XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.atheism, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
   XPost: sci.environment   
   From: org@org.org   
      
   On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 14:44:45 -0800, "T. Howard Pines, Jr."   
    wrote:   
      
   >Coming into existence, or "getting to experience life", is not better than   
   never   
   >existing.   
      
   Ipse dixit   
      
   > It can't be, because no such comparison can be made.   
      
   But you just did, nevertheless, and came to the conclusion that "Coming into   
   existence is not better than never existing."   
      
   >Nor can   
   >existence be worse than never existing,   
      
   Ipse dixit, again.   
      
   >for the same reason.   
      
   But you did anyway.   
      
   >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.   
      
   Meaning a third person is required to judge. Your argument breaks a lot of   
   rules - two baseless assertions followed by false dichotomy.   
      
   >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.   
      
   I agree.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)