nihilism [Archive I]

Ms. Siv

December 21, 2003, 11:39 PM

Originally posted by Big Neil
If we accept a nihilistic death - ie an end to the physical consciousness without an afterlife - then we must accept that the ultimate sum of our experiences will be nothingness. This nothingness is exactly equal if we live a good life raise a family etc or if we spend our lives richard ramirez style or if we just decide to walk out in front of a truck right now. The state of non-existence is exactly the same, ie future, present and past do not exist to you (because you don't), thus nothing you did whilst you were alive actually matters at the point of death.

Now since we all know we're going to die, why bother with all the slings and arrows? As far as I'm concerned, I live purely off the emotive instinct to live. Logically, however, there isn't a great deal of use to the continuation of life. {Emphasis mine}

There are various objections. The fact that the enjoyment of life is enough. We only experience consciousness and thus we are infinitely alive in a subjective sense. We need no meaning to life to live. Frankly, I find all of these objections to be purely emotive in order to ignore the sheer logic that there is no point to living. For we humans who desire significance and self-importance more than anything else, the promise that our lives mean nothing as do our actions is a bit of a blow.

Curious about what this forum thinks. All value judgements are ultimately arbitrary. And thats not surprising considering the fact that most of our instincts/emotions/behaviour is a result of a default programmed value of maximising gene propogation.
So when we shudder at hearing of mass murders or gruesome killings or when we try hard to avoid/delay death or dont mind putting our lives at risk to save the lives of our children etc... its basically the same programming thats kicking in. Because, if you really think about it, it is, ultimately, an arbitrary choice.
Our programming is "designed" to lead us to make those choices which, in the environment for most of our evolutionary history, resulted in higher gene propogation than the alternatives available.
And that is the only rationale for most of our behaviour, if we can call it a rationale. http://www.box.net.au/~cirillo/heh.gif

However, personally, I dont see why something has to last forever for it to be meaningful. So yes, we dont normally go around all gloomy and cynical because we're going to die one day. We think our lives are worth something, even after we die. And they are worth something ... to our friends, our near and dear ones etc. Yes, eventually its not going to matter anyway.

Drahzar

December 21, 2003, 11:56 PM

Ignorance again. You forget that your entire life, good times and bad, will be erased a the point of death. Thus, as far as your individual perspective is concerned, you will have never existed, because of the timeless nature of non-existence.

I didn't forget that, I never said I did, I just don't care. I know it will all be over at some point, so I want to have fun. I never said I wanted to have any effect after I died, but maybe I do, because it would make me feel better during my life to know I would be remembered. I like living because I am having fun, that isn't ignorance, I know it will end, but I don't care. That's inevitable, so I'm just going to have as much fun as I can while I live, I enjoy living.

spacer1

December 22, 2003, 12:10 AM

Originally posted by Big Neil:
If we accept a nihilistic death - ie an end to the physical consciousness without an afterlife - then we must accept that the ultimate sum of our experiences will be nothingness.
I think it is important to stress the subjective here, to which Ms. Siv has just alluded. Meaning and goals occur only to subjects, as we know them. There is no meaning without a subject.
The state of non-existence is exactly the same, ie future, present and past do not exist to you (because you don't), thus nothing you did whilst you were alive actually matters at the point of death.
Matters to whom? Perhaps it matters to those remaining alive, whether through others' affection for you, or through the legacy you leave behind.
Now since we all know we're going to die, why bother with all the slings and arrows? As far as I'm concerned, I live purely off the emotive instinct to live. Logically, however, there isn't a great deal of use to the continuation of life.
I don't believe that logic is as independent from emotions (or from our subjectivity) as you might think.

There is an implicit assumption here that we need some objective provider of meaning for there to be any "real" meaning at all. However, as I've already said, meaning requires a subject. Life matters to us because we're the ones with the desires and emotions. There is no higher being for us to please or for whom to accomplish goals, and there is no reason why there should be in order for us to find meaning in life.

Why bother with the slings and arrows? Simply, because of our emotional attachments. Why do you need a further reason?

trendkill

December 22, 2003, 04:13 AM

Within the context of materialism, nihilism cannot be proven or disproven. It's a perspective, not a fact or logical necessity. Inasmuch as it contradicts no facts, it is completely valid. As is any materialistic perspective which takes facts into account. Which is why the idea that nihilism is truth and that people who don't share it are self-deluded is just as absurd as the idea that it's falsehood.

