Why I Hate Existence

I was just wandering what itis about the concept of Being I find so distasteful, because for some reason I do find the very concept of being kind of alien and abhorrent. I am reading Sartre right now, and for some reason, even though I'm not far into Being and Nothingness I find that I am afraid of agreeing with him.

At first I thought it was because ontology is based on a transcendental, unprovable "category" - Being. But, my own logic finds a similar basis in the unprovable thing-in-itself. Both are pretty far from being empirical concepts, but the thing-in-itself is a transcendental object in a way that Being is not. Because Being is immanent in appearances while my concept of the thing-in-itself is always hidden.

Being can be known, to an extent. Being is. We have here a form of salvation: Being is so near to the world that it makes itself immanent in appearance, so that whoever searches for it shall not dispair, but shall have objective truth.

But the thing-in-itself, according to the implicit theory I think I work on, cannot be spoken of, cannot be known and ultimately, does not exist. It merely ought to exist. It raises a question it cannot answer. It is dispair without the possibility of truth.

So why choose dispair? The difference between them is largely a matter of how we see the world. My philosophy doesn't even give grounds for saying that its truthless state is more authentic. The only thing that my logic has going for it over existentialism is that I think it makes worship more difficult, and therefore more valuable.

Does that even count as a reason? I think it's the reason.