You need to learn a lot more about philosophical debate. Here's a tip, you can't assume that your logic is the logic of the world, other people can have separate and equal beliefs to you.
the rating you gave me it really proves how thick headed you are. I gave you your rating for a reason: you were being a cocksucker. You apparently think I owe some sort of explanation to you about how to disprove the cogito arguement. I do not. If you want a refutation, go read a fucking book. I was simply saying that it had been done. If you have a problem with that, then you have a problem.
What are you argueing? Are you arguing that the cogitto arguement is false? True? Are you arguing that my professors word is not good enough to say that it is false or true?
Well, if it is any of those, then you obviously don't understand what is going on here. I made the claim that my professors word was good enough to say that at least someone had made an attempt at refuing it. As I said in the post you replied to, its all up for debate. So what I'm supposed to take from you arguing with me is that you don't think my professor, my professor with a doctorate, doesn't know enough about philosophy to know that the cogito arguement is under dispute. Now follow me here, in case I lieft you behind. My professor has every bit of authority to say that the cogito arguement has been refuted (in the sense that someone has refuted it with their beliefs, not that it has been proven false, thats just dumb) The criticisms of the cogito arguement are on fucking wikipedia for chirst sakes. You obviously don't understand what is going on. Edited Mar 11, 2008 at 10:13:14 pm by xFrockx
xFrockx
Entropymancer
]
