I blog, therefore I am"When he who hears does not know what he who speaks means, and when he who speaks does not know what he himself means, that is philosophy". (Voltaire)
Descartes wrote: I think, therefore I am (cogito ergo sum). Descartes was a philosopher, and I'm not. All philosophers are rational thinkers. I'm not. What could he have meant by that statement? Could he have meant to say that only the fact you are a thinking being means that you "are"? And, that by that reasoning, all creatures that aren't thinking , "are" not? Then, what are they? Your cat, your dog, the flowers in your garden, the trees in the forest? I don't know about you, but I'm not underestimating philosophers, they're just too smart. And surely Descartes, he was a bright guy. Do you think that he could have meant that "thinking" is the essence of human beings, the soul, the thing that makes them stand out, the one thing where they fundamentally differ from other living creatures? OK, let me know what you think. The title of this posting was just an excuse to tackle Descartes. Don't think for one minute that my being depends on this blog, or that the only difference between my cat and me is this blog. Looking forward to hearing from you.
2 comments:
I think Descartes is wrong. You don't exist because you think. There are a lot of creatures that don't think. Yet they still exist. And I'm not just talking about flowers and cats ;-)
But like what about what I stated later on? Could he have meant that reasoning, thinking is the one thing where human beings differ from the rest of living creatures? And that that's why he said: I think, therefore I am?
Post a Comment