The facts seem to be consistent with a nihilistic view. What you cannot provide is a reason why anyone should care.

NearNihil Experience

December 22, 2003, 11:53 AM

"To be real brief I interpret nihilism as a particular perspective of life where 'nothing matters'. "

Or where one pays lip-service to those things they say have value, and never act as such.(But that's moral nihilism, a different subject.)

"If we accept a nihilistic death - ie an end to the physical consciousness without an afterlife - then we must accept that the ultimate sum of our experiences will be nothingness. This nothingness is exactly equal if we live a good life raise a family etc or if we spend our lives richard ramirez style or if we just decide to walk out in front of a truck right now."

Annihilation of the body and mind can not destroy the accomplishments of one's life and impact one's life had on others. Nihilism is childishly egotistical. To dis-value our lives just because we can't be around forever is silly and temper-tantrum reaction against death.... a spiteful thumb-to-the-nose at life, because of death. One thing I have learned from my father is that a life of good deeds can not be erased by death. Temporal flow just won't allow it.

"The state of non-existence is exactly the same, ie future, present and past do not exist to you (because you don't), thus nothing you did whilst you were alive actually matters at the point of death."

At the point of death, and to you personally...yes. That is exactly why life and living matter so much. Even the impact of your death affects others left behind. Personal value nihilism is a personal choice on how to view the world. Your life and actions affect those around you...even if you believe they don't.

Life doesn't have to be about the sum total of existence. It can be just about your small environment, Yes, on the whole, we are prettey insignificant....but tell that to mothers, sons, fathers, daughters, friends, co-workers...
Even if a nihilist doesn't think anything matters or has value, others find value in him\her.

"Now since we all know we're going to die, why bother with all the slings and arrows? As far as I'm concerned, I live purely off the emotive instinct to live. Logically, however, there isn't a great deal of use to the continuation of life."

The slings and arrows are just part of, the rough part, of this existence. Its not like you had a choice to be born and live....and thats a non-sense idea anyway. Instinct all the way here too.

"There are various objections.(1) The fact that the enjoyment of life is enough.(2) We only experience consciousness and thus we are infinitely alive in a subjective sense.(3) We need no meaning to life to live."

(1) Depends on how well you accept life's hardships with lifes rewards...personal.

(2) Not necessarily....we can only consciously experience...and this leads to an objective immortality....memories of you and your ideas in others....again personal.

(3) Depends on the person....most will create meaning or a feeling of meaning to cope with life's hardships and enjoy life's rewards.

"Frankly, I find all of these objections to be purely emotive in order to ignore the sheer logic that there is no point to living."

There may be no real point to living, but in living we affect our environment and others around us. You leave a scar on reality just by living. Now there may be no meaning there-in, but life is not just about the singular individual...
This type of nihilism seems to say, " Nothing matters, so I just won't care about anything."
It is possible to be a nihilist and say, "nothing matter, but in this lack of meaning is a freedom to create a life with individual meaning and care for whatever I feel like".

"For we humans who desire significance and self-importance more than anything else, the promise that our lives mean nothing as do our actions is a bit of a blow."

I think its a little off saying this blanket statement about humans in general. There are quite a few out there that do, though.
And they make up God and religion and the State and politics to help to make them feel better....Just like the nihilist rejects theae things to make himself feel more at ease in reality.
A nihilist who desires significance and import is not much of a nihilist, either.

"Curious about what this forum thinks."

Seems like nihilism, as such, is just a brutally honest personal worldview. Though it seems that it does make it difficult to want to do things outside of surviving. It would be hard for this type of nihilist to take pleasure in anything...or to really be pained by anything.

BTW, I'm pretty much a natural nihilist....in that most things, excluding the universe, are not real and are constructs, fictions, and social mechanisms. You could say, at the base of my reality is a moral nihilism and a value nihilism. That naturally these things do not exist except in the mind of conscious bodies. And these are constructed not from our views of nature, but by our want to control nature and subject it to our views. Example...if you have no humans(conscious minds)...what then would be left? Nothing...nihil... the universe would carry on like nothing matters....because it really doesn't.

