I'm sure we can all agree that one thing everyone shares is: At one point, we've all been children. At one point we all were infants...then toddlers...and things moved on from there to where we are at the moment.

One other thing we share is that at one point, we were not in existence.

Not sure of the significance of that to this discussion...or even IF there is any significance, but it came to mind as I read the OP. — Frank Apisa

You did not answer the question. The question is about whether it would be erroneous to equate death to not being born. Why or why not?

Agreed. But it's the deprivation of life, not the death itself for that individual, since they stop existing.

The deprivation of life often effects others people still living as well, whereas never existing can't do that. — Marchesk

Thanks. That is all I need. A straightforward answer.

To whom?

Isn't this thread about nihilism? Is no life better?

I can't get my head around what it's like non-existing. — Qwex

To whom it may concern. Either the subject himself or to the general population that would attribute a positive utility to pleasure and a negative utility to suffering. The topic is not nihilism and nowhere do I think it was implied to be such.