| I always thought the problem with Descartes' "cogito ergo sum" was that he assumed the "I" in the premise, which was what he was trying to prove: "I" think, therefore "I" am. That's why later on he changed it from a syllogism to the axiom "I am, I exist." Of course, I've also read that he never meant for "cogito ergo sum" to be a syllogism anyway. So maybe I'm just confused.
__________________ Footfalls echo in the memory
Down the passage which we did not take
Towards the door we never opened
Into the rose-garden.
T.S. Eliot ~ "Burnt Norton" |