But we are the Great Creators...and in this lack that the universe presents us...there is great freedom and great need to create. Those who wish to stick with nihilism and take up no more as Creator are rejecting the one true gift of life....imagination and imaginations ability to re-order the world through an actor.

There is freedom in nothingness...spaces to be filled...but stark nihilists seem to be afraid, dispossessed, disenchanted, hopeless, etc....unwilling to bring forth more in life....they seem willing to settle for nothing....and they are right. I just feel the urge to bring anew. I want more, even if I have to make it myself.

Hans

December 22, 2003, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Big Neil
I've had this discussion in a couple of different forums and have as yet been underwhelmed by the evidence against nihilism.

To be real brief I interpret nihilism as a particular perspective of life where 'nothing matters'.

That it will not matter that there is no oxygen to breath when I'm dead does not change the fact that it does matter now when I'm alive. That it no longer matters whether the house I used to live in has a leaky roof, it did matter when I lived there.

The fallacy of nihilism lies in its insistence that if under any condition something does not matter then under all conditions it does not matter.

We are, as Kansas put it, all just dust in the wind. But the wind still matters. Die tomorrow and it will still matter today whether we are hungry or not. ;)

Big Neil

December 22, 2003, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by ContraTheos

Annihilation of the body and mind can not destroy the accomplishments of one's life and impact one's life had on others. Nihilism is childishly egotistical.

And thus you are articulating YOUR particular brand of ignorance :)

You are not other people. You are an individual perspective within reality. If the feelings of other people matter, it is because you consciously allow them to. Your particular perspective cannot even absolutely know that the feelings of the other person even exist. It does not experience them. It only exists within you're mind, thus it is your own imaginations that you react to, NOT the feelings of other individuals. Important distinction.

You are close to talking about a legacy here. Dispense with the concept of the legacy. Just as you are unable to appreciate the feelings and experiences of others in life, you certainly don't care about them when you are dead. The concept of a legacy makes us feel better about things here and now, while we are alive. The fact that your actions are remembered after your death itself is neither here nor there as far as you are concerned.

To dis-value our lives just because we can't be around forever is silly and temper-tantrum reaction against death.... a spiteful thumb-to-the-nose at life, because of death.
Actually that's exactly what it is. If you don't feel cheated at your insignificance, I'm tipping you haven't quite appreciated how insignificant you are.

One thing I have learned from my father is that a life of good deeds can not be erased by death. Temporal flow just won't allow it.

Mmhm. You're forgetting that you are dead, and you unable to care. You are also forgetting that at the moment of death, all of those wonderful deeds are erased to you, and since your medium to reality doesn't exist, neither does reality.

At the point of death, and to you personally...yes. That is exactly why life and living matter so much. Even the impact of your death affects others left behind. Personal value nihilism is a personal choice on how to view the world. Your life and actions affect those around you...even if you believe they don't.

It doesn't matter if you believe them or not, it only matters that as soon as you die, none of it will have existed (as far as you're concerned).

Bear in mind you are not a collective conscious able to reflect upon reality. You are incapable of absolute objectivity. If you could somehow externally appreciate your life then sure, do all the good deeds you can. But since you cannot, there is no point. As soon as your individual perspective dies, so too does reality.

Life doesn't have to be about the sum total of existence. It can be just about your small environment, Yes, on the whole, we are prettey insignificant....but tell that to mothers, sons, fathers, daughters, friends, co-workers...

Who are all merely stimulii to your individual perspective. They don't mean anything. That's just your instinctive emotions telling you the do.

Even if a nihilist doesn't think anything matters or has value, others find value in him\her.
ditto

The slings and arrows are just part of, the rough part, of this existence. Its not like you had a choice to be born and live....and thats a non-sense idea anyway. Instinct all the way here too.

You have a choice to to end it though. Or to simply do whatever the hell you want rather than conform to society and become completely hedonistic.

(1) Depends on how well you accept life's hardships with lifes rewards...personal.
Define 'rewards'. If you mean 'feel good' there's easier ways of going about it, but society doesn't like them too much.

