The Feeling of Existence

In the world of science so much has been said by scientists about the universe the way they view it. Naturally, numerous new terms have also been coined so as to make it easier for the readers to follow the trains of thoughts of these scientists. At times, however, a term may be deemed to convey an idea that is just too blurry or too controversial to gain the acceptance of the society at large. Usually, when this happens, the concerned scientist will endeavor to coin another term so unique that this newly invented “term” approximates the idea that it really intends to convey. In such a case as this, there is a possibility that the term he coins is one that has already been widely used. Should this happen all the scientist needs to do then is to furnish it with additional explanations in order to “enrich” it with more meanings. This is precisely what the writer of this article is trying to do in his endeavor to deliver this brainchild of his.

Every one of us knows that all objects that make up the contents of the universe are mutually influential. The earth, for instance, has such an influence on the moon that the moon consistently stays at a particular distance from the earth while revolving around it. On the other hand, the moon, by its gravitational force, has such an influence on the earth that the waters on it alternately experience high tide and low tide.
Similarly, the earth is under such an influence of the sun that it keeps revolving around the sun, which itself being one of the stars in the constellation that forms the Milky Way Galaxy revolves together with the other stars around the hub of the galaxy. The Milky Way Galaxy is not the only galaxy in the universe. There are so many other galaxies in the universe, each influencing and is influenced by not only the other galaxies but also other celestial objects.
This mutual influence, while it is obvious in only visible objects, invariably has its origin in the invisible basic matter that makes up the whole contents of the universe, i.e. the sub-atomic particles.
These sub-atomic particles influence each other, thus forming atoms which, by the influence they have on each other, further combine to form molecules. It is through such a process that the objects we see around us, including the celestial objects, have come into existence. Clearly, all this gives us warrant to say that all existences in this universe, regardless of what they are, are mutually influential?
Now, what does this mutual influence suggest? The word influence as a noun means the power or capacity of causing an effect in indirect or intangible ways. Influence as a transitive verb means to affect or alter by indirect or intangible means; or to have an effect on the condition or development of.
From here it is obvious that the term “to mutually influence” concerns two or more objects, which implies that when two or more objects are said to be mutually influential, each must certainly “feel” the influence of the other(s). Of course the word “feel” here has nothing to do with the feeling that comes from our senses—those sensory organs that enable us to see, hear, smell, taste, and feel with our skin. It also has nothing to do with the feeling acquired from the cells of our body, nor does it have anything to do with the feeling caused by emotions.
This “feeling,” which has a status unique to it, is one that is found in every entity and which enables it to feel its existence. Let’s consider an example which, though very common, will—if contemplated more profoundly—indeed astonish us.
If we hit a marble against another marble of approximately the same weight, each of them will bounce back because they “feel” each other’s presence. Could such a reaction have occurred, if each had not “felt” the presence of the other?
To be able “to feel” the presence of the other, each of them should be able “to feel” its own existence. If it could not “feel” its own existence, how could it “feel” the presence of the other? Would it be possible for something that doesn’t “feel” even its own existence “to feel” the presence of others? How could something that doesn’t even exist “feel” the presence of others? By what means then does it “feel” the presence of others?
Does this not mean that, logically speaking, even objects have their “feelings of existence”? Here, it is obvious that objects not only “feel” the existence of others but they also “feel” their own presence. Though man evolves from organic matter, initially, however, he and all the various matter before us evolve from the same basic material, that is, the sub-atomic particles. As man is a composite of a variety of matter, each having its own “feeling of existence,” the “feeling of existence” he has is, therefore, a combination of the “feelings of existence” of the various matter. Nonetheless, the “feeling of existence” in man is obviously not at all the same as the “feelings of existence” of the various matter of which he is made. Given the fact that the feeling of existence of man is a combination of the “feelings of existence” of matters, man must certainly have more complex feeling of his existence than matters have of theirs. This is reasonable, because apart from the combined “feelings of existence” of the matter inside the body, there is also the life process. In a dead person, all of his physical body is a combined “feelings of existence” of only his body forming matter without the life process. On the other hand, in a man who is in a comatose state or unconscious, or under total anesthesia, while the combined “feelings of existence” of his body-forming matter are still there in a life process, these feelings acquired from our senses, unlike those of a conscious man, are void of the cooperation of the senses, nerves and brain. Healthy people, thus, not only have the “feeling of existence” but are also “aware of their existence,” because they have senses and brains.
How then could we feel or express the feeling that we have referred here to as the “feeling of existence”? Clearly such feeling having nothing to do with the feeling of the senses or the emotional feeling, all we can do here is to build our own assumption, even if this may not be quite accurate. Everyone of us must at one time or another have had the experience of being sound asleep; some may even have had the experience of being under total anesthesia. Have you ever noticed that although in either case you simply can feel nothing, you can yet feel the presence of your self between your pre-asleep and your post-asleep condition? You can in fact feel the “distance” between them. You will possibly feel this distance as a period of “darkness,”—without any of the feeling of our senses, without any of the feeling of our cells, and without any emotional feeling—which can be either long or short. This “feeling of existence” can perhaps be analogized to something like “condition in distance.” While it is true that in our very being in such “condition in distance” we can feel nothing, “within that distance,” however, we can feel that “the distance” is there. It’s all because we have the “feeling of existence.” It could thus be said that “the feeling of existence” in inanimate objects or sub-atomic particles is more or less analogous to that “distance.”
Certainly the whole content of the universe is highly dependent on the characteristics of its formative matter, among which are the sub-atomic particles. The first law of thermodynamics which states that nothing is ever added to and nothing is ever subtracted from the universe affirms that the formative matter is “always present” in this universe. Man himself being made up of similar basic matter must therefore also feel that he is always present the whole of his life—a feeling that is attributable to the fact that he has the “feeling of existence.” Thus, to restate the whole thing: Because we have the feeling of existence, we therefore reasonably feel that we exist; because we live in a certain period of time, we thus feel that we are “always present” throughout our lifetime; because we feel that we are “always present,” we therefore consistently experience “the present” throughout our life time; and further, because our very existence itself is connected with conditions both internal and external to our body, our constant experience of “the present time” subsequently leads us to experience the various changing conditions. This naturally means that we are “always present” in the various changing conditions, which can be either internal or external to our body. In other words, because we are “always present,” we feel that we are consistently at “the present time” and in “the always changing present condition.” This is one secret of the universe now increasingly gaining the attention of scientists. You have perhaps by now already understood the reason why men, by their possession of the feeling of existence, feel that they are always at “the present time” the whole of their life.
Let’s now get back to the issue of the title of this article. Is it true that apart from the various feelings with which we have generally been so familiar, we also have what, as delineated above, is known to be “the feeling of existence”? Now, if you happen to be one of those who don’t believe in the presence of “the feeling of existence,” what would you say should someone ask you this question?: “With which feeling do you actually feel that you are ‘always present’ and that you are always at ‘the present time’ the whole of your life?” Obviously, the feeling meant here is one that has nothing to do at all with your sensory feelings and neither does it have anything to do at all with your emotional feelings.

By Reinarto Hadipriono
Reinarto-AT-Hadipriono.com

Quoted and developed from the philanthropic book Paradigm for Peace.
www.paradigm-for-peace.com

Note:
As this is a philanthropic manuscript, anyone is at liberty to quote from it and have the quotes disseminated through any form of media whatsoever as long as he/she clearly states the name of its author.