"I think therefore I am", should just have been "I am"

"I think therefore I am."

There is an I who is in thought and an I who is am-ing. More grammatically there is an I who is in thought and a being (I am).

The I who is in thought is either: 'I being in thought' or 'I am thinking'. The I am or the beingness precedes the whole event.

The statement could be rightly reduced to "I am".

If it is not reduced to simply being or I am then it reads as follows:

"I am thinking therefore I am"

Which is circular, if not slightly backwards reasoning. After all who is the I am who is thinking if they are not the very same one being?

You can check out Ta-Wan's other musings here.