Experientio
September 3rd, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: Summary of Arguments against the Experientio :: The Forensic Inference within the Experientio :: EXPERIENTIO PART ONE :: EXPERIENTIO PART TWO
Joseph Polanik writes:
the Experientio: I-2 experience; therefore, I-2 am.
[the peculiar pronouns, subscripted by reality type, are explained here:
_http://what-http://whhttp://whahtt_ http://what-am-i.net/symbology.htm) ]
the Experientio is structurally analogous to Descartes’ Cogito; but,
hopefully, without some of the warts.
In particular, I don’t share Descartes’ objection to having the same
statement be both intuitively true and deductively provable. In the case of the
Experientio, the proof is based on the Logic of Reality.
The derivation of the experientio: _http://what-http://whhttp://what-
