I feel like questioning stuff. WE have the ‘existence’ of reality, but do we have the existence of ‘existence’ - if we define reality as ‘life’… and existence as ‘what always exists’. by definition is there a part of us (a soul) that always exists in existence rather than existing in reality?
Then what’s your difference between reality/existence. Surely they both exist. If reality is life and existence is not that exist seperately… call existence the impersonal soul… it is still self-less. Reality ends at the end of yoru life and is largely defined by time - time cannot be defined in existence because it is by definition NOT reality NOT ‘living’ . The soul/existence is immortal and is not phased by the end of matter/energy - existence is indestructible like nothingness - and very we’ll may be null state - 0 chaos to be ‘something’-
If you want to call existence out… don’t’ confuse it with reality - they are very different. Existence can be called the impersonal soul: it is still self-less…
If you are right, then show me where you are right. If not, then you don’t know at all, tortoise.
See this post on this thread for my present thoughts about it.
Existence happens both ways. Either you die and are reduced to a far simpler structure. Or, you exist AS nothingness, but you do not exist IN nothingness.
Terms like soul, and self and existence are jargonic and the meaning of them is to be extracted from philosophical discourses on the subjects. Throwing them around in some poetic way is nice and all, but ignoring accepted meanings and failing to provide solid definitions as you intend to use them makes philosophical debate quite difficult.