I mean we are individuals, regardless of our level of understanding or
abstraction. "I" is different than this, perhaps, because it may
necessitate self-awareness, but the fact remains that we *are* individuals.
Add our self-awareness to that, and you have "I."
>
>> Language or the use of it may have
>>ramifications in the objective world (the making of the hydrogen bomb, or
>>the writings of Henry Miller) but this is I think on a different level
>>than we started out talking about - the simplicity of "I."
>
>If "I" implies consciousness it isn't simple at all.
Consciousness may not be, but "I" is only the recognition that the speaker
or thinker is an individual, perhaps dependent but still separate from his
surroundings and acquaintances. I think it *is* rather simple. Now, as to
how we wish to define consciousness, that is another matter, and probably
too much for my abilities. Be fun to try though. ;-)
Mark