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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.