
I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am?
The Cartesian method of skepticism is predicated upon one doubting something. The fact that one is doubting is taken as evidence that one is thinking, which is evidence that one is existing.

He wasn't arguing from first principles though, so he only gets a B-