Is it safe to say..

[Koden]

If there is no life, there is no existence?

[G037H3]

If there is no life, there is no existence of life.

Life is an emergent, complex thing that arises out of unknown physical processes.

Without life, these processes still exist, unless you're defining life to be existence, in which case you could call a rock alive, but it would be pointless, as there must be a hierarchical distinction to be made if the question is to be answered definitively.

[wuliheron]

Words only have demonstrable meaning according to their use in specific contexts. Thus if someone is dead we can still say they "exist" in our memories or they "exist" in the past or they exist as a body in the grave or any number of ways. Whether it is safe to say so also depends on the circumstances.

[texasblitzem]

For me to be able to perceive "my own" existence, I must be alive. If I die, I cannot perceive my existence, therefore, "I" do not exist anymore. Oh well, it makes sense to me.

[wuliheron]

For me to be able to perceive "my own" existence, I must be alive. If I die, I cannot perceive my existence, therefore, "I" do not exist anymore. Oh well, it makes sense to me.


Since I've never been dead and there is no reliable evidence I know of about what it is like to be dead I'll just without judgment.

[turbo]

If there is no life, there is no existence?Dead stuff exists, doesn't it? So why might you think life is a prerequisite for existence?

[Maui]

Dead stuff exists, doesn't it? So why might you think life is a prerequisite for existence?



Perhaps this is a thread on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism_(cosmology)

But with such a cryptic title and opening post, he could be saying anything.

[Math Is Hard]

Perhaps this is a thread on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism_(cosmology)

But with such a cryptic title and opening post, he could be saying anything.

Agreed. The question posed needs more clarification.