Non-Existence

Non-existence is not a fact, it is the absence of a fact, it is a derivative Concept pertaining to a relationship, i.e., a concept which can be formed or grasped only in relation to some existent that has ceased to exist. (One can arrive at the concept “absence” starting from the concept “presence,” in regard to some particular existent(s); one cannot arrive at the concept “presence” starting from the concept “absence,” with the absence including everything.) Non-existence as such is a zero with no sequence of numbers to follow it, it is the nothing, the total blank.^[1]

Any notion of "non-existence" without recognizing the prior antecendent concept of "existence" is an example of The Stolen Concept Fallacy.

[...] a non-existent is nothing. It is not a type of existence. It is not a special constituent of reality which gives off special effects or consequences which one could hope to detect. For instance, if somebody asserts there’s a convention of green gremlins over in the corner of the room, now gremlins don’t exist. They are not a constituent of reality. What would be a possible answer for someone who would say, “prove to me now that those gremlins do not exist; give me an argument, point out to me the effects or consequences of the non-gremlins in reality?” Well, obviously, there can be no special effects, consequences, traces, signs, or manifestations of non-gremlins. It is simply preposterous to say, “point out to me the facts in reality which follow from the non-existence of gremlins,” because gremlins are nothing and therefore nothing follows from nothing.^[2]