>>13989133I'll have to articulate my point in more detail then.
The assumption is that you are not real and you have to prove that you are real to me, and your argument is that "I can think therefore I am real" but I don't know that you can think, so you are still just like the vacuum to me.
And then what would follow is that you say "But I think therefore I am means that I can prove to myself that I exist because I can think."
But if you study neurology you'll realize that "you" are not so clearly defined, so "you" can't think... "you" are just several neurons simulating thought, so there is no such thing as "you" thinking.
I can explain in more detail if you still don't understand yet. I think therefore I am is not a good argument. It will take too long to go all the way down this rabbit hole.
