Cayuse wrote:... the assertion that "I experience" informs nobody of anything.
Joseph Polanik replied:
it doesn't have to be informative. it only has to be true to be used as the fact from which the conclusion is derived: I experience; therefore, I am. is there anything at all in your mereological speculations that indicates to you that 'I experience' is false.
Your claim expands to "there is an 'I' that experiences the data of experience", where this putative "experiencer" makes no appearance in the data of experience, and nor is there anything in the data of experience that gives grounds for postulating the existence of such a conceptual entity for the purpose of explanation. Consequently, no assertion can be made regarding the truth or falsity of your claim -- this putative "experiencer" is merely the result of a confusion of language games, and is a primecandidate for Occam's Razor.
========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/