Cayuse wrote: >Joseph Polanik wrote: >>Cayuse wrote: >>>Joseph Polanik wrote: >>>>Cayuse wrote: >>>>>Joseph Polanik wrote: >>>>>>I certainly seem to be present whenever I am self-referencing. why >>>>>>should I conclude that I am not? >>>>>Can you show this "experiencer" to yourself? >>>>as I just said, I seem to be present whenever I am self-referencing. >>>>that's the showing. >>>There's no *showing* without a show-er. >>how is this claim different from the claim that there is no >>experiencing without an experiencer; or, that there is no storytelling >>without a storyteller? >Identify the show-er as an aspect of the data of experience, and then >you will have your "showing". very well, then. I will undertake to show that the experiencing I is itself an aspect of its stream of experiences; but, I will not first join you in the Self-Inflicted Linguistic Lobotomy you seem to cherish because it exorcises first-person self-referencing from among the resources of the language game within which you purport to 'do' philosophy. while I respect your right to self-lobotomize, LW's axiom (the limits of my language mean the limits of my world) implies that, by limiting your language, you have limited your world. consequently, in order to establish that you retain the ability to comprehend an argument stated in the first person, we must first establish the conditions, if any, under which first-person self-referencing is still permitted within the rules of the truncated language game you've ended up with. would you briefly state the conditions of assertability for first-person self-referencing in your self-lobotomized worldview? Joe -- Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ http://what-am-i.net @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ ========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/