Existence Is Infinite

[daniel j lavender]

Existence Is Infinite
Daniel J. Lavender


Abstract

Existence is infinite, existence is unlimited. Only nothing or nonexistence could actually limit existence; however, nothing or nonexistence is not and cannot be. Existence is infinite, existence is not limited as there is [not] nothing beyond existence to limit or restrict it.


Terms and Definitions

Existence (n.): Being; that which is perceived, at least in part; that which is interacted with, at least in part, in some way.

Infinite (adj.): Immeasurable; vast; unlimited or unrestricted.

Nonexistence (n.): Non-being; no thing, nothing, nothingness; is never perceived or interacted with other than as a concept or term; it does not and cannot exist. A paradoxical concept and term.

Consciousness (n.): Awareness; process allowing feedback of existence.

Intelligence (n.): Recognition of patterns in existence and their application for some benefit.

Thing (n.): An existing, material or immaterial; a part of existence. That which is perceived or interacted with, at least in part, in some way. E.g. a word, an object, matter, energy, consciousness, a concept, an event, a process, etc.

---

Existence is and nonexistence is not.

Existence is everywhere. Nonexistence is nowhere. Nonexistence does not exist, it is no thing. Every thing is something, including the concept or term nonexistence.

Existence did not begin as a beginning of existence would imply a previous state of nonexistence, and nonexistence was not, is not and cannot be. As nonexistence never was existence would not require a beginning.

Existence extends beyond creation. Creation implies a point of being created, a beginning point. Existence extends beyond creation because existence had no beginning point or point of creation.

Existence was not created and therefore was not intelligently designed. However existence does concern intelligence as we possess it. At least to a certain degree.

Any thing, substance itself is being, is existence. The thing is. Substance is. It always concerns existence. Existence is constant. Things, parts may change. Parts may develop, they may transform, they may shift around or reform, they may break apart or break away but existence always is.

Existence did not begin and existence will not end. Existence was not created, it was not intelligently designed and it is not needed. Existence just is. We, as biological beings, create need. As conscious individuals we create purpose. Much like we create good and bad, right and left, up and down.

Existence is infinite, however, our limited perspective creates an illusion of limitation. From this perspective we are inclined to limit existence, we are inclined to create measurements of existence although existence is essentially immeasurable.

---

Additional Notes

- All variance balances as simply being. All difference, all variation, all opposition balances as simply being, as simply existence.

- Existence is not merely defined as "that which is" because "is" would have to be addressed which would involve perception. The matter implicitly involves perception and interaction; the term "is" only has significance with perception.

- Existence is not needed. Existence is not needed as there is [not] nothing beyond existence to need or require it. Alternatively phrased, there isn't any thing beyond existence to need existence because every thing is part of existence. Existence is not needed, existence just is.

- Existence is that which can, at least partially, be perceived, but it does not necessarily need to be perceived. Things can be without being perceived. Likewise things can interact without awareness, such as waves crashing onto the shore.

- Immateriality, immaterial space is part of the structure of existence. Immateriality helps structure existence as spaces help structure sentences. The contrast of materiality, the contrast of physicality is immateriality, not nonexistence or nothing.

- It may be argued that at some point existence was finite or limited in extent. But as stated that would only be some particular point, that would only be a limited portion of existence. That would not be the totality of existence. Existence is the whole, existence is all; existence is what we perceive as the past, present and future, existence is all aspects or all portions of all things. Existence is infinite, existence is unlimited. Existence is not limited in extent; existence is not limited to any particular area, period, point, portion, quality or thing.

- It may be questioned why existence is. There is no why or reason. Why would imply a cause or a beginning. Existence did not begin. There was no reason initiating existence. There is no reason for existence. Existence simply is.

- Perception or perceiving, as in the definition of existence, concerns mental apprehension in addition to sensory experience.

- Something and nothing cannot coexist. If there is something there is not nothing. Anywhere. Nothing or nonexistence exists only as a word, a term, a concept in relation to other things.

- Things have properties, things have qualities. Stars are bright. Icicles are cold. The automobile is aerodynamic. Nothing or nonexistence, beyond the concept or term, has no properties or qualities as it does not actually exist.


---------


The Definition Of Existence

Standard definitions of existence are often ambiguous and circular. They provide no means of substantiation. Existence is defined as simply being, being defined as simply existence. The terms form a vacuous loop of abstraction with no substantiation in concrete, real world instances.

