XPost: alt.atheism, sci.skeptic, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
   XPost: sci.environment   
   From: admin@127.0.0.1   
      
   On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 12:34:23 -0700   
   Bob Casanova  wrote:   
      
   > On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:31:04 -0700, the following appeared   
   > in sci.skeptic, posted by Ron Hamilton   
   > :   
   >    
   > >On 1/21/2011 10:18 AM, T. Howard Pines, Jr. wrote:   
   > >> Coming into existence, or "getting to experience life", is not better   
   than never    
   > >> existing.  It can't be, because no such comparison can be made.  Nor can    
   > >> existence be worse than never existing, for the same reason.   
   > >   
   > >Correct.   
   > >   
   > Agreed. While the stated comparison isn't, strictly speaking   
   > and AFAIK, a logical fallacy, it *is* an error in logic.   
   > >>    
   > >> In order to say that anything is better or worse for an entity, one   
   necessarily    
   > >> is talking about two different states of welfare or well-being for the   
   entity.     
   > >> But an entity must exist in order to have a welfare state of well-being.    
   Thus,    
   > >> the comparison between existence and non-existence, from the perspective   
   of the    
   > >> entity, cannot be made.  It is absurd.   
   > >   
   > >Also correct.   
      
   I think "David" no longer posts to Usenet.   
      
   It's been 14 years since this "discussion"   
      
   --    
   Bah, and indeed Humbug.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)