However, I can make claims which do not involve a description of i, because 1 does not descriptely determine the theory of Universal Algebra. However, I cannot make any claims which do not contain the concept of 1. To me this is a different sort of claim.

I did answer yes to all of those questions. As for my position, I think that the number 1 has the strongest possible form of existence. Although I do agree with your last paragraph and I think you summed up the essence of the question in that paragraph, I am trying to claim that our existence, including how our intentional states relate to the world, neccessarily depend on the existence of 1. The logic is this: "If I can only make claims which descriptively contain the concept blue, then blue must exist and blue's existence must be strictly stronger than the truth of my claim. "

I am vaguely aware of this tribe.

So, I completely changed my question; however, my question is still related to the ontology of numbers. However, I am interested in a specific type of reasoning rather than the question about the ontology of the natural numbers.

I am asking a more specific question. There seems to be something unique about the number 1 as it pertains to our use in language. I see the word "a" very much like the phrase "to be."