There is no such thing as a self

We're having a debate about the existence of the self and my opponent is making unsubstantiated claims about demon possession. I find this line of reasoning to be a ridiculous attempt at absurdity. First off, do these demons have a sense of self? And secondly how can you tell enough difference between your thoughts and the demons thoughts to definitively say that you and the demon are not one in the same? And in this same line if you"re aware of this demon, wouldn't that require you have an understanding that you and the demon are 2 separate beings, that the self that is you is being corrupted by a non-self entity? My opponent claims we are metaphorical sticks in the ground, receptors of thought that just happen to be floating by at the time of their manifestation in the mind. I find this to be nonsensical as well. This very debate proves we are not simply thought receptors but we also have the ability to consciously evaluate and respond to others. In our communication we see that we can consciously broadcast our thoughts to impress upon each other. And from where do these thoughts come from? The self; the conscious mind that comprises our perceptions, emotion and thoughts is where we understand ourselves as the subject of our experiences and our interaction with others (the non-self). In his 3rd paragraph, Pro again brings up the Theseus Paradox, and again I remind him that just because people change over time this does not disprove the existence of the self. People's selves are maintained through an amalgamation of change and experience. These things do not change the 'self' as a cohesive concept; they add to and compliment the already existing self that is you or me. We can and do hold past memories subconsciously and consciously simultaneously with the present. It may be distracting but it's not impossible, the brain is pretty wondrous like that. Finally for a brief argument on the existence of self: Rene Descartes had the same thought experiment of doubting reality and self due that of an evil demon, or as he called it an evil genie. But as touched upon in my initial questioning of the demon Descartes and I come to a similar conclusion; the self still exists. Quote: "I can doubt the existence of the external world, and I can doubt the existence of what appears to be my body. But when I try to also doubt the existence of my inner self, my thinking, then I find that I am still there--as a doubting mind. And if I try to doubt the existence of this doubting mind, then I still find the activity of my doubting. And no matter how hard I try to doubt this doubting, I cannot help but find the process of doubting. My doubting is the thing that in the end I cannot doubt. Doubting, however, is thinking, and the existence of thinking implies the existence of a thinker. Hence Descartes' famous conclusion: "I think, therefore I am" [2]. In summary, changing tactics from impression to demon possession does not make a compelling argument. The Theseus' Paradox again does not disprove the notion of the self. And if we are just metaphorical sticks in the ground, then we are sticks with the clear ability to think for ourselves and communicate with others to better understand our context in relation to the self and others. Finally the brilliant thinker Descartes has already put thought into the existence of the self despite demons and has found that even if we doubt the existence of self it is the self that is still doing the doubting, thus the self exists. [2] http://faculty.frostburg.edu...