The Case For Non-Existence**

** I must warn my Post Modern friends that you must isolate the philosophical from the ordinary lest one be swept up in a whirlwind...surely to be set down in another place and time.
......................................................................................................................................................

I suppose if Perry Mason was making the case for Existence, it's about the only way such a poser [concept] might have a chance...

In order to transcend that which demands homage to the four dimensions, the notion that we exist must be forthrightly confronted and overcome...thus allowing all things to be possible. What is not possible is to offer [in evidence] that we exist in any real manner.

Facing off against the legendary barrister, I dare the curmudgeon to make any case for the existence of Existence. From where does this state emanate? And to where does it return? Can it be examined, categorized, defined, or judged? Is it of this human world?

My nemesis, ensconced in abstracted thought, I take the opportunity to suggest that Non-Existence is omnipresent, as humanity simply lacks the capacity to experience Existence and must instead be consoled by a rather thin facsimile, a hodgepodge of perceptions and intellectual ruminations powered by a cerebral cortex putting out a meager 3 erg/sec of brain power [running full-tilt].

So Existence is like all ideas that mankind has fabricated in order to bring objective order to a world so incredibly complex that settling on bedtime stories and nursery rhymes allows us to concentrate on the more practical matters [food, shelter, clothing, etc.].

The fact that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for our own existence seems to do no more harm to most of us than would a light summer shower. So what exactly are we if we do not exist?

Is this why so many seek answers that can only be found beyond the intellectual realm?

 

Hey if you are going to smoke that stuff you can at least offer to share.

once again, if you don’t think there is evidence that you exist I recommend that we leave you alone in a shark tank and see how complacent you are about the existence of the shark as it shreds the flesh from your bones.


In all seriousness though, I wish I could understand how physicists have theorized that this universe is a hologram. I need to brush up on my math I guess

 

I guess in order to care more about this, I'd need to determine what difference it might make. Can I break out of nonexistance? If not, then nonexistance will have to do and I'll have to be OK with that.

 

That’s very practical.

 

I don't mind talking about things that can't make a difference (although I don't fault anyone for disagreeing). There's plenty of philosophy that isn't directly impactful that can still be interesting and perhaps even illuminating.

That being said, most of what the OP is saying is not even that, it is closer to meaningless word salad. He seems to have redefined a bunch of words into referring to useless concepts that he also can't say anything interesting about. The only effect being that arguments using normal words also become confusing and misleading.

 

You should have taken the blue pill.

 

Of course, instead of the above explanation, you could have said, "I am not really following you. Could you further explain what you mean?"

Or, if this isn't the sort of thing that interests you, say nothing. That's always a good option.

I have been trying to intellectualize something that is anything but, and I know that it is quite difficult, but at least I am attempting to provide some original content instead of debating the same tired subjects for the 10,000th time. Cut me a break, or better, come up with something on your own that people might find interesting.

Believe it or not [and within the context of what people accept as reasonable thinking], there is a point to what I am saying. The entire non-intellectual sphere has been around for thousands of years for good reason.

 

Make a case for existence.

 

I am attempting to demonstrate that some [all] of the things we take as solid foundations for existence do not exist themselves. Once you begin to see this, then other things become possible and you look at life differently. This is a good thing.

This is not to say that you blow off what everybody considers as regular life. Relationships between people and with the physical world still exist objectively [but why this is the case is unknown]. Outside of your self exists another world [between you and the voice in your head that never stops]. It is here where you can effect change by tapping into the non-intellectual by cutting off that voice and substituting, "things as they are."

So non-existence is simply acknowledging that there is really no place that existence exists. Existence is a term that is used to validate our self. Once you begin to realize that this self of ours is empty, then non-existence makes sense.

 

I think, therefore I am
Cogito ergo sum. I wish I could speak Latin,

 

Exactly where are you? And in what time do you exist?

 

I've never felt it necessary to validate myself or my existence. I mean, I hope I get to know, in part, what mark Im leaving on the future before I die, but I'll be content knowing that I left some sort of mark, even if its just the 'butterfly effect' kind. There's a homeless dude that died on the street and the English dressed his body up as an officer and dumped him in the ocean with some made-up battle plans to fool Hitler about a major strategy in WW2. The homeless guy was later reburied with full military honors for the part he (posthumously) played in winning the war. He never knew he was gonna do that. Prolly died feeling very 'invalidated.'

 

Aren't you kind of doing that by saying what you did?

 

Certainly that could be debated but what cannot be debated is that I am experiencing existence, even if that existence is an elaborate deception or illusion, I am experiencing. I am thinking.

If we hold fast to what I am experiencing, I am currently whirling around in a big circle on the face of an oblate spheroid that is itself whirling around a giant glob of exploding Hydrogen or Helium or whatever and that is in turn being whirled around a giant black hole that nobody quite understands. It’s all quite confusing. To be honest I probably wouldn’t know most of that if I didn’t read it in a book

 

You say that you are experiencing existence. Well, perhaps we need to define existence. What do you think existence is?

 

To be.

 

Or not to be?

 

Being...very good.

What is being?

 

The present tense of to be. To exist. It’s a verb

 

That is the question.

 

The contrast between positive and negative polarities the sparks of consciousness that are cut off from the source perceive that gives meaning to the source that the sparks of consciousness are veiled from.

 

Does being require consciousness? Does a stone exist. Does it have consciousness? It would seem that to exist, a thing only needs to have mass and occupy a point in space time. I’m not enough of a physicist to say if that bears out on the quantum level but trying to reconcile the quantum with the larger universe we know is something greater minds than mine could not achieve.

 

Well, we tried that before, and I tended not to get so much answers as just more and more stuff that also didn't make any sense.

I struggle to see the difference between failing to intellectualise something wise and simply not having found something wise to begin with. As they say, if you can't explain it to a six-year-old, then you don't understand it yourself. Probably not quite true, but the point remains we can trick ourselves into thinking we understand something, and when we don't understand stuff, the results tends to be that we struggle to explain it.

I'm sure there is a point, it is just hard to see it, because of your writing style.

I can think of several bad reasons. And I can think of reasons that seem good, but only ones that seem good for bad reasons. I can also think of some good reasons, but none that would apply to your text.

 

Thank you for the grammar update, but the question stands...what is the state of being?

 

Existing!