The definition presented herein resolves that issue. The definition is functional and operational. Existence is defined; existence is that which is perceived or interacted with, at least in part. With the definition provided one could see a tree, touch a leaf, hear a bird or smell a flower and declare existence.

The definition maintains abstraction while also breaking free of the circularity of standard terms by grounding itself in concrete examples through practical means of substantiation.

The definition establishes testable criteria allowing substantiation of existence and rejection of nonexistence. That which is perceived or interacted with indicates existence. Nonexistence fails because nonexistence cannot be perceived or interacted with. The rejection of nonexistence is not merely definitional but grounded in the inability to substantiate nonexistence.


The Significance Of Perception

Perception or consciousness is part of the basis of defining existence because conscious entities, such as ourselves, are who this issue matters to. Existence, things can be without consciousness or awareness, but consciousness or awareness must be included because that's what we are. For our purposes existence is that which is, or can, at least partially, be perceived. It involves perception both because perception is part of existence and because the issue intimately concerns conscious entities. It implicitly involves perception or consciousness because that is the process used for such inquiry and exchange.

All inquiries, including those in science, involve perception and interaction. The line between a semantic test and a truly empirical test is blurred. Scientific tests are not independent of observers. Scientists observing experiments are conscious beings using perceptive tools to interpret data. The data itself is a result of interaction between phenomena. Thus science operates within the definition of existence provided.

Perception is a parametric base allowing us to ground existence in practical, concrete ways. Perception is not necessarily presupposed in the definition of existence, hence the key qualifier "at least in part". Not all of existence must be perceived. However, all doesn’t need to be perceived in order to realize any supposed boundary or limiting factor would itself be, the act of limitation a form of interaction, indicative of existence.

Interaction, or the ability of things to interact, or the fact that things or phenomena interact, also plays a significant role in the definition of existence. It frees the philosophy from a purely biological, conscious perspective. Chemicals interact. Atoms interact. Protons, electrons all interact on nonconscious, nonbiological levels.


Epistemic Ontological Distinction

Perception is a means of substantiation concerning conscious beings. Perception and interaction are epistemic tools, not ontological requirements.

Existence simply is. Existence is not dependent on perception or definitions however perception and definitions are significant tools for conscious beings to substantiate and understand existence. The definitions concern us, our knowledge and substantiation, not the dependence of existence on them.


Existence Both Part And Whole

Existence is both part and whole. Existence as the whole is. Parts of existence are. It is. They are. All share the same commonality of existence, of being. Whole is. Parts are. They exist. They are.

Take Earth for example. There are parts of Earth and the whole Earth. Earth, the entire world, exists. However each continent, each body of water also exists. Each continent has its own name, each its own list of regulations. Each body of water has its own name. The continents are acknowledged as distinct things, the bodies of water are acknowledged as distinct things, as pieces or as parts. They also are acknowledged together as a whole, as the world or as the planet Earth. Earth's structure is comprised of several layers which also are viewed as parts or as pieces or together as the entire planet. Both parts and the whole can be and are acknowledged. This same premise applies to existence. Existence concerns both parts and the whole.

"Existence" or "being" is general, and applies to all, including parts, and the whole or entirety. "An existence", "an existing" or "a being" is specific, and applies to a particular. Both are acknowledged. In other words, both are.

A thing, although observably only part of existence, is still existence. A thing is not nonexistence. The fact a thing is [only part of] existence is implicit within context of interaction with said thing.


All Means All

Although both parts and the whole are, a part is not the whole or totality nor is the whole or totality just a part. A part is a part, the totality is the totality. A part cannot be turned into the totality, just as the totality cannot be turned into a part. A part may only represent the whole or totality or be in relation to the whole or totality. Nor can a duplicate of the totality be created. Such would be redundant, not to mention impractical. Any supposed addition to existence would still be part of existence or would still be part of the totality. In other words, there cannot be multiple totalities. Total means total, whole means whole. All means all.


Unlimited In Extent

Existence is not limited to any particular, existence is not limited in range or in scope. Existence isn't just any particular thing, existence is all things. Existence goes on and on and beyond, without limit. There is no edge to existence, no ending or beginning point to specify. There are only edges, there are only beginning and ending points to particulars or to things. To reach an edge is to reach an edge of some thing or some things, not existence entirely.

The edge of the seashore leads to the edge of the ocean; the edge of the ocean to the edge of the seashore. The edge of Earth's atmosphere leads to outer space; the edge of outer space to Earth's atmosphere, etcetera. Materiality edges into immateriality and immateriality edges into materiality. Edges of things always lead to edges of others; things give way to other things, not no things. Edges and boundaries apply only to particular things. Existence as a whole has no edge as existence is all things. Being all, existence flows seamlessly from one thing to another. Without edge, without limit.


