Selon moi- I have always believed of this qoute that 'If I can think and that means I exsist and I can ascertain whom around me thinks and that they exsist (at least in my own mind) then how can I exsist as I think I exsist if I percieve that that which gives me life does not think therefore does not exsist. I question the strength of the argument in that my perceptions of though are creating me, the people around me, the animals, and then a subcategory of plants, trees, air, etc- that does not actually exsist by this statement.
If I were to say that I exsist in a form of thought, creating things by my own perceptions of two categories, those that think (artificial intelligence?) and those that don't to aid ein my survival- then it would make more sense.
It would explain why I am discussing a movie with friends and not a week later it plays on T.V...... coincidences don't happen- I make them happen.'
That's what I've been able to come up with... as of yet. Ideas on that?
Lisa