Challenge

[rasterbee]

I hate you so much, JP.

[Rodri]

Is - The he/she/it form of the verb that defines all things that exist, or that could, or will, or did happen.

Definition fail. (by your own rules)

[Hehe]

Definition fail. (by your own rules)

I did say I was gonna do that lol

[Eutopeus]

Everything exhisting,has exhisted or will exhist.

Now the good part.
This post reminded me of my youth. While in grade school I was chosen with a handful of other students to take speech therapy tutoring. One hour a day or so spent practicing
tounge twisters and reading flash cards (?)

I find that confusing as I look back because I was the most advanced reader in our school and that was 2nd grade for me. I've aced every English class I ever took. Yet I can't hardly type a sentence.

Is text writing evolving a new language? If so am I going to have to sit in that little bus again?

[Gnerphk]

Yes. Yes you are.

As has been remarked before, Rasterbee extensively described but used "is" a lot. Boleslav defined within the rules but was excessively concise and restrictive; even Korzybski, I think, would have objected.

The challenge is still open, people.

[Hehe]

I explained why it was impossible. To define anything is to use the verb to be, seeing as the verb to be is the verb that defines everything, in its most literal sense.

[rasterbee]

I also explained that mine was just a copy and paste of the first google search result for 'is' and not an earnest attempt at the challenge.

[Hehe]

I know (if that was directed at me).

I know to be and define are not synonymous but by using any form of "to be" you are defining it, literally. You cannot define without using the verb to be. Even to say something as simple as "I am" defines "I". "I" can not exist without first being defined, and without existing, it cannot classify as anything, as it doesn't exist. Most of this will look like completely unintelligible blabbering, but ah well.

[Gnerphk]

Only one definition of the verb "to be" is similar to "to define".

The thing is, "IS" means so many different things that to define it as "to define" would be absurd. The act of definition is that of determining the boundaries of a concept in order to determine its qualities. Being does not, however, presuppose meaning, and the act of being can easily be indefinable. As well, one can attribute meaning to indefinability. As such, it can readily be seen that the two concepts are distinct -- which is one reason for the two different words.

[Abdul Haamar]

is - a word

There's my 2 cents on this matter