Variance Of Existence

Parts of existence both limit and expand or give variety to existence. Parts are limited as observably they are not the entirety of existence, they do not concern the full scope of existence or the qualities of other things. Yet at the same time parts of existence give variety to existence; their uniqueness contributes variance to existence. For example the grittiness, the composition of sand contributes variance to existence as it contrasts the wetness, the composition of water. The water, as part of existence, perpetuates existence beyond just the grittiness or composition of sand. Both give variety to existence with their contrasting qualities. Simultaneously sand limits the extent of water, water limits the extent of sand.


Nonexistence Cannot Be

Nonexistence cannot be referenced because nonexistence is not and cannot be. Only things existent, only existence can be referenced. Absence of a thing or things may be declared, but this still concerns reference in relation to existent things. For example, Bob may be absent from class, but Bob is not nonexistent. Nor does Bob's absence create a gap of nonexistence in the classroom as the room is still completely filled with or comprised of things, be it air, desks, other students, teachers, etcetera. Absence concerns reference to a subject, to an existent thing and its location. The subject of reference is Bob, is the existent thing, along with its location. The subject of reference is not nonexistence or nothing; neither nonexistence nor nothing have location or presence to be referenced in such a way.

The very term "nothing" concerns reference to things. The concept or idea of nothing exists only in its relation to, and is based on, other existent things. "No thing" concerns direct reference to a thing or things. Attempting to reference nothing or nonexistence always fails as something is invariably referenced. The attempt to reference nothing or nonexistence itself results in reference to things: mental constructs or concepts of nothing, of nonexistence, or of nothingness, along with the words or terms nothing, or nonexistence, or nothingness themselves, all of which are things and are indeed existent. The words "nothing", "nonexistence" and "nothingness" are obvious paradoxes as they are all observably things. Every reference is to some existent thing; nonexistence is not and cannot be.


On Becoming

Becoming is a process, becoming is in essence development. Becoming could be viewed as dynamics of things, a process pertaining to things, similar to change.

Becoming is simply a process of existence, a process pertaining to individuals or parts of existence. Individuals, things become, develop or change into other things. A caterpillar, a thing, exists and becomes another, a butterfly. A student becomes a teacher, etcetera.

Existence, that is all things, cannot suddenly vanish into nothing. Nor can they suddenly appear from nothing. Existence cannot suddenly become nonexistence just as nonexistence cannot suddenly become existence. Existence always is. In this sense existence does not become. Existence, generally speaking, is not becoming and did not become. However becoming, as a process or as development, can pertain to parts of existence.


Immateriality

Immaterial indicates intangible things or impalpable things. Immaterial things cannot be physically touched like typical material objects. Truth and philosophy are examples of immateriality. Space may be considered material or immaterial depending on the subject.

An ocean is an example of material space. An ocean, or at least part of one, can be touched and is obviously tangible. An ocean provides material resistance because it consists of densely arranged molecules and atoms. Relatively the vacuum of outer space is an example of immaterial space. The vacuum provides no resistance as it concerns minimal molecules and atomic arrangements allowing material bodies motion.

The vacuum does not concern matter in the terrestrial sense. The vacuum concerns quantum fields, radiation and sparingly atoms or molecules. Too few molecules are present to form tangible, solid material. Pure immaterial space would theoretically concern no atoms, no molecules and no radiation. The idea or concept of space itself is conceptual and thus immaterial.


Smallest Thing

Whether there is a smallest thing or not is rather inconsequential. Even if there were a smallest thing, a smallest object, a smallest particle, etcetera, it would still be a thing, it would still be something, it would still be part of existence. A smallest thing would not create a gap of nonexistence. Existence would still be infinite, existence would still be ubiquitous; existence would still flow seamlessly from one thing to another.

A smallest thing would not necessarily indicate limitation of existence, as in limitation of existence's size or extent; rather it would indicate limitation of that particular thing, limitation of the size or extent of that specific thing. It would indicate limitations of observation or ability of the observer. Existence is infinite in size and extent; existence includes every thing and is not limited to or by size of particulars. Nor is existence actually limited due to limitations of observation or ability.


Theological Versatility

While many philosophical systems offer rigid prescriptions for existence the framework presented herein supports a plethora of theological and metaphysical interpretations.

