can skepticism refute the fact "I am", because once you attempt, you prove its validity, right?

Question

because once you try to refute it, (actually you don't even have to do that), you prove its absolute validity by entering a state of "I am"(existence to a degree)

Descartes's "I think, therefore I am" is basically saying you really cannot refute the fact that "you are" or "I am" because once you do, "you are"(you just existed)

I am a skeptic, but i wonder if this maybe the exception

arguments of evil demon and brain in vat does not discount that "you are"to a certain degree, it does not disprove "I am" although you may have this "I am" experience artificially created.

Being a true skeptic, I still believe there is a way to be skeptical about "I am", but I don't know how to disprove it. What do you think?

Answer 1

You refute it by setting different boundaries.



While we might say that we have to acknowledge the notion of existance in order to refute it, there is quite a bit of difference from the existance of an IDEA and the existance of a REALITY. After all, we can think of unicorns, but nobody would say that they exist and are real. They are only ideas. Perhaps so too are you and I.



Once you have written off the mandatory notion of your existance as being only at the ideal level, then you can wad that up and throw it out entirely if you like. Adopt an anti-idealist stance: where are all these ideas that supposedly exist, even as ideas? Can we measure them, stack them up? And if the deamon can put any other idea in your head, why not that one so you draw distinctions that don't exist?



If we both looked at a monochrome field and I said that I saw several different colours on it, you would think that one of us would have to be mistaken. Perhaps this is just like that. There's room for doubt. Even on this.



I would say the real question is whether it's PRODUCTIVE to doubt that.

Answer 2

Can skepticism refute the fact "I am"; because once you attempt, you prove its validity, right?



Skepticism cannot prove or disprove anything. Good sceptics may prove, or disprove, lots of things. Absolute sceptics, who are absolutely sceptical about everything, except there own personal "I am" thesis are called "solipsists". They should, on their own utterly sceptical ground, never even try to disprove your own personal "I am" thesis, because they have no reason to even think you exist, let alone to try and refute you.



But everybody is sceptical about something.



There are religious sceptics, philosophical sceptics and people who are sceptical of politicians and used car salesmen. Some of those rational scepticisms are perfectly prudent.



NEXT:

because once you try to refute it, (actually you don't even have to do that), you prove its absolute validity by entering a state of "I am" (existence to a degree).



ANSWER:

I'd never try to refute anyone's existence because its good that you are a thinking and apparently "young thinking" person. You sound like you are enjoying Msr. Descartes. He was a great analytical geometer, at a young age, but not much of a "metaphysician", since he contradicted Aristotle on almost every philosophical topic possible. And he did not prove either God's existence or the immortality of the human soul, as he proposed to do. If you don't prove your theses or hypotheses, you're not much of a philosopher, even though you may be an excellent geometer. Descartes was.



ASKER:

Descartes's "I think, therefore I am" is basically saying you really cannot refute the fact that "you are" or "I am" because once you do, "you are" (you just existed)



Sounds like a good paraphrase of his argument. But, according to Descartes, you have to shut off your senses and then simply examine your own mind, to prove God's existence and then you reprove everything else from your experience of those 2 "certainties" --- your own existence and God's existence. But if God does not exist, where's Descartes's rational scepticism, other than a step closer to utter solipsism?



More importantly, can you really "peer into" your own mind, while utterly ignoring your senses, as Descartes advised? Socrates and Aristotle didn't think you could peer into your own mind, nor did Uncle Sigmund Freud. Descartes and Kant think you can. Kant goes so far as to think that the only thing we really know is our own minds. Everything outside is just "things and stuff", which is intrinsically unknowable, but still there for sure.



So what do you think? Can you see your own mind? Are you sceptical about that or certain you can see into your own mind?



ASKER:

I am a skeptic, but i wonder if this maybe the exception.



What exception? --- That "I am.", meaning yourself. I don't think anybody should be sceptical about that fact.



ASKER:

arguments of evil demon and brain in vat does not discount that "you are" to a certain degree, it does not disprove "I am" although you may have this "I am" experience artificially created.



QUESTION:

Aren't all of us "brains", among other things, in biological vats? I can remember asking my 1st professor about "Evil demons" deceiving us, so he switched to the "brain in a vat" thesis. So I asked him if he actually believed in either "demons" or "disembodied" brains. He didn't have an answer, other than "Not really." So I asked him whether or not he was an "evil demon" trying to deceive me. All hell broke loose shortly thereafter. But I already had a science degree when I started fooling around with Ph.D.'s in philosophy. I don't recommend such tom-foolery to undergraduates. But philosophy is actually a lot of fun and teaches good thinking skills if you're patient and want to learn some logic and many great thinker's thoughts.



ASKER:

Being a true skeptic, I still believe there is a way to be skeptical about "I am", but I don't know how to disprove it. What do you think?

Additional Details

13 minutes ago



ANSWER:

Since you are a true sceptic, why would you want to disprove anything? If you disprove something, you can be certain about that negative proof. So are you as truly sceptical as you say you are, or trying to practice a healthy scepticism? Or are you just trying to please your "evil demon" 1st year philosophy Prof?



ASKER:

basically i am trying to say you cannot refute that you exist to a certain degree.



QUESTION: Is existence a matter of degree or kind? Oh, now I know what you are talking about by "existence to a degree".



REPLY:

You may mean "certain to a degree" and "uncertain to a degree", rather than "I am" to a degree. Descartes's thing was philosophical certainty vs. philosophical doubt. But doubt and certainty are psychological states, whereas knowledge and ignorance are actual "philosophical states".



Keep thinking and have fun. Philosophy is a fun game. You can play it all your life to amuse your own personal "I am...whatever you're doing at the time." Have you asked your professor why it is that if he's dreaming you and if you're dreaming him, you have to pay for him dreaming in class and you dreaming elsewhere? Just kidding.



If you are a true, complete sceptic, then, according to Aristotle, a vegetable is better off than you because a vegetable knows nothing and has no doubt about that fact, whereas the true sceptic is stuck in ignorance and doubt.

Answer 3

The I Am is the knower of himself, he who has gained self realisation and is conscious of his purpose and path, has full reasoning of the meaning of his life, his identity and place in the world.



There three linear perspectives. I Am – to know oneself, as an entity. You Are – a submission to a recognised and understood higher power. We Are – a unity with one’s peers and a bond of will and Spirit. They are called the three types of self realisation. Each requires not only a faith but understanding of what constitutes each condition of existence.



I think therefore I Am pertains to one self absorbed within a universal consciousness within the imagination. The only evidence to offer is subjective reasoning to validate such a claim. A need for validation only arises when seeking to impress upon another, thus negating the state of individualism itself. It is the gaining of superconscious, the fourth dimension within ones own line of consciousness and imagination.