34
edits
Changes
m
no edit summary
First, it is perhaps important to '''contextualize these concepts''' with a created-world example.
* When one discusses someone (say, John Doe), one might ask "what John Doe is." The answer would be a human being (a creature with a mind/[[nous]], a body, and a life).
* If, however one asked "what John Doe does," that would be a different question. The answer might be running, building, teaching, etc. Note that we may often say John Doe ''is'' a runner, builder, or teacher; but such is simply a method of speaking. These attributes (all acquired through time) have no relation to what John Doe actually ''is'' by nature (i.e. a human being).
* Both of those questions, however, are different from "who John Doe is." The answer to "who John Doe is," is what makes John Doe different from Jim Doe (or Jane Doe, etc.). This is a specific person who distinctly uses the characteristics he/she shares with others (ex. sharing the same humanity, but also perhaps the same activity, like running).