Livingness vs non-livingness

this article is motivated from my belief that the beauty of the livingness is not the fruit of only it's capability but also we have non-livingness which shares a great proportion in the credit for the evolution of livinenss. for this dicussion to be taken forward i just need to share what i think about these two independent terms. so what livingness is just a perpatual fight for one's existance ,it just continues to strive for being in the state in which its comfortable and enjoys its existance, however feelings,sentiments,individuality all are derived parameters which alltogether keep livingness in action and focussed to its motive. And what the non-livingness is just absence of all the parameters mentioned above. However being ignorant to the fact of its physical existance Non-livingness has always supported livingness for the actions of livingness to be exceuted and achieving the goals. If the whole planet were alive(i mean each and every entity, constituent of the system) then the livingness wudnt have been that beautiful as it is and as it feels to livingness at least.Reason behind this is so simple to understand that if all were alive they all have had some motives and obviosuly they would suffer from ill feelings i mentioned above and conflict of motives,methods of workings wud stand against the rise of its own.so it wont be an exaggeration to say that livingness depended much on non-livingness. and this dependency is proliferating day by day, one day surely gonna come when majorities of human(the main living entity responsible for structuring and hence assigning non livinness its work) actions will be executed by non-livingness while livingness will have to witness the power,the efficiency,the altrusim it possesses. this all should be very much apparent if you just observe your daily shedule and involvement of machines in that. but wait m not critisizing livingness, this was just to realize the power of non-livingness. by the facts(my observations very common in fact) drawn above i may be appearing to say that "by getting assisted by non-livingness livingness has lost its capability", but its not that.in fact it has enhanced it's capability with the help of blend of power of both.this is how i agree with the proposition (which i make here in this article) that non-livingness has the power, the power of efficiency,correctness,unbiasedness and immunity to pain and tiredness. someone may disagree and award the whole credit to only livingness by arguing that non-livingness was nothing without livingness's support who could assemble non living things to behave as a working unit otherwise it was an useless piece of physical structure. But this argument can be strongly opposed by the fact that livingness sees the usability in terms of its needs, so there is not any global reference to measure the usability. If livingness has given a shape, a structure to non-livingness then this is for it's own needs only.So its not only the liningness which should be given the whole credit but also non-livngess without which things were not be as beautiful as today.SO LIVINGNESS OWES MUCH TOO non-livingness.