I am; am I?

Which do you relate to more?

  • I am.

    Votes: 22 57.9%

  • Am I?

    Votes: 16 42.1%
  • Total voters
    38
NeverAmI

NeverAmI

Satisclassifaction
Retired Staff
MBTI
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
I was thinking about something that relates to this question. Which of the two do you relate to more?
 
this is very vague so with out much explanation my first instinct is; Am I?
 
am not might have been a nice peace to add to the puzzle
 
Entyqua said:
this is very vague so with out much explanation my first instinct is; Am I?
Click to expand...

First instinct is what I'm going for. Thanks!
 
Descartes: I think therefore I am.
Sartre: I am therefore I think.

Me: I am and I think, but I'm not making any assumptions.

But this is only peripheral to your question. I don't really relate to either of them. I don't really doubt my existence, but I don't affirm it either.
 
I wonder what "I am" relates to you guys, when I see or hear "I Am" I immediately think God.
 
Hmm perhaps too vague does exist for this question. I mean it about how you see yourself. Are you content to be or do you question who you are?
 
From these two, I relate more to "I am".
 
I am.

Being it is another thing altogether, though.
 
I fluctuate between being, not being, and not caring. I doubt that I exist, then affirm that even if I don't, it doesn't matter, then question myself again, etc. etc...

So I guess I relate more to "Am I?" and "Who cares?"

EDIT: But I also think, "I am, to the extent that one can be."

So really, I dunno.
 
May said:
more of the latter, though i'm apt to phrase it as "I am?" ;)
Click to expand...

I agree in fact I had to edit my post because I originally typed I am? instead of Am I?
 
RedDeath9 said:
I doubt that I exist, then affirm that even if I don't, it doesn't matter, then question myself again, etc. etc...
Click to expand...

Same.

Most existentialist philosophy for me ends in the acceptance of not knowing. Existence seems real enough that I work from the axiom that it is real. And even if existence isn't real, some substitute and/or simulation of it is real because I'm experiencing it.
 
nom nom nom
 
Korg said:
Same.

Most existentialist philosophy for me ends in the acceptance of not knowing. Existence seems real enough that I work from the axiom that it is real. And even if existence isn't real, some substitute and/or simulation of it is real because I'm experiencing it.
Click to expand...

i envy you, i am nowhere near accepting the uncertainty of existence yet. it's something i've got to know, for sure, if i'm to accept anything as definite which results from it.
 
Mine is a greatly resounding 'Am I?'
 
I am much more a "Am I?" person. I start with a general idea or prinicpal, and I must extract the details from that. Starting with the details and unifying it all is possible for me, but it is not automatic, takes a lot of effort, and in some cases it is actually inpossible (much to my dismay).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top