you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago* (3 children)

If I am understanding your meaning you recognize the inherent flaw is that you believe in inherent truth? Or that your rationalization for being is inherently true if it werent you wouldnt be?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (2 children)

    The question is of my reason for being, which is based on the flaw of belief in an inherent truth other than the fact that I exist is inarguable, since my ability to doubt of my own perspective proves I can think, and thus that I exist.

    In other words, I believe certain base assumptions are needed for reason, whether you acknowledge them or not, and only one, "I exist" can be proven as 100% true through reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments