Hello Daniel. Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I still don't really have an answer for you. I'm inclined to say "yes," the thinker is distinct from his thoughts, but I can't explain why. Do you think there's no distinction between you and your thoughts? And can you explain why?

I'll get back to you on that Daniel. I'm too tired right now.

Thank you Daniel. I think we're saying close to the same thing.

How about this as a syllogism?

Minor premise: Things of my making are less than I am.
Major premise: Things that are less than I am are in my control.
Conclusion: Therefore anything (and anyone) that exists outside my control is not of my making.

Would that prove I have my own independent existence?

Hello Daniel. I'd appreciate it if you'd first answer my question. Is there any way you can logically prove that I exist, independently of you? If I don't shouldn't I be giving you whatever answer you want right now?

That's interesting. Thank you. And I'd still be interested in anything you or anyone else has to say here.

Then let me prove I exist:
I am thinking (Minor premise).
Whatever thinks, exists (Major premise).
Therrfore I exist (Conclusion.)

Now, how do I prove that you exist?

That the room I'm sitting in, the country I live in, the world this country is part of, and the sun I saw today exist?