[082349872349872]

If you abstract and formalise, it's possible to divvy up the world into nouns ("being") and verbs ("becoming") transitioning between them.

On one hand, as long as we accept that chaining two compatible verbs produces another verb, it follows that chaining no verbs is the same as chaining a single verb "to remain the same", and now we don't even need nouns, because everywhere we used to have, say, an apple, we can formally use the verb "to remain an apple".

On the other hand, if we're attempting to prove things, and wish to use excluded middle or double negation elimination, it's very convenient to have explicit nouns (for which we can do so safely) rather than having almost everything we do be consequent upon taking care to manipulate only the subset of verbs which involve remaining the same.