George Levy wrote: > Brent Meeker wrote: > >>George Levy wrote: >> >> >>>Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>That brings us back to Descartes "I think therefore I am"; which Russell >>>>pointed out was an unsupported inference. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>IMHO everything hinges on "I think." "I think" MUST BE THE STARTING >>>POINT - for any conscious observer THERE IS NO OTHER OBSERVABLE STARTING >>>POINT! >>> >>> >> >>Are you disputing Russell's point that "I" is a construct and "thinking" is >>all you have without inference? >> >> >> > Yes. I am disputing what Russell said: "I think" IS THE ONE AND ONLY > STARTING POINT for any conscious thought process. It is both an > observation and an axiom. Developing the concept of "I think" in a > formal mathematical fashion as Bruno is attempting to do is IMO the > right way to proceed. I also believe that "I think" leads to a relative > (or relativistic) TOE - probably a very extreme view. > > George
As I understand him, Bruno agrees with Russell that "I" is a construct or inference. That's why there can be 1st-person indeterminancy. Brent Meeker --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
