May you have peace!
I am a big supporter of both Descarte and Nietzsche. A discussion would be interesting!
Oh, dear, JK666... I think I may have misled you, which was not my intent: while I liked the courses, enjoyed the writings/theories and even identified with the philosophies of some, I am certainly not a studen of philosophy. I don't think a discussion with me would be worth your time: I most probably couldn't keep up, will most probably have to ask you to break your comments down even further, and will most likely end up frustrating you.
Unlike some of the "logic" proposals! Excuse me, but I like to think! Does "logic" prevent that?
I LOVE to think! Perhaps too much, I'm afraid - LOLOLOLOL! I have been told ALL my life that I "think too much"! Gets me in trouble like no body's business (excluding those who love me, who seem to appreciate it!). I love analyzing, as well as critical thinking. And I have to say, that it was this critical thinking that helped me come to know God and Christ - the things I had been taught just didn't add up, and based on what I had read and what I KNEW to be true... much of it COULDN'T be true. And I love truth, so I had to keep looking for it. Praise JAH, I found him (the Truth)!
The first proposal that I would like to share is the complete question that Descarte raised: "I question, I think, Therefore I am."
Hmmmm... I remember it a little differently: Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"), which was the original statement, later changed to Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum ("I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am"). Not to pick at straws, but I don't think questioning is quite the same as doubting. I can question simply because I wish more information, better understanding, greater enlightenment. I doubt, however, because either something has already shown itself to be false, I believe it has... or I lack faith.
Moving on, I am not sure I agree with this premise, and forgive my very elementary, uneducated and un- "philosophical" manner, but, IMHO, the fact that I doubt, which presumes that I think (and I say presume because many unthinking people doubt, and many doubters don't think), does not necessarily prove my existence. IMHO, the proof of my existence lies, first, in the establishment of the reality, starting with what IS reality and then with what is real vs. what is not in that reality. And before I even get there, I have to know what "reality" is and "real" means, what both actually are, vs. what I thought them to be.
Now, you're probably scratching your head and saying, "What?? What is she talking about?" My sincere apologies: unfortunately, I do not know how to "argue" pursuant to the "rules" of "logic"... or other methods of so-called "structured" thinking. I don't know how to "lay a foundation" in the manner that most "great thinkers" do. And so, I get myself in trouble because my way of reasoning is not of any of the usual orthodox/accepted methods, forgive me. I only think what I think and know what I know... because it is not mine. It is/has been given to me by One who is not human and so does not think like earthling man.
Earthling man's thinking and, therefore, his logic, is very often limited, however. It takes you to a point and then drops you off. It is very often disputable... and thus, disputed, even proven wrong by the next premise or "new" thought. The mind of Christ, however, is indisuptable, something I have now learned.
I hope this is sort of along the lines of what you meant, JK666. If not, please accept my apology and clarify, if you can. If so, I await your response. Until then...
I bid you peace.
Your servant and a slave of Christ,