(2) Not necessarily....we can only consciously experience...and this leads to an objective immortality....memories of you and your ideas in others....again personal.
Yes, but who has the objective perspective to see your objective immortality? Ans = no one. It is an imagined concept in your own mind. We are not a collective, we are individuals.

(3) Depends on the person....most will create meaning or a feeling of meaning to cope with life's hardships and enjoy life's rewards.
That they will. But this is entirely emotive and not necessarily logical.

There may be no real point to living, but in living we affect our environment and others around us. You leave a scar on reality just by living. Now there may be no meaning there-in, but life is not just about the singular individual...
This type of nihilism seems to say, " Nothing matters, so I just won't care about anything."
It is possible to be a nihilist and say, "nothing matter, but in this lack of meaning is a freedom to create a life with individual meaning and care for whatever I feel like".

Wantonly idealistic. You cannot create meaning from a lack of meaning, that is nonsensical.

I think its a little off saying this blanket statement about humans in general. There are quite a few out there that do, though.

Actually I think this blanket statement is entirely appropriate. We are, after all, stepping stones in our species. The species doesn't care abotu the individuals, only its own advancement.

Seems like nihilism, as such, is just a brutally honest personal worldview. Though it seems that it does make it difficult to want to do things outside of surviving. It would be hard for this type of nihilist to take pleasure in anything...or to really be pained by anything.
true enough, I spose.

But we are the Great Creators...and in this lack that the universe presents us...there is great freedom and great need to create. Those who wish to stick with nihilism and take up no more as Creator are rejecting the one true gift of life....imagination and imaginations ability to re-order the world through an actor.

Riiight. Someone's been into the killer wheezy me thinks...

There is freedom in nothingness...spaces to be filled...but stark nihilists seem to be afraid, dispossessed, disenchanted, hopeless, etc....unwilling to bring forth more in life....they seem willing to settle for nothing....and they are right. I just feel the urge to bring anew. I want more, even if I have to make it myself.
No, actually, your freedom call is entirely accurate. It's the same feeling you get whenever a specific law is broken down. Like when traffic lights don't work. It's liberating to run through without obeying some rule of order. Nihilism is this feeling all the time. But this doesn't really make for a productive society, unfortunately.

Nihilism promotes extreme individualism because we realise the collective does not exist.

variant 13

December 22, 2003, 09:09 PM

No, I said instinctive will to live. This is enough to live in accordance with the expectations of society. I think you're being a little black & white here.

But as nothing matters then society doesn't and you should do what you please without thought of anything else.

And thus you are articulating YOUR particular brand of ignorance :)

Stop that! :) they are contrasting views which you may find ignorant but then so are yours.

Actually that's exactly what it is. If you don't feel cheated at your insignificance, I'm tipping you haven't quite appreciated how insignificant you are.

I have tried to grasp as much of my insignificance as I can, my brain is only capable of some much :D . But in the end the only thing I can do is get on with things (whatever they may be). You may say what is the point, the only answer is "there is no point, you just do".

You have a choice to to end it though. Or to simply do whatever the hell you want rather than conform to society and become completely hedonistic.

Who's being black and white now? You are seeing nothing but the too extremes as valid, while there is a middle ground as well.

Ms. Siv

December 22, 2003, 11:13 PM

Big Neil, what exactly is it that you're trying to prove here ?
If you're looking for the forum's opinions and views on this matter, then you will have to live with the fact that we might have a different viewpoint.

We've all more or less agreed that death is the end and ultimately nothing matters. All values are ultimately arbitrary anyway, including the value we give to our lives.

However how we live does very much matter as long as we live.
To repeat a part of my earlier response to you ...
All value judgements are ultimately arbitrary. And thats not surprising considering the fact that most of our instincts/emotions/behaviour is a result of a default programmed value of maximising gene propogation.
So when we shudder at hearing of mass murders or gruesome killings or when we try hard to avoid/delay death or dont mind putting our lives at risk to save the lives of our children etc... its basically the same programming thats kicking in. Because, if you really think about it, it is, ultimately, an arbitrary choice.
Our programming is "designed" to lead us to make those choices which, in the environment for most of our evolutionary history, resulted in higher gene propogation than the alternatives available.
And that is the only rationale for most of our behaviour, if we can call it a rationale.

