Re: Existence - not "better" than never existing

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.philosophy.]
On 2025-04-14, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:31:04 -0700, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by Ron Hamilton
<banmilk@hotmail.com>:
>

On 1/21/2011 10:18 AM, T. Howard Pines, Jr. wrote:

Coming into existence, or "getting to experience life", is not better than never
existing.  It can't be, because no such comparison can be made.  Nor can
existence be worse than never existing, for the same reason.

>
Correct.
>

Agreed. While the stated comparison isn't, strictly speaking
and AFAIK, a logical fallacy, it *is* an error in logic.

Does it not follow then we could only ever experience the state of
existing?  If this is the case, then any possible state of the unverse,
where we can exist, will be what we experience.  That is to say, we can
never 'not exist' as long as thier is even the remotest possibility of a
universe, any universe, where we exist in it.