Will you choose the state of existence or non-existence?

Imagine that before the universe contained humans, animals, or any form of life at all, there was no observer, no consciousness, no one looking at anything.
Would anyone feel lonely?
No.
Would anyone suffer?
No.
Would anyone be happy?
No.
Would anyone do good or evil?
No. Because there would be no one to act, no one to be acted upon, and no one to judge.
This is what I mean when I say, “I would choose non-existence.”
I don’t mean that life has no happiness, or that everyone should die.
I’m stepping back and asking an even more fundamental question:
**If we could choose before any living thing ever came into existence, would we choose for life to exist at all?**
Because the moment life comes into existence, something else comes with it—awareness.
Once we become aware, we begin to desire.
Once we desire, we become capable of loss.
Once we fear loss, we try to preserve what we have.
And once we realize that everything we love will eventually be lost, we begin to question our own existence.
But if no living thing had ever existed in the first place, none of this would ever begin.
No one would desire life.
No one would fear death.
No one would desire happiness.
No one would fear suffering.
No one would seek meaning.
And no one would ever have to ask whether life has meaning.
Even the concepts of “good” and “evil” would have no one to use them, because there would be no conscious being to create those judgments.
So I’m not saying that non-existence is “good” in the sense that someone benefits from it.
I’m asking:
**If no one existed at all, how could we call it bad, when there would be no one there to experience it as bad?**
Perhaps the fear of non-existence exists only from the perspective of those who already exist.
And that is why I find this question so interesting:
**Do we value existence because existence truly has value in itself—or because, once we came into existence, we developed the desire to preserve it?**