I have heard that Descartes' "cogito ergo sum," while intuitively compelling, is

I have heard that Descartes' "cogito ergo sum," while intuitively compelling, is

I have heard that Descartes' "cogito ergo sum," while intuitively compelling, is actually a logically flawed argument. Can someone explain how/why it is logically flawed? I have heard the argument that anything that has any properties at all has the property of existence automatically, so existence is not a substantive property (have I put that correctly?). Even if that is true, why should it matter so as to make the cogito argument flawed? And are there any other, perhaps better logical arguments against Descartes' proposition?

Read another response by Gloria Origgi
Read another response about Philosophers
Print