/lit/ - Literature

>>16185425

>indisputable axiom

No.

tl;dr we can't prove the 'I think' part, as per Nietzsche (B. Good and Evil). Because even if we identify an 'I', it's not nessarily what is doing the thinking.

To give an example in more buddhist terms, proposing we are the awareness, not the thoughts. Therefore the 'I' doesn't think, but is simply aware of the thoughts. If we reason this way, 'I think' is invalid. Alternatively, you can argue that the 'I' doesn't exist; by arguing that the distinction between our matter and other matter is a purely arbitrary function of our minds.

>>15747663
Saved. Thank you based schope poster

How do you stop being a book hoarder?