[coldtea]

>How do you define existence, here? Are you equating it with consciousness?

Yeah, I, for one, equate it with consciousness. I could not give less fucks if my "atoms, molecules, particles" existed before me or will exist after me.

I want the whole conscious being, able to kiss, hug, think, love, hurt, eat a steak, and so on to extend.

>I think you'll also agree that the arrangement of matter and energy you call "your life" is regulated by natural processes. In principle, it's possible for the thing you call "your life" to be a brief window within some larger process (a meta-life, if you will) of which you have no recollection.

If I don't have "recollection", then I still don't care.

[presscast]

I think you may have completely missed the point being made.

[coldtea]

No, I've got the point being missed. I just don't find the distinction useful at all.

The whole point being made was that "metaphysically speaking, it's not at all obvious that we "didn't exist before birth".

Which I say is irrelevant, if we need to distort "exist" so much as to mean some "larger processes" or our "atoms and molecules" existing.

Metaphysically speaking it might not be obvious, but the way the grandparent, me, and almost everybody else uses the term existence (i.e. regarding the conscious person, or at least their soul) it's obvious that we very much do not exist.