The elements of existence are asymmetric and interact because of their imperfections. If they were perfect they would be static. Nonexistence is boundless, timeless, omnipresent, simple, etc. Existence is defined by its limitations. Furthermore, for any number of things that exist, one can imagine twice as many that do not exist, or the set of all sets of them
2006-06-05 19:54:17 · 8 answers · asked by GobleyGook 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
you can get better answer from jean Paul satre great existianalist
2006-06-05 19:59:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 13⤊ 0⤋
existing, even when there are non-existing things that out number, pushing the boundaries of imperfection is what life is all about. The staus quo of the universe is balanced by the existing and non-existing. what you don't see is of opinon, seeing isn't believing, there are things around you so small that the best microscope in the world cannot pick up but we know that they are there. There are somethings that are around us that cannot be measured or seen but felt, scientists have proven the existance of anger, love, etc. But there is not element that defines them, just signs, symbols, actions...
2006-06-06 03:07:42 · answer #2 · answered by spookiebutt 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since we know only our own existence and not what lies after this life, the question can't be fully answered. Whatever the evils of this life, those who find such things as love, peace, joy, and eternal truths in it would likely not consider non-existence a preferable alternative, whatever their sufferings.
2006-06-06 03:02:20 · answer #3 · answered by jzyehoshua1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
~My imaginary friend Douphineas was always happier than me, does that help? Didn't help Douphus. He ticked me off so bad being happier than me that I stopped imagining him. Now he's all alone in the forest not hearing the sounds the trees don't make when they fall because he's not really there so neither is the noise. Or is it? And is he? Did we both get our rocks off on this one? Thanks for the hand.
2006-06-06 03:03:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would it be an ad hominem to point out that people who chose to end their existence are usually very unhappy?
It would put an end to all the stupid hassles.
Who are you, Dr. Kevorkian?
2006-06-06 03:03:15 · answer #5 · answered by hunter 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Once existing, always existing.
2006-06-06 02:57:53 · answer #6 · answered by ruletheworld 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if not exist, then it will not make a difference. if there's no difference, there's no progress. if no progress, how do you know if it's perfect ? so it's better to exist...to be able to compare.
2006-06-06 03:00:35 · answer #7 · answered by jims_bong 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you've never existed, you've never been, so there for you wouldn't have known anything because you never were!
2006-06-06 03:00:58 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