this is what i was going to write for the profile on this web page, finally, but i was informed there were too many words, and so anyway, here is my profile description: the thing about any being is that they are not reducible to their name, whether a proper name or a name which is like a category, and so therefore, since any being is not only not reducible, nor like limited by any name or category given, there is not much place for something like a profile description of such beings.  and yet this is a profile description, a problematic one, because even if i wanted to avoid any proper name or something, maybe like using the word being for myself, as well as all beings, the problem is still that the word being is still an example of such a labeling and/or naming and/or categorization, and thus even this should not be trusted too much, if you happen to be reading this.  creature, maybe, is okay for its kind of playful attitude and awareness of the problem of naming things, in particular, beings, though of course that word still comes with all the aforementioned problems, but is at least a small bit more aware, if applied correctly.  human being is certainly bad and reductive, along with just human, and being is not too bad, as mentioned, for it connotes as well as denotes actual like existing, like present existing, though this of course becomes problematic when, you know, existing is all done (though is it really ever?), and also being is too serious and somehow seems not so self-aware.   now that we're here though, on this subject of not existing, can one creature ever actually be separated from others, which also happen to be existing, and so, if no, not really, if we believe such a separation can't be said to be truly possible, isn't it also the case that then no thing can ever go out of existence if it is always related to other things which are already in existence or are arriving in an existing state?