|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.|
Books on Amazon
Doctrine of non-possessing/I/self/consciousness/Strawson: (probably not Wittgenstein's position/StrawsonVs): Representative: "OP" (our philosopher): Descartes: the uniqueness of a body should be sufficient to evoke the idea that the experience is attributed to it - it was just unfortunatly expressed in terms of possessing - Our PhilosopherVsDescartes: then it would be inadmissible, to assume an "ego" additionally, whose sole function of this is "possessing" - difference: body has experience causally, contingently.
"Ego" has them necessarily, conceptually (wrong) - Solution/Our Philosopher: only things whose possession is logically transferable, can ever be possessed - experiences are then no ownership of the subject - StrawsonVsOur Philosopher: is using himself the false possession term.
Actually our experience in this particular sense are our own, and only identifiable by that - StrawsonVsDescartes/VsOur Philosopher: there are not two uses of "I".
From particular experience of the subject arises not the necessity of a self-concept.
Einzelding und logisches Subjekt Stuttgart 1972
Analyse und Metaphysik München 1994
Die Grenzen des Sinns Frankfurt 1981