NearNihil Experience

December 23, 2003, 11:11 AM

"You are not other people. You are an individual perspective within reality. If the feelings of other people matter, it is because you consciously allow them to. Your particular perspective cannot even absolutely know that the feelings of the other person even exist. It does not experience them. It only exists within you're mind, thus it is your own imaginations that you react to, NOT the feelings of other individuals. Important distinction."

I can only go off of how people seem to me to be acting or feeling. I am reacting to my view of their their feeling, which is an approximation. If you want to treat it as a nihilation, thats fine....but approximation works for me.

"You are close to talking about a legacy here. Dispense with the concept of the legacy. Just as you are unable to appreciate the feelings and experiences of others in life, you certainly don't care about them when you are dead."

nope, dead. but can being dead erase all that you have done...no.
And we don't matter any more than we let ourselves matter.

"The concept of a legacy makes us feel better about things here and now, while we are alive. The fact that your actions are remembered after your death itself is neither here nor there as far as you are concerned."

While we are alive, and our actions are more than remembered from life....quite often you leave a very lasting impression on reality and society. Personally, since your dead it doesn't matter much after you are dead, but until then, the desire to create more and leave a lasting impression is something that drives some non-religious people.

When I am alive, this idea of the future seems to be the one thing that gives me any reason to do anything.

"Actually that's exactly what it is. If you don't feel cheated at your insignificance, I'm tipping you haven't quite appreciated how insignificant you are."

I have seen how small I am compared to everything else. But I have also seen myself on scale to an ant too. Significance changes due to time, place and situation....our sense of scale changes according to those things being compared in scale...
So yes I know how significant and how insignificant I am....I just won't let self-conception be ruled by inferiority to something so far off the scale in comparision(ie, the universe).

"Mmhm. You're forgetting that you are dead, and you unable to care. You are also forgetting that at the moment of death, all of those wonderful deeds are erased to you, and since your medium to reality doesn't exist, neither does reality. "

Solopsist much? Erased to me, yes. But I am insignificant on the scale of "reality", which seems to be a pretty big thing. But, having been in reality, in the world, I have left an impression. Reality can't esacape me or erase my life. I only care when I am alive and I won't let something like death stop me from living out my life as I see fit. The inevitability of death matters less to me than the impression and memories I leave behind.

"It doesn't matter if you believe them or not, it only matters that as soon as you die, none of it will have existed (as far as you're concerned)."

Hello....it matters a great deal up to the point of death...ya know dying happy and fulfilled and all that shit.

"Bear in mind you are not a collective conscious able to reflect upon reality. You are incapable of absolute objectivity. If you could somehow externally appreciate your life then sure, do all the good deeds you can."

Well duh. But you can internally enjoy the reflection of your life's action in reality. See the results of your actions....good or bad.

" But since you cannot, there is no point. As soon as your individual perspective dies, so too does reality."
You haver to deal with the consequences of life lived as you are living it. Death doesn't make it all better or make it all worthless.

It's living your life like there was not even the freedom to create, and enjoy subjectively, that makes life pointless. Its being resigned to a pointless life that is pointless. Doubly so when you spend part of that life trying to convince others that life is pointless...simply because we are not immortal.

Obviously, the point to nihilists is to be pointless, which makes a point.

"Who are all merely stimulii to your individual perspective. They don't mean anything. That's just your instinctive emotions telling you they do."

And...if I choose to assign value to these folks? Value their input, reactions, help? I am not saying this isn't just some natural communal mechanism...it probably is. Again, you are trying to tell me what has meaning and what doesn't when we all simply create meaning as we go through life. Obviously, to you, telling people nothing has meaning has meaning...otherwise you wouldn't be doing it, right? Death will come alsong and make it all pointless right? So why are you trying to tell me nothing has value, including opinions, as you give me an opinion? You shouldn't make the effort and shouldn't even consider listening to such contradiction.

"You have a choice to to end it though. Or to simply do whatever the hell you want rather than conform to society and become completely hedonistic."

Definatley. Suicide I value less than a hard life, though.
And yes, a lot of what I am saying is do whatever you feel like....because it is pointless to conform and one looses freedom as one adheres to previously encased values instead of creating their own...or none, if that's waht works for ya.

