JethroUK© wrote:

> "Wilson Woods" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>JethroUK© wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Wilson Woods" > wrote in message
link.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>JethroUK© wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>What YOU, ****tard, have repeatedly failed to
>>>>>>understand is that prior to existing, one has no
>>>>>>well-being or welfare that can be "improved" by coming
>>>>>>into existence. THEREFORE, ****tard, an entity cannot
>>>>>>be "better off" merely by coming into existence: one
>>>>>>must ALREADY exist to be made "better off" by some event.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>wrooooongg !!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>an animal can better off (from it's own perspective) merely by virtue
>
> of
>
>>>>>it's existence
>>>>
>>>>No, it can't. It didn't exist previously, so it had no
>>>>well-being or welfare to improve. Look, ****tard:
>>>>being "better off" MEANS experiencing an improvement in
>>>>well-being/welfare.
>>>
>>>
>>>there is no 'better improvement' than life over non-existence
>>
>>It isn't an "improvement" AT ALL.
>>
>
> it's the ultimate improvement

It is not an "improvement" at all: there was nothing
to improve.