I have has some interesting discussions recently about who we are versus what we do. For example, Trish and I were discussing how I think of her as an artist, but she thinks of herself as someone who has made some paintings. Do you need to be working on current projects to call yourself an artist?

This led me to think about E-Prime, a version of English that excludes all forms of the verb to be. The potential value of E-Prime could be that we recognize that our experiences are an indication of our present state, not a permanent condition.

I have been writing essays for a couple of months and started publishing in December. Does that make me a writer? It might be good to think of myself that way if it keeps me going. What if “being a writer” no longer serves me? The identity might make it hard to let it go. I might be better served to say, “I spend some time writing each day.”

If you struggle to get up in the morning, you might say, “I am not a morning person.” It might be more helpful to say, “When I stay up late, I struggle to get up in the morning.” A slight difference, but the latter gives you a glimmer of hope that you can change.

When someone asks you what you do, do you tell them what you do or what you are? I am sure I used to respond, “I am an auditor.” That was my identity for 19 years. At the time, I did not see it as something I was doing, it was who I was. Now a bit older and wiser, I might respond differently. What do I do? “I help people feel, move and sleep better.”

How do you view yourself, as someone who does or someone who is?