You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: I am a ...

in #philosophy7 years ago

Well I don't have a problem with "I am" or "I am a". I understand the basic "i am", but that is nothing but blank consciousness that is the similar basis for all human animal construction. We all share basic functionality and behavioral dynamics, but we are all individual, unique, and different in many way as well.

I am human. The word human exists to describe a specific type of animal, us. I am also not employed. I am many things. And they can accurately define me. I don't have apprehensions about describing myself.

LOL, yeah it's funny like you say, I have a name, given or chosen -- no I can't be a name, but that is part of my identity anyways. It identifies me from others. It's arbitrary compared to a word that actually defines a state of being. Names of personas don't define states of being ;) No categories of being in philosophical-metaphysics, so we can name ourselves anything hehe.

Indeed. The point is to remake, reconstruct and transform ourselves (alchemy) so that we learn to identify the false parts of who we think we are and learn to let go of them. Not to deny being able to say "I am" or "I am a", yet learn how we can fall for cognitive traps by limiting what we're seeing due to the restriction of labels or group identities, etc.

Labels are useful indeed, and they help us identify others on common or dissimilar grounds. Awareness of how we use them is how we can use them better hehe. Thanks for the feedback as usual ;)