What need is there of proving the existence of something he already knows exists?
To explain why something exists, we standardly appeal to the existence of something else.
On the other hand, some constructions may share some syntactic features with the existential, but they should not be regarded as such: Lei (1993) lists three conditions for a clause to be called an existential: 1) Semantically, it asserts the existence of something, that is, there exists something (New) in someplace (Given).
And I am starting to believe a little, the existence of something higher".
"The distinction with prediscovery is that theorists discover the existence of something observers have never seen.
Second, reality is original in contrast to derivative, self-dependent rather than dependent on the existence of something else.
They seem to confirm the existence of something like the long-lost regional, the agrarian and, ultimately, the utopian.
What possible reason could there be for believing in the existence of something in the spatiotemporal world that does not affect anything in that world in any way?
"The existence of something that looks so much like our personalities, but is obviously evolutionarily independent, suggests that having a personality serves an important function".
Separation of the act of sale from the act of purchase requires the existence of something that will be generally accepted in payment.
To Dennett's opponents, he is simply denying the existence of something everyone knows for certain: their inner experience of sights, smells, emotions and the rest.
