Joseph Polanik wrote:
one of the differences is that you have 'I' in quotes so that when you interpret my position as "there is an 'I' that experiences the data of experience" you are literally saying that the word 'I' experiences the data of experience.
I can't make any sense of your interpretation that a word can experience the data of experience.
where you say "that there is data of experience is not in question" I would simply say "that there is experience is not in question". do you see any difference between those two statements?
Admittedly the word 'experience' is ambiguous, just as are so many words (e.g. 'sheep' could be plural or singular, and 'dog' could refer to any member of the family of carnivorous quadruped /canis lupus/ or only to a male member of that family in contrast to 'bitch'). In the case of the word 'experience' (as in "conscious experience") it could refer to a particular object or event appearing in the stream of experience, or it could refer to that stream itself. That there is experience (a stream of experiences) is not in question, and that there are experiences (particular objects andevents appearing in the stream of experience) is not in question.
========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/