"Define 'rewards'. If you mean 'feel good' there's easier ways of going about it, but society doesn't like them too much."

Yeah, but fuck society, eh? Right in their stodgy poop-chutes.
And by rewards, depends on your values. Some go straight for the smack, others find rewards in hard work and mission accomplished.

"Yes, but who has the objective perspective to see your objective immortality? Ans = no one. It is an imagined concept in your own mind. We are not a collective, we are individuals."

No, not no one. And its not some spooky immortality. But, posterity has a very clear view of the things you did. Hitler---Neo-Nazis, Jew Jesus---Christians, Einstein---Hawking, etc....
Posterity learns(or doesn't) from your mistakes and accomplishments. There is a bit of a collective, but not conscious, not tappable, not communicable. We are a collective of individuals.
Its not really an imagined concept...why else would we need translation in language? If we were strictly individyals, no language would be necessary.

"That they will. But this is entirely emotive and not necessarily logical. "

Man is not ruled by logic. Logic is good in creating consistent discourse amongst people about the world presented, but falters in the face of human behavior and psychology. You may not have choosen to create any meaning in your life to help cope with the realities of life lived...but you really can't fault others for doing so. Your answer is just one removed from theirs. Not better or worse, just different. From a different perspective.

"Wantonly idealistic. You cannot create meaning from a lack of meaning, that is nonsensical."

Space to be filled. Blank canvas. Tabula Rosa. Sure you can. I do it every day. Meaninglessness can be a starting point...it doesn;t have to stop there. There are things I care for in a purely emotive sense...this I can not help...I am an animal. But in other things, I find little reson or meaning behind them...so I either leave it a mystery(I don't say well, I don't know, so there is no answer), or I construct some meaning to this action or consequence from my personal experience and psychology.
The "meaning" doesn't lie in the action, consequence, or object...it lies in my value of it...of which I am totally free to choose.

"Actually I think this blanket statement is entirely appropriate. We are, after all, stepping stones in our species. The species doesn't care abotu the individuals, only its own advancement."

Good point, but then isn't there some meaning or purpose behind our species advancement? And besides, a species can't care about anything. Don't anthromorphicize(?).

"Riiight. Someone's been into the killer wheezy me thinks..."

Oh yeah...but I have been into the Nietzsche much harder.

"No, actually, your freedom call is entirely accurate. It's the same feeling you get whenever a specific law is broken down. Like when traffic lights don't work. It's liberating to run through without obeying some rule of order. Nihilism is this feeling all the time. But this doesn't really make for a productive society, unfortunately.

Whiz bang. Right on. Its hard for a nihilist to function in a society because there are so many social stop-gaps to help keep us valuing what "they" tell us to.

"Nihilism promotes extreme individualism because we realise the collective does not exist."

I think nihilism promotes extreme individualism because we realize that we have little to no effect on the collective. Ithink the collective exists, but as a phantom that pops its head out at points of punctuation, Einstein--->Hawking. Not some swirling unity constantly flowing through all mankind. That's pop-psychology crap. But we wouldn't have a history of events, a collection of the collective to look back on. I guess our species is the collective, if anything, created by individuals willing to create value under the illogical hope that they might have something to contribute to the collective as a strong individual. Nihilism forces us to see ourselves as a tiny creature trying in vain to move the mountain. But other tiny creatures have moved the mountain before. Nihilism shows you the honest odds...and they aren't good. But that has never stopped people before.

Big Neil

December 23, 2003, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by Ms. Siv
Big Neil, what exactly is it that you're trying to prove here ?
If you're looking for the forum's opinions and views on this matter, then you will have to live with the fact that we might have a different viewpoint.

Obviously I expect this, else I'd not bother posting. I accept the different viewpoints but don't think this means I won't attack the weaknesses I perceive in those viewpoints.

If you are specifically talking about my use of the term 'ignorance' it is not meant to carry the derogatory stigma as you'd usually associate it with. I bask in ignorance, it's the only reason I continue living and am indeed posting on this forum :) But I think plenty of people wish to deny that by continuing to live they are in ignorance of the implications of a nihilistic death. That's the point I'm trying to make.

We've all more or less agreed that death is the end and ultimately nothing matters. All values are ultimately arbitrary anyway, including the value we give to our lives.

