Joseph Polanik wrote:
Cayuse wrote:Joseph Polanik wrote:given the fact that you've admitted (that there is experience of an afterimage), either something is experiencing that afterimage or nothing is experiencing that afterimage.The claim is neither true nor false but nonsensical.you've alleged that the argument is unsound. that means you need to identify an invalid step in the logic of a simple disjunctivesyllogism.
The invalid step is that which goes from 1 to 2: 1. There is experience 2. therefore there is an experiencer. The flaw is called a "non sequitur".
precisely which step or phrase contains the non sequitur?There is only one step in the argument -- how can you be confused about which step?there are three main steps,
No, there is only one step as identified above. ========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
