@LunaClare,
LunaClare wrote:
Quote: By definition "before being born" has no value whatsoever so how can you qualify it as potentially preferable to any other possible state which has value by merit of existing and thus be able to be relatively compared with something else ?
I understand exactly what you're saying because you're not the first person to respond with this. What I'm saying is existing has no merit. It has no value. It's unnecessary and there is no end result. Non-existence has merit from the perspective of already existing. No, you will not be happy when you don't exist, but you don't need to be happy. That's the point. When we're alive we have to work hard and we have to avoid pain. When you're dead, you don't need any of those things.
If you don't think it's possible to compare existing to non-existing, maybe I'm just insane, but I'm sure as hell doing it.
You do understand negative value, suffering, has value right ?
I can go even further and explain you negative value has positive value in the measure it provides meaning to positive experiences for contrast...
...the frailty of life, the possibility of getting sick, suffering the loss of loved ones, dying, retro feedbacks meaning to positive experiences which otherwise would have no measure per se. Its the contrast between those that raises value. Picture it as valleys and mountains, the bigger the discrepancy between those the bigger the value you produce. And its a relative comparison. You don't need Everest for the most happy possible state so long you have the Marianne's trench right next to a small hill...
My point is a non state nullifies everything to the extent the question becomes meaningless...