Descartes said "cogito ergo sum." The word "cognito" does not mean "I think" or "I know" or "I anything." It is a dative or ablative singular form of a perfect passive participle -- not a first person singular form. "Cognito ergo sum" is nonsensical because there is nothing for the word 'cognito' to modify.

You're right. He actually wrote "Cogito, ergo sum."

Chal...

I don't want to read anything that quotes Descarte as having said, "Cognito Ergo Sum".

...and...

Again, enough with the "Cognito Ergo Sum", he [Descarte] never said that!

...and...

Descartes said "cogito ergo sum."

I'm confused.

Ohhhhhhh, hahahahaha! Now I gets it.. Gee, foolish me I missed it.. "Cogito" not "Cognito". Hahahahaha.. Now that is funny.

Sorry Chal..., nevermind.

Ohhhhhhh, hahahahaha! Now I gets it.. Gee, foolish me I missed it.. "Cogito" not "Cognito". Hahahahaha.. Now that is funny.

Sorry Chal..., nevermind.
I didn't get that either, I thought James R was making a point about the comma. :bugeye:

Oh no, I get it now... If the point is that it's cogito and not cognito (which I've never heard it referred to as, or maybe I just skim read too much).

Or if the point is it has a comma, then I got it the first time. :p

The inclusion of an extra letter inndeed a verry serious mistake. bad grammer truely undermines the valdity of any serious debate.

I say that hence forth we should all boast our extensive knowledge of latin grammar and proudly display our passion for nit-picking.

It would make the world a better place. :D

There's a simple way to fix this...
tell everyone to stop being academic pricks. Descartes said "I think, therefore I am". What I'm sick of is people who like to think they know philosophy so they quote famous lines in the original language when they don't actually know the language - just the line. Unless you can read latin, don't go around writing cogito, ergo sum. Unless you can read and speak German, don't quote Kant in German. It's of no benefit.

By the way, who is this thread aimed at? Did anyone ever actually say 'cognito ergo sum'? I've never come across it before.

By the way, who is this thread aimed at? Did anyone ever actually say 'cognito ergo sum' or is it a straw excuse for a latin discussion? I've never come across it before.

Ug, newbs.
What in my post made me think I was addressing anything at you in particular? You noted a problem - I said there was a simple way to erase it.

I need not say, "I think, therefore I am" because that would be like me telling you Nike's ad in days of yore was, "just do it"..... people know, it's not a shell shocker, don't blame me for not spoon feeding you something that is so hackneyed.

What, in the first place, makes you feel the need to put cogito ergo sum? If I'm writing something, I tend to stick to the language I speak most fluently. I feel no urge to write the latin form of Descartes' statement, the english version does the job perfectly. As far as I can tell, the only reason Descartes really used the latin was to sound more academic - latin was the academic text of his time and place. I feel no urge to sound more academic. If I can't accomplish it through english, hopefully no one will be dumb enough to think me any smarter having used a line in another language.

and it's funny, because I think I addressed that very same notion in the first post I posted in my thread, where I said it had become de rigueur (not that you know what that means, of course)

Actually I speak French well enough, though I don't think one needs to have had a day in a French class to know that term. Again, you seem to have interputted my post as an attack against you - I'll thank you not to assume so much.

Furthermore, I took latin in school, and I KNOW latin, otherwise I don't see how I would've been able to point such a grammer folly, dipshlt.

I took latin for two years, I could have pointed out the gramatical error. Taking latin for two years does not, in any way, mean I know the language.


Allow me to illustrate my point to you...

...formulated succinctly in the proposition Die Welt ist meine Vorstellung, implying that all...


it can be communicated: 'wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man shweigen'.

Both of these quotes are taken from an old text I have on Shopenhauer. Throughout the book the author uses German, French and Latin quotes and phrases, for no reason what so ever. Sometimes there is a footnote with the English, sometimes not. Now, take the first example. "The World is my Idea". Shopenhauer famously went on and on about the world as will and representation, and in fact in English the translation of Vorstellung, and how to give the proper impression of Shopenhauer's idea is highly debated. What good does it do to give a university student who likely has no experience in German only the German with a footnote? In fact, what difference would it have possibly made to just put the English? The difference is that author's like to sound more academic. Especially in philosophy it seems a trait that everyone wants to sound smart through their language rather than their ideas.

The English would have done just fine in the above quotes. And I highly doubt every university student who takes philosophy knows english, french, german and latin.

My point is that writing the original latin is useless in the first place. The fact that one can translate three words of latin (or for that matter, could speak the entire language) in no way indicates their intelligence. Nor does it in the remotest sense help to prove their point. I can only hope everyone in philosophy would loose their immature desire to sound academic.

Chill out, Chalaco. :D
It aint gonna make any good for ya to get stressed out with that... :D
:cool:

Stupidities. However, I was refered here so:

The term has become de rigueur, people say it without having ever read Descarte.

I have. And you're missing an 's' at the end.


Off to some other thread. Farewell.

Hmmm, it was only meant to educate people. You took offense, perhaps, because you didn't know what I brought forth and felt inadequate so you had to resort to using ad hominem arguments questioning my motives... perhaps. :bugeye:

I certainly took no offence, you however apparently took my dionysian jest as offensive. I merely wished to point out the Irony in your statement, I have never seen anyone say that, and if it was spellt wrong I certainly would not care.

Insulting people on a purely arbitrary basis is however not a good way of making yourself popular arround here.

But I make nothing of it, I still remain neutral to you.

Yes, getting an emotional reaction from reading words on an internet forum realy is rather pointless when you think about it isnt it? ;)

I know no Latin, so please correct me. I’ve heard taht the translation of what he wrote is ‘I am thinking, therefore I am.’ and that the reason he used Latin was to be precise about the type of action he was doing which made him knowledgeable about his existence.

…anyway what is the difference between thinking and think, English, French, Latin?

Sometimes those reactions are much more subtle than you think.


What the hell am I going on about now...?

... I'm right.

It is a dative or ablative singular form of a perfect passive participle, not a first person singular form. "Cognito ergo sum" is nonsensical because there is nothing for the word cognito to modify.

Actually, you're wrong.

The perfect passive participle "cognito" could easily be an ablative absolute corresponding with "I".

The sentence would then be

"Therefore, having been recognized, I am."

It's not what Descarte wrote, but it's not nonsensical either, I'm afraid.

…anyway what is the difference between thinking and think, English, French, Latin?

I know only a few chic, slick-type phrases/words in French, like carte blanche and gauche and bete noir... etc.

So I can't really help you there, friend.

As to English and Latin, though...

I think, I am thinking, and I do think all convey similar yet distinct actions in English, but in Latin they may all be rendered as "cogito".

Truthfully, Latin is a very concise language.

Yes, you were right about that, though your explanation wasn't exactly spectacular.

I wrote that you were wrong. I specified the topic on which you were wrong by providing the quotation I did.

Great

[Must provide extra letters. It's the rules, don't ya know.]

[Whoops... still not enough.]