Why am I me?

[Violet]

We are us because if we weren't us it wouldn't be *us* asking the question it would be other people. It's the anthropic principle and it's fucking simple.

And there you do it again... *sigh*

Exactly. It's a really simple point: I am me because the claim "I am not me" is a contradiction. In a sense, it is a tautology, as Saerules says. But this doesn't make the claim weak. In fact, the tautology is perhaps the most valid of arguments (a bachelor is an unmarried man, for example). And the facts that its negative is necessarily false, and that the law of the excluded middle is a self-evident axiom, we are left with the undeniable conclusion that I am me because... I am me.

Here's another example of an argument supported by itself.

"The Bible is the word of God."
Why do you say that?
"Because it is written in the Bible."
Why does it being written in the Bible make you think so?
"The Bible is infallible."
Why do you think it is infallible?
-repeat from 1 indefinitely-

The above is just as self evident, and just as faith based.

and the facts that its negative is necessarily false, and that the law of the excluded middle is a self-evident axiom, we are left with the undeniable conclusion that I am me because... I am me.

You might, for example, notice that you have avoided answering the question. You've asserted one thing, twice. Our very hold to logic is a matter of faith... this isn't to suggest that there is anything wrong with either logic or anything else which only has evidence from itself. But there is something wrong with people not discussing "faith-based" things when everything they know is faith-based.

Tautology is the only form of proof.

People can prove things in a number of ways that don't make logical sense. What you mean to say, is that 'tautology is the only form of logical proof', is it not?