Take the 2-minute tour ×
Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in logical reasoning. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is there a difference between when a person says 'I exists.', compared to the same person saying ' I'm existing.'? Is the person saying at the one time 'I exist.' saying he exists at a certain moment and has the 'functional capability' to exist for further moments in the foreseeable future? And when the person says I'm existing, maybe this is like the former statement yet emphasizing that the 'existing' is a functional capabilty to exist that is ever continuing , like a self-sustaining quality.

share|improve this question
1  
It's a great question, but I think it's best suited for English.SE. –  user132181 May 8 at 7:43
    
Agreed with user132181. Pretty sure that, as an example, in Latin one would just use the verb "to be" (esse). Similarly in Hebrew, God is written to have said "I am," which could just as easily be translated "I exist." So, seems like a quirk with English. –  James Kingsbery May 8 at 14:18

2 Answers 2

I wouldn't read any serious metaphysical conclusions into the difference between the simple present and present progressive tenses in English, if for no other reason than that not all natural languages make such a distinction.

share|improve this answer
    
Maybe philosophically 'I exist' and 'I am existing' are different as I am existing is a phrase emphasizing the processes necessary for one to even be able to say I exist . Even if your memory can be deceived there are certain autonomic processes that must be 'operating' for more than a moment by moment basis. These are necessary processes that one must 'feel'are 'being' maintained for hopefully long durations. Can you imagine feeling your necessary biological PROCESSES are only 'certain' from one moment to the next?? –  user128932 May 10 at 6:03

You cannot be certain that you are existing as your memory may be deceiving you, only that you exist at the moment when you are asking the question do 'I exist.'

share|improve this answer
    
It's actually the other way around, no? At least in our everyday language usage. I'm existing, now, but there's no way to make sure that I exist before I didn't establish the continuity of the "I". –  iphigenie May 8 at 11:10
    
@iphigenie I will go double check. –  LIUFA May 8 at 11:16
    
@iphigenie Just spoke to language zealous Brit at my disposal. He thinks both are correct, however he prefers 'I exist'. –  LIUFA May 8 at 11:28
    
That's still wrong. Tell your Brit he or she should check out the difference between simple present and continuous: ( web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/elc/studyzone/330/grammar/simcon.htm –  iphigenie May 8 at 11:39
    
@iphigenie I have consulted with another Brit who thinks that 'I am existing' would represent better case where we are talking about this current moment. However he sees such statement as unnatural and 'I exist' more commonly acknowledged as statement by Descartes. He also pointed out that statement was originally in French "je pense, donc je suis". –  LIUFA May 8 at 13:20

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.