The framework accommodates theism and deism in which deity, a part of existence, creates the universe, another part of existence. It accommodates pantheism in which all is equated with deity. It accommodates naturalism in which systems and structures develop naturally. It accommodates agnosticism in which knowledge of deity is uncertain. The framework also accommodates atheism in which deity is rejected. All positions are accommodated without compromising the integrity of the ontology.

Not only does the philosophy accommodate various theological positions it also reveals and connects the commonalities among them.


Conclusions

The philosophy presented herein illustrates the commonality we all share. In fact the commonality all things share. As demonstrated throughout centuries past various religions, ideologies and ideologues have served largely to confound, to divide, to stoke the fires of conflict in the world rather than to unite. Optimistically philosophy, such as the one presented here, can serve to clarify, can serve to reconcile these ideas as well as improve understanding and community throughout the world and beyond.


Discussion Topic Index: viewtopic.php?p=753415#p753415

‪https://linktr.ee/daniellavender‬

[iambiguous]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

[Age]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Those 'things' are only seen as 'a living hell on earth' to those who expect PERFECTION, or to those who expect 'the world' to revolve around them.

Those 'things' do NOT make living on earth a living hell AT ALL to those of 'us' who KNOW those 'things' are just a NORMAL and VERY NATURAL part of Life and living.

Only the very weak perceive those 'things' as a hell like existence.

By the way the only hell like existence events are those unwanted and unneeded events caused and created by 'you', adult human beings.

And, if you want to argue AGAINST ANY of what I just SAID and CLAIMED here, then PLEASE go ahead and 'TRY TO'.

[iambiguous]

No, SERIOUSLY.

[Age]

No, SERIOUSLY.

This is ALL this one EVER says in response TO me.

And this is BECAUSE it CAN NOT refute NOR argue AGAINST what I SAY and CLAIM.

And, it WILL AGAIN just say,

No, SERIOUSLY.

As a Truly INCOMPETENT interlocutor would say.

This one does NOT even 'TRY' to DISCUSS, BECAUSE it KNOWS it would FAIL each and every time.

[Age]

Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must NOT be a God.

LOL

[Gary Childress]

Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must NOT be a God.

LOL

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

Or it could be the equivalent of:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now people are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

Or perhaps:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now others are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[daniel j lavender]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Noticed this was conveyed here as well: viewtopic.php?p=620660&sid=fb5d8fb4bee5 ... 03#p620660

Not completely sure of the context but yes, things we may perceive as negative events or even catastrophes are indeed parts of existence.

[daniel j lavender]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Those 'things' are only seen as 'a living hell on earth' to those who expect PERFECTION, or to those who expect 'the world' to revolve around them.

Those 'things' do NOT make living on earth a living hell AT ALL to those of 'us' who KNOW those 'things' are just a NORMAL and VERY NATURAL part of Life and living.

Only the very weak perceive those 'things' as a hell like existence.

By the way the only hell like existence events are those unwanted and unneeded events caused and created by 'you', adult human beings.

And, if you want to argue AGAINST ANY of what I just SAID and CLAIMED here, then PLEASE go ahead and 'TRY TO'.

Good points.

We could also examine the term “perfection” itself for better understanding.

What does “perfection” mean? The quality or condition of being perfect. So what does “perfect” mean?

“Perfect”, according to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language Fifth Edition (2016), means “lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind”. https://www.thefreedictionary.com/perfect

In other words perfection or perfect doesn’t necessarily mean completely good or exclusively positive as many would like to imply.

Perfection, perfect simply means complete; it simply means lacking nothing essential to the whole or entirety.

As illustrated above, that would be existence.

Existence would not be complete if it were lacking destruction, if it were lacking catastrophe, if it were lacking negativity.

Existence is infinite. Existence is the entirety. Existence is perfect. Existence is perfection.

[Gary Childress]

things we may perceive as negative events or even catastrophes are indeed parts of existence.

I think the guy who made the t-shirt "shit happens" already beat you to that profound philosophical insight.

[Age]

Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must NOT be a God.

LOL

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

you MISSED the POINT.

Or it could be the equivalent of:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now people are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

you MISSED the POINT.

Or perhaps:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now others are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

you MISSED the POINT.

[Age]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Noticed this was conveyed here as well: viewtopic.php?p=620660&sid=fb5d8fb4bee5 ... 03#p620660

Not completely sure of the context but yes, things we may perceive as negative events or even catastrophes are indeed parts of existence.

In fact if these Truly NATURAL events did NOT happen and occur then human beings would NOT even be 'here'.

