Well, that's the beautiful thing about philosophy: it allots for contradicitions. I too am under the general guideline that EVERYTHING exists . . . and by this, I'm going to even assert that unicorns exist (metaphysically, not physically) and God exists (metaphysically, not physically) and a Wickywackybuhtoon exists (metaphysically, not physiclally). What I mean is that philosophy more or less is obsessed with understanding existence, and there are very, very, very many ideas pertaining to the subject. I'm not going to go into them all, but I'll briefly mention that all of this was really set in motion by Descartes. Philosophers before him dealt with it as well, but it was Descartes that really brought the whole metaphysical vs' physical question into debate, in terms of existence.

Anywho, let me ask you: does a unicorn exist? Well, for most people, there initial response is no. It's not a physical creature, they cannot percieve it with their senses like they can with other physical entities (in other words, they can SEE it, maybe even HEAR it, but only in as much as it's on television or in a book). So, no unicorns don't exist . . . right?

Now let me ask, does God exist? And with that question, you're going to get a lot of varying answers. Some will say no, and some will say yes. And for those who say yes, it kind of goes without saying that God, like the unicorn, isn't a physical creature either. You cannot percieve Him like you can other physical entities . . . you can't perceive him like you can the unicorn! Sure, we have a mild idea of what God may look like . . . a man, with a long white beard, sitting on a throne. But compared to the unicorn (a horse-like creature with one horn), God's image is a mystery.

So, under that general principle . . . which seems to exist more, God or the unicorn? And further more, let me ask: does a Wickywackybuhtoon exist? Well, the obvious answer for most is no. But for someone who might say yes (albeit a philosopher or a student of philosophy) they're bound to say that its existence is weak at that, and not as justified as the unicorn, and certainly not as justified as God's.

There is a sort of varying level of justification for whether or not something does indeed exist. Certain philosophies think that the metaphysical aspects of existence are inane . . . some plainly just don't think they exist. And some metaphysicists think that physical aspects of existence are nil. So it's all over the place.

The point is . . . a tree falls, does it make a sound? Is it impossible to percieve a tree falling that DOES NOT make a sound? Is that not a possibility in existence? You claim that you are hopelessly rooted to the idea that everything exists . . . so is it possible, in existence, for a tree to fall without making a sound?