Cartesian Fallacy (or, How Thinking and Being Are Not the Same)

Cogito ergo sum.

Almost everyone is familiar with this phrase that is, perhaps, one of the most important in the history of Western Civilization.

"I think; therefore, I am."

What, however, is the connection between thought and self-awareness? How does the ability to cogitate lead to the supposition of the existence of the individual?

I'm thinking as I write this blog. I can watch the characters appear on my display, symbols representing the form of the idea as best as they can. My fingers are engaged in their restless dance about the keyboard.

But are these real? Are my senses adequate or, in the same fears as Descartes would have, are my empirical senses being deceived?

Descartes had God to explain these fears. God wouldn't deceive us within his creation, so our senses must be valid.

I, however, am an agnostic. I find the arguments both for and against the nature and existence of God to be fallible. As such, I cannot make use of his/her/its existence to define the potential accuracy of my senses.

So, I think. I know I think because the thought processes are my own. I direct them, I guide them, I can shift them to a brief mental digression about the state of my flower garden and then return to the topic at hand.

I think. I know these thoughts are mine... or, at least, these thoughts exist. I can reason that as well as the Rationalists. Does thinking, however, birth awareness? Are we aware because we think or do we simply think we are aware?

The only absolute truth that comes from "I think" is that thinking, itself, is real.

"I think; therefore, thought is."

Of course, the dangerous pronoun of self-awareness still dangles at the beginning of the sentence.

This post may be the beginnings of an ongoing project.

Edit #1:

Thought, itself, cannot presume awareness in a physical sense. I "know" that this intangible psyche is somehow connected this this physical form, but I'm not certain as to the "how" of this knowledge. Beyond the fact I have a sense of self, what aspect allows to me to say absolutely, "I am and I do exist as an individual"?

Let's apply some basic assumptions for later contemplation:

1. There is thought which, by its action, proves itself as real. (Truth. Thought is present and, while intangible, is the only thing which cannot be doubted. It is happening outside of empirical senses, so there is no cause to blame the failure or inadequacy of the senses. Thought must be real.)

2. I have awareness. (Truth, to a degree. What is awareness, though? How do I have it? More important, how do I know I have it? I have this sense of self, but there is no explanation as to its conception or existence.)

3. There are physical sensations to which my thoughts respond. (Whether false sensations or not, I can interpret them. They exist in some fashion, either real or as abstracts contained within the process of thought.)

4. Because of thought, I have awareness. Because of this awareness, I know I exist. (Long form of Cogito ergo sum. Thought, in some way, has bearing on the awareness of self, which assumes existence of the self.)