I'm currently reading, "the psychology of totalitarianism", the author suggests that much social anxiety is created from our inability to be confident in what we try to express with each 9ther.

Words are an expression of what we think, but if we each assume different meanings from words without knowing, how can we be sure of anything?

I understand the cosmological argument to mean, how the universe begun.

The ontological argument is about the nature of being.

I am guilty of confusing the 2, but can they be separated?

Can anything exist if it has no witness?

Is there a cosmological argument without an ontological one first?

It stands to reason, all things must exist if only to oppose non existence.

All truth resonates out of hypocrisy.