Fred or Jet, I am not sure who said it, but a minor correction is needed
here. It was not Kant that said "I think, therefore I am" It was Rene
Descartes (1596-1650) the famous mathematician and philosopher. He
invented Cartesian coordinates among other things. Cartesian coordinates
are the familiar X,Y, and Z plots we use today.
Your comment was correct about him starting his philosophy with that
statement as a beginning. He is considered by some to be the father of
It is interesting how back in those days mathematics, physics, and
philosophy were considered as interwoven or connected fields of knowledge.
I think in our modern age we have lost some of that wonder by considering
math and science as mechanistic ideas that only describe things in an
objective, detached kind of way.
> From: Fred McGalliard <frederick.b.mcgalliard@...>
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: STRANGE GROUND RADIO EXPERIMENT..
> Date: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 10:33 AM
> Jet Black wrote:
> > Why should I have to prove I think , by definition in the dictionary ,
> > mere writing of this sentence is sufficient proof of thought.I am
> > the "legal" definition of "think" so i can't comment on that one.I
> > read Kant to see what he is _really_ on about.
> Kant. "I think therefore I am." (Gosh I hope I got that right.)
> In fact, a pretty good program might sound very much like you, and make
> as much sense as some of our internet folk. There is no really good
> definition of thinking, although we do it every day, perhaps. I would
> never ask you to prove that you think, but it is very interesting to ask
> how we really know that we do. Kant thought it made a solid foundation
> to start his philosophy from. I rephrased it because I think he really
> erred. At foundation we do not know that we think, whatever that is. We
> just are. In most ways totally unconscious of the details.