• bert1
    159
    Because only you can be you and I can only be me.ArguingWAristotleTiff

    But why?

    Is the answer 'because that's how grammar works?' Or is there more to it than that?

    Do you see any separation between your own subjectivity, and all the (ever-shifting) things that go up to make ArguingWAristotleTiff?
  • bert1
    159
    If Bert1 is a rigid designator that refers to you, then you cannot be other than Bert1.Banno

    Which me? The bert1 I refer to when I refer just to my consciousness, or the bert1 I refer to when I refer to the flesh-memory complex you can take a photo of?

    If you reject that distinction that's fine, but that just means we have different metaphysics, not different grammars, no?
  • ArguingWAristotleTiff
    3.2k
    Do you see any separation between your own subjectivity, and all the (ever-shifting) things that go up to make ArguingWAristotleTiff?bert1

    Hmmmmm… you have me thinking.....
  • Relativist
    491
    "Why am I me?"
    False assumption. What makes you think you ARE?!
  • Banno
    3.8k
    ,
    Why am I me?JohnLocke

    The feeling of bewilderment in the OP derives from a poorly phrased question.Banno

    But of course, if you change the question, you change the grammar...
  • unenlightened
    2.9k
    But I didn't change the question, I only changed the questioner.
  • Banno
    3.8k
    And hence what was asked.
  • unenlightened
    2.9k
    And hence what was asked.Banno

    The same question was asked, and the same question can be asked, and a sensible answer proposed under other assumptions. For example @Sam26 might answer something like '...that is the life that you chose in the spirit world, as the most suitable for your education and development'. ( My apologies if I have put words into his mouth he objects to, but it is something of the sort that people do suggest in good faith, and it seems meaningful, if unjustifiable.) My particular previous example was intended to remove all trace of otherworldliness, but there seems no necessity to do so, except to pander to the sceptical.
  • Terrapin Station
    5.5k
    Why am I me? Why am I not the person next to me?JohnLocke

    Not that I'm a Randian, but because A=A. In other words, per logical identity/the identity of indiscernibles and the non-identity of discernibles, things are themselves and not something else.
123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.