Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interstingly, this "I think therefor I am" has been taken as the most barebone possible way to demonstrate what exist and what does not. However, each word of the sentence makes an assumption that it never tries to demonstrate: - "I": assumes individuality and that the mind is a local phenomenon. - "think": assumes cognition and that it's a process of the mind. - "therefor": assumes causality. - "am": assumes there i…
Except it's "Cogito ergo sum", not "I think therefore I am" "I" here is whatever is the origin of these thoughts, and nothing more. Not you. He explained it as "we cannot doubt of our existence while we doubt" So no, there is no postulate, just observation. However far the doubt goes... well, there is still something doubting, and thus thinking (doubts are thoughts), that has to be. Otherwise there would be no doubt.…
Re: Descartes was wrong: ‘a person is a person through other persons’ (2017)
#51"Cogito" implies "I", it's just not required in latin. Espacially since it's been first coined by Gómez Pereira (not Descartes), a spanish man, language in which you can say "pienso" and not provide any "I".