happydolphin said:
Much better. If A (matter) did not exist, and A gives birth to B (sentient beings, via evolution), how did B exist as we observe it today?
Truth is: At that moment where A had not yet been observed, the truth is that it still existed, for without A's existence B could not have come into being. Which invalidates the converse of the definition you offered. The definition is fine, no problem with it. It's the converse that isn't (e.g. that if we haven't observed something then it doesn't exist). |
Of course one would have to determine how A came into existence too. And why there were other As popularly considered to be A before the A that is popularly considered to be A today came into existence and why it can be documented that today's A seems to be based on earlier As.