[Age]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Those 'things' are only seen as 'a living hell on earth' to those who expect PERFECTION, or to those who expect 'the world' to revolve around them.

Those 'things' do NOT make living on earth a living hell AT ALL to those of 'us' who KNOW those 'things' are just a NORMAL and VERY NATURAL part of Life and living.

Only the very weak perceive those 'things' as a hell like existence.

By the way the only hell like existence events are those unwanted and unneeded events caused and created by 'you', adult human beings.

And, if you want to argue AGAINST ANY of what I just SAID and CLAIMED here, then PLEASE go ahead and 'TRY TO'.

Good points.

We could also examine the term “perfection” itself for better understanding.

What does “perfection” mean? The quality or condition of being perfect. So what does “perfect” mean?

Like with EVERY word, the word 'perfect' 'means' whatever one wants it to MEAN. But one could make the 'perfect' word mean; as good as it is possible to be.

Now, it could be argued that the Universe, Itself, is ALWAYS as good as it is possible to be, or ALWAYS just plain old 'perfect'.

Babies and young children are ALSO just ALWAYS 'perfect', or as good as it is possible to be, AS WELL.

Now, considering that 'we', human beings, are ALL just children in Life, 'we' ALL, also, could be considered to be 'perfect'. However, as adults it is VERY OBVIOUS that what 'we' do, that is; 'our behavior', can be NOWHERE NEAR 'perfect, nor NOWHERE NEAR being as good as it is possible to be.

“Perfect”, according to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language Fifth Edition (2016), means “lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind”. https://www.thefreedictionary.com/perfect

Which again leads back to the Universe, Itself, 'being' 'perfect'. That is; It is lacking NOTHING to be the whole, and is complete of Its nature or kind.

In other words perfection or perfect doesn’t necessarily mean completely good or exclusively positive as many would like to imply.

NOT in that one, of MANY, MANY different definitions.

Perfection, perfect simply means complete; it simply means lacking nothing essential to the whole or entirety.

In that one "american heritage" definition. But which, by the way, STILL WORKS 'PERFECTLY' here.

As illustrated above, that would be existence.

Existence would not be complete if it were lacking destruction, if it were lacking catastrophe, if it were lacking negativity.

VERY True.

But I am NOT sure 'where' the 'negativity' is, or is 'meant' to be, here.

Existence is infinite. Existence is the entirety. Existence is perfect. Existence is perfection.

I AGREE.

It is only SOME people who whinge or complain when Truly PERFECTLY Natural events occur. This is partly, and maybe even mainly, because they have been brought up BELIEVING that they are ENTITLED.

[iambiguous]

Just out of curiosity, where does this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages...

...fit into your philosophy above?

Noticed this was conveyed here as well: viewtopic.php?p=620660&sid=fb5d8fb4bee5 ... 03#p620660

Not completely sure of the context but yes, things we may perceive as negative events or even catastrophes are indeed parts of existence.

Given my frame of mind, whenever I encounter another "philosophy of life", I'm always curious how it accounts for the sheer horrors that are built right into the "human condition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_earthquakes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_l ... _eruptions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... l_cyclones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tsunamis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landslides
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_floods
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... ore_deaths
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_diseases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinction_events

You note that...

"Existence is eternal. Existence is constant. Things, parts may change; they may transform, they may shift around or reform, they may break apart or break away. But existence always is, existence is constant. The foundation of any thing, the basis of substance itself concerns being, concerns existence. The thing is. Substance is. It always concerns existence. Matter or energy, things may morph or shift around but no matter the form or arrangement it always is an expression of existence."

"Nonexistence cannot be referenced because nonexistence is not and cannot be."

"Life, in the sense of being eternal, would not have been created nor would it have originated from a specific starting point."

I'm curious as to how your philosophy is construed by you in a religious sense. With many religions human life is eternal because God made it that way. It's just a question of going up or down. But then God Himself created the conditions that sustain all of the horrors above. So most believers subsume that in His mysterious ways.

How does your own philosophy above encompass all of this?

[Gary Childress]

Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must NOT be a God.

LOL

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now I am 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

you MISSED the POINT.

Or it could be the equivalent of:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now people are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

you MISSED the POINT.

Or perhaps:

"Oh, there has been an earthquake, now others are 'suffering', and 'living in hell here on earth', so there must be a God."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

you MISSED the POINT.

I saw your other post claiming that you "know" God exists, Age. I wish you'd make up your mind or else clarify your position. I don't know about you but I don't claim to know what I am incapable of knowing with any certainty, at least when it involves the most critical things that any human being could possibly know.