Disproving Descartes? December Writers Guild 3rd Sunday Write

Another month, another Bloomington Writers Guild’s “Third Sunday Write” (cf.November 25, October 24, et al.), this time posted right on time Sunday on Facebook and answered (by me) today, Monday. The prompt of choice this time:

2. The first resolution I will break. . . .

The obvious resolution to break is: “I will not make resolutions.” Easy enough, one might think, to break. But wait! If I kept the resolution instead, how would I even have a resolution to break? Or to keep, for that matter — or anything. That is, doesn’t the resolution itself require its already having been broken to even exist? But if that’s the case, does even existence itself have a meaning — at least in the case of resolutions?

*This* resolution.

But then if existence, even in one single, limited instance, no longer has meaning, does that not call all existence into question? There can’t be two classes of existence, can there: (1) existence that exists, and (2) existence that does not? How does one divide them, existent existence and the non-existent kind? Does not that which exists de facto fade into the simpler, non-existing kind? (That is, non-existence can’t very well, itself, exist, can it.)

“Cogo ergo sum” — I think, therefore I am. But if I am, therefore I must exist, which means in turn that I must be contained in the ever-expanding class of the non-existent kind.

Have I disproved Descartes?

(If interested, you can check out 3rd Sunday Write for yourself by clicking here.)