Heidegger

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >Joseph Polanik wrote:
>
> >>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >>>>>1. If I know that predicates are attributable to me, then I must
> >>>>>know that I exist.
>
> >>>>>2. If I know that I exist, I must know that there is something
> >>>>>which remains identical throughout all […]

Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>>>>>1. If I know that predicates are attributable to me, then I must
>>>>>know that I exist.
>>>>>2. If I know that I exist, I must know that there is something
>>>>>which remains identical throughout all my perceptions.
>>>>>3. But there is no evidence that […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >>>1. If I know that predicates are attributable to me, then I must know
> >>>that I exist.
>
> >>>2. If I know that I exist, I must know that there is something which
> >>>remains identical throughout all my perceptions.
>
> >>>3. But there is no […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> >>Let me make sure I understand you. I ask why you deny that attributing
> >>predicates to nothingness is impossible; and, you reply by restating
> >>the three premises and the conclusion of your argument. okay, so you
> >>are admitting that your argument depends on assuming that attributing
> […]

In a message dated 03/04/2008 10:20:42 GMT Standard Time, jPolanik at nc.rr.com
writes:
GEVANS613 at aol.com wrote:
>jPolanik@nc.rr.com writes:
>>at the end of the day, however, you still have to deal with your claim
>>that *any* I (of *any* reality type for which there are referents) may
>>conclude ‘I have not proven by evidence based […]

Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>>>1. I remain self-identical throughout all my perceptions.
>>>2. Therefore, if I know that I exist, I must know that there is
>>>something which remains identical throughout all my perceptions.
>>>3. But there is no evidence that anything remains identical
>>>throughout all my perceptions.
>>>4. […]

GEVANS613 at aol.com wrote:
>jPolanik@nc.rr.com writes:
>>at the end of the day, however, you still have to deal with your claim
>>that *any* I (of *any* reality type for which there are referents) may
>>conclude ‘I have not proven by evidence based logical deduction that I
>>am not nothing’.
>>I have shown that any […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >1. I remain self-identical throughout all my perceptions.
>
> >2. Therefore, if I know that I exist, I must know that there is
> >something which remains identical throughout all my perceptions.
>
> >3. But there is no evidence that anything remains identical throughout
> >all my […]

In a message dated 02/04/2008 10:05:31 GMT Standard Time, jPolanik at nc.rr.com
writes:
Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>>>but, there is no way to save your argument in its present form
>>>>without denying the assumption that one can not attribute predicates
>>>>to nothingness.
>>>>if it is so important to save your argument; then, […]

Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>>>but, there is no way to save your argument in its present form
>>>>without denying the assumption that one can not attribute predicates
>>>>to nothingness.
>>>>if it is so important to save your argument; then, just deny this
>>>>assumption.
>>>>go ahead. make my day.
>>>Done.
>>>So now, why […]