I'm new to this forum and have a question. In Power of Now, Tolle wrote:
On another discussion board( Lightmind Forums Forum Index -> World of Ken Wilber), "John" suggested that:"The philosopher Descartes believed that he had found the most fundamental truth when he made his famous statement: "I think, therefore I am." He had, in fact, given expression to the most basic error: to equate thinking with Being and identity with thinking.
To which I replied:This statement does not equate thinking with being. It affirms the correlation between thinking and being. There's a difference. Thinking is a sufficient condition to confirm beingness. They are not equivalent, they are correlated. Smoke is not equivalent to fire.
Equate may have been a poor choice of words on his part? It was, after all, a quote from an interview.
So plug in "correlate" or "link" where equate is and it reads:
"He had, in fact, given expression to the most basic error: to correlate thinking with Being and identity with thinking."
I'm not trying to put words in his mouth, but to keep it in context with the rest of the paragraph.
Tolle might say that while thinking can confirm Beingness, it is not a prerequisite... probably a handicap in fact.
John is not letting me off the hook that easy.
So our question is, did Tolle really mean "equate" or "correlate"?