I am also a little unclear as to how we arrived at the conclusion that "I think therefore I am" is a fallacy. Regardless of where thought originates it is still at least perceived by us. I am aware of myself therefore I exist.
I suspect the hiccup may lie in perception of self though. Say, for example, that I am a computer program that has no physical being but I live in an entirely convincing virtual world. I may not be the physical being that I think I am but my consciousness still exists. Another example: same situation, but this time I have no original thoughts. Instead all thoughts I have are sent to me by the user of the computer I am in. I exist only as a part of the greater whole that is the mind of my user, but even though I am just a part I am a part with awareness of self. Therefore I exist.
Maybe I just mistook the meaning of the argument. If that is the case I would appreciate it if someone would explain in a little more detail. Thanks a bunch.
