Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

I, philosophy: A) The expression of a speaker for the subject or the person who is herself. The use of this expression presupposes an awareness of one's own person. B) The psychical entity of a subject that is able to relate to itself.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
II 79
I/use/Nozick: all semantic facts about what the use of "I" refers to, state necessity de dicto, not de re.
II 91
I/synthesis/Nozick: Problem: how do we know that not in any moment a new I is synthesized?
II 104
I/unit/self/Nozick: unit is not about the act, which could have produced something else - but as a unified whole the I constitutes itself as capable of having other bodily parts or to lose memories (perhaps all).
II 105
I/self: is projected into the future, as comprising certain stages - after the scheme of the next successor the self-concept will be a listing and weighting of dimensions - but no metric (more Next are possible). - Nozick: Thesis: we are choosing partially by ourselves.
II 112
I/Nozick: physical descriptions exclude me, because they are not reflexive.
II 113
Self/I/Part/Whole/Nozick: a) self as the next successor of each act of synthesis ((s)> Castaneda: volatile egos) - or rather an underlying, enduring self: then rather a whole, less limitations, more unit.

No I
R. Nozick
Philosophical Explanations Oxford 1981

R., Nozick
The Nature of Rationality 1994

> Counter arguments against Nozick

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-23