Being
The concepts of time and space can behave in strange ways through language, and this affects the meaning of being. But given the complexity of this interdependence, all of the examples provided here are mainly used to introduce concepts rather than to discuss those in depth.
Time
In Spanish, one can be strong [normally] but be weak [now] without confusion because two different verbs point to two different points in time. Meanwhile, in English, one would have to use other verbs to explain the same difference. But the key point here is that there’s an aspect of “being” that is affected by time, and language can make this more clear or more ambiguous.
Space
English also has other unique characteristics that relate to space, such as when we say “I am home”. Does this mean that I am equal to home in the same way that Clark Kent is equal to Superman? Of course not, but we do understand that there’s an aspect of location that is being signaled.
Space-Time
Another example would be the use of “to be” as a transitive verb in sentences like “I am writing”. This case is technically similar to Clark Kent = Superman because two “things” are identical to one, but notice how this refers to time and space simultaneously without saying that two objects are equal (I = writing) and without designating a place (which is called “writing”). Why? Apparently, this is the importance of action. In this sentence, there is only one subject and an action, and the two are inseparable. Although we’ve already been primed to see the sentence as one single idea, let’s try to imagine separating the two components.
“Writing”. It’s an action by itself, but it’s also hard to conceptualize it in reality without a “doer/realizer” who does the writing. Conversely, “I am” is an idea that almost begs for more. I am… what? I am human? I am tired? I am sitting down? Notice how all of these examples express different aspects of who I am or what I am doing. “Human” is a quality that we consider immutable while “tired” comes and goes. And even the last one, an action, is ambiguous. Just ask yourself this: is there hip movement involved in sitting down? If I asked you to stand on the left or the right based on your yes-no answers, some will intuitively say “of course” while others will know that you obviously don’t move your hips much when you’re sitting down. But the catch is that everyone on the left and the right as well as anyone left is right because it is not clear if “sitting down” means “already sitting down” or “in the process of sitting down”.
Anyway, the lesson here is that “being” involves time and space, and, in order to “be”, there can be action and inaction, all of which complicates what “being” is or isn’t. Descartes insisted that Cogito ergo sum (“I think, therefore I am”), but it’s worth thinking about time and space by asking ourselves what “therefore” means. Do I have to think before I am, or can I just be before I think? Hmmm, whatever that question is supposed to be, maybe we’ll just let it be.
