What is Non-Existence?

 

Delt Church Park trail

Before I get started on today's article, I'd like to take a moment to thank all those who posted comments recently; especially the supportive ones. I think that being more supportive in today's atmosphere of eroding trust and increasing violence is one way to thwart those trajectories. Not only do I appreciate these comments, but I am certain that others are benefitting from them too!

One item I considered putting into my recent article about suicide I decided to put into a future article instead to keep the first article more compact. This explains the inspiration for this article which has been similar to suicide in my line of articles - it has been put on the back burner too long and needs to be brought into the light.

I don't take these articles lightly, but at the same time I likewise do not think they are more than they are. Ever since I discovered the psychological roots as to why and how we got ourselves into this mess of inescapable predicaments, I have realized that yammering on about these predicaments as if people would "make the right choices" once knowing about them is nothing but an illusion many folks like to believe. The evidence demonstrates that only some people actually choose to make the right choices and that most simply follow what everyone else is doing. 

I want and need to make clear that the entire premise of this blog is point out the difference between problems (which by definition have answers or solutions) and predicaments or dilemmas (which by definition only have outcomes), and how our behavior of technology use has been the overarching cause of the predicament we suffer from, ecological overshoot. It is very clear to me that the ONLY way to reduce overshoot is to reduce technology use, something that most of society is steadfastly against because of societal loss aversion and our collective addiction to technology use (for technology addiction, see here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). As a result, I think we can discuss potential ways to bring about technology use reduction but ultimately must accept that no such prospect is actually on the radar of society anywhere. This leads to the uncomfortable reality that technology use reduction WILL happen, but not voluntarily by our species. Instead, it will happen when we no longer have the necessary energy and resources to power it, an inevitable symptom predicament of overshoot. 

Recently, I wrote yet another article about collapse that focused on ecological collapse rather than civilizational. social, political, or economic/financial collapse (see here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). I wanted to point out that collapse is built into the system of civilization because of the unsustainable nature of that system. The idea that we can avoid collapse while at the same time continuing civilization is flawed thinking at best. We might as well attempt to avoid gravity - it's just not going to happen.

I made quite a few points about suicide in my recent article about it which mentioned that there were few reasons for attempting such an act and that what many people might see as reasons, actually amount to excuses. They are actually seeking help or validation of one sort or another. I can assure you that life isn't always fair and that the one thing life frequently throws one's way is cruelty. Those are just simple facts, mirrored in the old maxim, "Life isn't always a bowl of cherries." Despite that reality, there are songs which claim the opposite.

Several years ago, I knew nothing about non-existence other than that of death. But death signifies that there had been existence. So, non-existence is the absence of existence altogether. For some people, this may be a difficult and abstract idea to conceptualize. The implications of having never existed appear to be exceedingly difficult for parents. Even I have had difficulty visualizing it.

Life itself (and, yes, I just thought of Tad Patzek as I typed that) is a wide mix of sparkling highs and deep lows and everything in between. Being consistently happy is an illusion utterly dependent upon denial of reality. Initially, I thought of non-existence as that of a negative thing; after all, non-existence would not only mean having never existed to begin with, but all of the great experiences I have had throughout my life would also have never happened. This appeared somewhat saddening to me at first until I realized that there would be no "me" to feel anything to start with. Everything I have created throughout my life never would have occurred. So, not only would all the pain I have experienced have never existed, but all the positive parts of life would have likewise not existed.

So, this led me to think of an individual's life as having a responsibility to make things better. Isn't this what we're all trying to do in one way or another? Yet, this concept of "human progress" or innovation we are burdened with constantly doing in one way or another is precisely what has brought us to this point in time. As a result, non-existence in one manner of thought can be said to be the antidote to overshoot, at least in terms of a concept. Obviously, nothing can take us backwards and nothing can "fix" the mess we are in. However, non-existence can help ease the situation by not bringing more people into the mess we have collectively made. Nobody set out to cause overshoot. It simply happened when enough people chose to continue the unsustainable system of civilization. So, by choosing not to reproduce, one can help ease conditions for those of us already here by practicing a form of non-existence by not bringing forth yet more people to experience the pain and suffering that life inevitably presents.

Recently, I have come across some great articles which highlight the predicaments we face. Many of them have been included in compilations of articles, one such collection noted here. There is also a Substack one can subscribe to, although I'm not certain the posts are free like the original on the Reddit site. Justin McAffee came out with this article a few weeks ago. Here's an excellent one from Richard Crim. I could choose multiple articles from Alice Friedemann, but this one stands out. A new Youtube channel contains podcasts from Music For The End of the World. This article highlights the war over water, soon to be a much larger issue. Disease is always an issue and ticks bring many different ones. Here's an informative one about mercury. A newer article from Tim Watkins brings up Liebig's Law. Several different articles and videos highlight David Suzuki's claim that it's too late for climate change. How about an article regarding the Southern Ocean's current reversing? Last but definitely not least, here is William Rees' latest video.

By the way, I did notice an argument between two different collapse writers, one calling themselves "the doers" and the other one being critical (rightfully so) of such hubris. Quite frankly, I found it rather humorous. Both of them have valid points and yet I see where both of them are stressing over points that I find somewhat irrelevant over the long haul. People will learn these facts one way or another or they'll end up dead. In the meantime, there are lots of arguments to witness online.

I generally try to avoid arguments, especially in the comments section underneath most articles and/or posts. Some of the comments can be enlightening, but more often than not, many demonstrate the depressing reality that many people have only a partial understanding of the material being discussed. 

With this article about non-existence, the bigger issue I would like to draw attention to is the inevitability of death. George Tsakraklides says this about it:

"Death is everywhere around us, always, yet we condition ourselves to only pay attention to life. It is good to be hopeful about things, but the failure to acknowledge loss is a failure to prevent even more loss from taking place. This landscape does grow back, but less and less so each year, because no one has ever grieved it. The problem with the loss of nature is that it leaves no evidence behind. People forget what was lost, as it all disappears into the time vortex like a lost language.

The church is dark, but full of murals and carvings: on the walls, the ceilings, on the tiniest square centimetre available. There is no space for the eye to rest, to get lost in the terrifying emptiness of the cold, grey concrete wall underneath. We never bravely stare into the endless vacuum of death. Instead, we must always distract ourselves with religious fairy tales and retail compulsions. The murals, the priest’s fancy clothes, the psalms that are supposed to help the body ascend into heaven, are nothing but a big gaslighting exercise to distract us from loss."

Death is a part of life; you can't have one without the other. With non-existence, one avoids both. But this is the crux - so many articles I read stress survival or ways to avoid collapse. Sure, one can survive for a while in today's world. But tomorrow's world will be different, and surviving will become an unpopular activity at some point. Death has always been a part of the program and will begin to take bigger and bigger bites out of the surviving population. As for ways to avoid collapse - that is nothing more than an illusion. We're already in collapse now and have been for the last 5 decades or so. Collapse isn't something that can be avoided, as it will only deepen from here on out. 

Onto a less stressful subject; I have some beautiful pictures from Pilot Mountain State Park and Smith Mountain Lake State Park and Rural Virginia for you to enjoy!