Descartes I Think, Therefore I Am Disproven?

[Age]

YES you DID. However, I have ALSO ASKED you MANY QUESTIONS FIRST, but which you have NOT YET ANSWERED.

And I don't care what my inferiors think of me.

And here we HAVE the IRREFUTABLE PROOF that this one here ACTUALLY BELIEVES that 'it' is, LAUGHINGLY, "superior" TO "others".

Which, by the way, could be CLEARLY SEEN throughout just about ALL of 'its' WRITINGS here.

If they want my respect, then they must at least become Equal, which they have a long way to go first.

LOL 'This' here was REALLY what some people ACTUALLY BELIEVED and HOW they THOUGHT ABOUT "themselves", back in those VERY 'OLDEN DAYS' when this was being written.

Correct, when you start acting normal and respectful, then I will respond in kind.

SOME people ACTUALLY, and LAUGHABLY if it was NOT SO EXTREMELY SAD, had 'grown up' SO ABUSED that 'they' had ACTUALLY come to BELIEVE that "others" were NOT EQUAL TO 'them', and, that 'they', "themselves", were HIGHER, ABOVE, BEYOND and/or SUPERIOR TO "others".

AND, to THEN CLAIM that I HAVE a 'braggadocious autism' just SHOWS and REVEALS the True HYPOCRISY, while AT THE SAME TIME STILL 'trying to' BELITTLE and/or RIDICULE 'me', as though 'they' were STILL BETTER and SUPERIOR.

Your braggadocious autism is grating to any and everybody around here.

So, ABSOLUTELY EVERY one here AGREES WITH 'you' on 'this' "wizard22"?

[Age]

Cogito = "I am a thinking-thing" by the way.

Descartes did not literally reference "I" or state "I think therefore I am".

The Latin statement is different:

Cogito = (I cognate, am a being of cognition, with consciousness)
Ergo = Therefore
Sum = (My cognition is integrated into the sum totality of existence)


...silly illiterate Anglican Protestants...

Oh [bows low] thank you great Catholic? Eastern Orthodox? teacher.
As the wiser than D and earlier Saint A would say 'ergo sum si fallor'.
You have given us the key. He didn't mean 'I' because of Latin grammar,
even though he first wrote it in French!!!!!

je pense, donc je suis

Just to mislead people.

Is your smugness convincing in other forums?

Also, if "wizard22" is going to CONCLUDE and CLAIM that "descartes" did NOT literally reference 'I', nor state 'I think ...', then WHY SAY and WRITE,
'Cogito' = 'I cognate', or 'I am a being ...'?

I suggest NOT USING the 'I' word in YOUR equals, (latin grammar), DEFINITION, if you ALSO want to SAY and CLAIM that 'I' was NOT being REFERENCED there.

BUT, if "descartes" REALLY did WRITE, whatever 'it' DID here, in the "french" language, then this REFUTES, ABSOLUTELY, ANY 'thing' "wizard22" has SAID and CLAIMED here anyway about the "latin version".

Also, if the translation is correct, 'je' MEANS or REFERS TO 'I', anyway. So, what this MEANS IS "descartes" did NOT literally reference 'I' once, but ACTUALLY TWICE, in that five word sentence and CLAIM.

Therefore, if TRANSLATION IS Correct, "descartes" did LITERALLY reference,

I think, so I am.

[Age]

Oh [bows low] thank you great Catholic? Eastern Orthodox? teacher.
As the wiser than D and earlier Saint A would say 'ergo sum si fallor'.
You have given us the key. He didn't mean 'I' because of Latin grammar,
even though he first wrote it in French!!!!!

je pense, donc je suis

Just to mislead people.

Is your smugness convincing in other forums?

Oh you are too gracious...

So French is not based on Latin these days... I must have missed the news?

NO one SAID ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'this'.

"iwannaplato" just POINTED OUT that "descartes" WROTE what 'it' DID IN "french" and NOT IN "latin".

Is 'this' Fact TO HARD, for you, to COMPREHEND or UNDERSTAND, WITHOUT you 'TRYING TO" DEFLECT, and just OWNING UP TO 'it'?

[Iwannaplato]

Please stop replying to my posts, Age. I do not read your responses but get a noticification each time. I sincerely doubt other people are interested in your responses to my posts as they have enough responses from you to their own posts to be content.

[Age]

Please stop replying to my posts, Age. I do not read your responses but get a noticification each time.

Have you tried putting me on YOUR IGNORE LIST?

Does 'that' STOP you being notified?

Or, have you just NOT 'thought' of just mentally IGNORING the notifications you get?

As for you NOT reading my responses, then this is of NO concern to me AT ALL.

I am NOT necessarily writing FOR you, anyway.

I sincerely doubt other people are interested in your responses to my posts as they have enough responses from you to their own posts to be content.

Okay. If you KNOW 'this' FOR SURE, then 'they' ALSO will, supposedly, NOT read my responses either. Which is ALL WELL and GOOD, as 'this' just PROVES some of MY CLAIMS here EVEN FURTHER. Thus, ACHIEVING what I SET OUT TO DO here.

[Iwannaplato]

I can only hope that whatever wrote, Age, and plan to do came from kindness.