My life is a predicated “I am”, which is to say, “My I is ising (I hate the sound of this word, but I need the sense of its meaning).” My “aming” is “ising”. My “ising” is expressing. My expressing is existence. My subject is predicate (no this is not syllogism), and my subject/predicate is predicated.
I, as a finite being, must achieve this predication with limitation – I merely am. This is what distinguishes me from the concept of the “I am that I am”. The very expression connotes absolute sufficiency. I, on the other hand, am insufficient and thus dependent.
It is conceivable that the “I am that I am” transcends existence itself, that the “I am that I am” is not contingent on expression, that the “I am that I am” precedes the category of existence, and that the expression of the “I am that I am” is in itself the force of all existence.