Corrected version of Leibniz's implied dictum- I think, therefore  
there is an I 
Although previously I refered to propositional subject:predicate  
logic in reference to an implied dictum of Leibniz's ? 
? think, therefore there is an I?, that is incorrect. The true  
meaning of Descartes' famous dictum, "I think, therefore I am"  
can be better clarified instead by analyzing Leibniz' model of the 
mental I (essence ) with the physical brain as its existent correlate. 
The proposition ? think, therefore I am? is a simple intentional  
act by the mind, a monad, which is the mental essence of subject,  
not the brain, which is the corresponding physical existent form of the mind.  
The actual agent of the intention is the mind, not the brain,  
as the brain cannot perform intentional acts. 

Here "I" is the essence or monad of the existent brain, being  
its agent, so that the I plays the brain in thought much like a violin is 
played by a violinist. 
This also answers Heidegger's life-long search for 
an answer to the question "what is being?" 
Being is "I am" or essence+existence. 

Dr.  Roger B Clough  NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] 
See my Leibniz site at

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
To post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
For more options, visit

Reply via email to