Kant Had it Backwards

“‎The ‘I think’ which Kant said must be able to accompany all my objects, is the ‘I breathe’ which actually does accompany them.” – William James

I have long thought that Kant had it wrong when he said “I think, therefore I am.” Sometime not long after my Intro to Philosophy course at Hobart College I started think that it was the other way ’round – that we are, therefore we think.

I much prefer the implications of our beingness coming from something other than thought, like a timeless, effortless Source:

I am, therefore I think.

Similar Posts