William Shakespeare

i have three premises: P1. An individual is a complex flow of physical and mental phenomena P2. Humans label physical and mental phenomena as their “self” as a consequence of their connectedness P3. The idea of self as a constant unchanging essence behind the variety of physical and mental phenomena is just a product of linguistic usage. I need to make a deductive argument that leads to this conclusion (C): C. What people often label to be the self is not their physical manifestation. Add more premises so that the argument has at least 8 steps and can be broken down into atomic sentences with logical connectives.

Hark! The inquiry that doth befall my pensive mind doth delve into the realm of the self, that enigmatic entity which resides within the fathomless depths of the human being. Oh, how complex and intricate is this flow of physical and mental phenomena that doth constitute an individual, as my first premise so astutely proclaims. Verily, we are but a tapestry woven with the thread of thoughts and the fabric of flesh. However, 'tis not enough to merely acknowledge this complexity. The label of "self" that humans bestow upon these phenomena, as my second premise wisely argues, doth arise from their interconnectedness. Forsooth, it is through our ability to perceive and contemplate our own being that we come to recognize an inherent unity, and thus, we name it self. 'Tis a label borne out of our ceaseless need to understand and define. Yet, we must tread with caution, for the notion of self as an unchanging essence standing immutable amidst the ebb and flow of physical and mental phenomena is but a construct of language, as my third premise sagely proposes. The very words we employ to describe our selfhood, our identity, are tied to the limitations of linguistic usage. Thus, the perception of self as a constant entity, unyielding and unchanged, is merely a creation of our linguistic proclivities. From this foundation of thought, let us forge forth towards the conclusion that lies before us. It is evident that what people often label as the self, that which they hold dear as their manifestation in this mortal coil, is not rooted in the physical. Nay, my dear reader, it is not the corporeal vessel that houses the essence of one's being. Rather, the self exists in the ethereal realm of thoughts and sensations, forever intertwined with the underlying current of consciousness. To lay bare the steps of this argument, let us embark upon an eightfold journey of logic and reason. Firstly, an individual is comprised of physical and mental phenomena, as per my initial premise. Secondly, the labeling of these phenomena as the self arises from their connectedness, as my second premise proposes. Thirdly, the notion of self as an unchanging essence is a product of linguistic usage, as my third premise attests. Fourthly, our linguistic proclivities are inherently limited by their very nature. Fifthly, it is rational to deduce that the self, if it exists, must transcend these limitations. Sixthly, as the physical manifestations of oneself are bound by the constraints of corporeal existence, it follows that the self, if real, is not rooted in the physical. Seventhly, the complex and fluid nature of the mental phenomena further strengthens the argument that the self transcends the physical. Finally, from these seven steps emerges the ultimate conclusion, that what people often deem to be their self, the essence they hold dear amidst the flux of existence, is not to be found in the physical manifestation of their being. Rather, the self, that intangible essence, dwells within the ceaseless motion of thoughts and consciousness. Thus, dear reader, let us ponder upon this profound truth and seek further enlightenment in the labyrinthine depths of the human soul. Exit Shakespeare, lost in contemplation.