However how we live does very much matter as long as we live.

It only does because you tell yourself it does. There is no high power, no greater goal, nothing external to prompt you to live. It is just you telling yourself living matters. That's it. I'd ask "Why do you tell yourself this?"

I have yet to receive a coherent answer to that one...

All value judgements are ultimately arbitrary. And thats not surprising considering the fact that most of our instincts/emotions/behaviour is a result of a default programmed value of maximising gene propogation.
We are, of course, in complete agreement at this point.

So when we shudder at hearing of mass murders or gruesome killings or when we try hard to avoid/delay death or dont mind putting our lives at risk to save the lives of our children etc... its basically the same programming thats kicking in. Because, if you really think about it, it is, ultimately, an arbitrary choice.

Further agreement...

Our programming is "designed" to lead us to make those choices which, in the environment for most of our evolutionary history, resulted in higher gene propogation than the alternatives available.
And that is the only rationale for most of our behaviour, if we can call it a rationale.

And am in continued agreement right through.

The only problem is, you're missing the last bit. Our 'program' has an anomoly: it is able to consider itself and ask why it is doing what it is doing.

So you can say that you are going to continue to do what you've been programmed to, but in doing so, you choose to remain ignorant of the fact that there is no purpose to it. It's like a water pump that is still gunning it's engine even though there isn't any water left. You are a self-conscious water pump that can see there isn't any water, that can see nothing is getting processed by what it's doing, but continuing to pump away because that's what you've been designed to do.

spacer1

December 23, 2003, 08:44 PM

"There is an implicit assumption here that we need some objective provider of meaning for there to be any "real" meaning at all. However, as I've already said, meaning requires a subject. Life matters to us because we're the ones with the desires and emotions. There is no higher being for us to please or for whom to accomplish goals, and there is no reason why there should be in order for us to find meaning in life."

trendkill

December 24, 2003, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Big Neil
Obviously I expect this, else I'd not bother posting. I accept the different viewpoints but don't think this means I won't attack the weaknesses I perceive in those viewpoints.

[quote][b]It only does because you tell yourself it does. There is no high power, no greater goal, nothing external to prompt you to live. It is just you telling yourself living matters. That's it.And who is a higher power to tell us what our lives mean? That's what you don't get. A higher power means nothing to us. Even if a higher power that created us for a specific purpose of its own exists, we still make our own purpose. It's our choice whether to adopt this higher power's purpose for our own, i.e., choose servitude. As long as we have free will, it's our choice either way. There is no such thing as objective purpose. We are not objects. We are people. Only we can ask why, and only we can answer why. No one else can do it for us. We are not machines that process purpose, we are the generators of purpose. That's what makes us special, and that's what those who wish to enslave try to deceive us about. The perpetrators of religions and all forms of authoritarianism set themselves up as the source of purpose, and often people who reject them remain deceived about that source. Instead of recognizing the true source of purpose (themselves) for what it was all along, they erroneously conclude that there is no source, and thus, no purpose.

You are seeing from the viewpoint of a slave with no master, who cannot see any way of existing past being a slave, and therefore, with no one to tell you what you are for, no purpose to existing at all. You have every right to look at your existence this way--you are free to do so. Just realize that it's not the only way. Some of us actually realize that we are free, and that purpose never came from anywhere but inside ourselves.

Oxymoron

December 24, 2003, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by Big Neil
(snip)

Curious about what this forum thinks.
Why are you curious? After all, it doesn't really matter :)

Ms. Siv

December 24, 2003, 09:39 AM

Big Neil, We've all more or less agreed that death is the end and ultimately nothing matters. All values are ultimately arbitrary anyway, including the value we give to our lives.

However how we live does very much matter as long as we live. It only does because you tell yourself it does. There is no high power, no greater goal, nothing external to prompt you to live. It is just you telling yourself living matters. That's it. I'd ask "Why do you tell yourself this?"

I have yet to receive a coherent answer to that one... But living does matter to me as long as I live. I really am in no hurry to end my life. And thats not pretense. I really really dont want my life to end now even though I know that it will end some day and there doesn't seem to be anything beyond that point. Howmuchever you try and tell me that I should not be feeling that way, that is how I feel. I may be programmed to feel that way and I may even know that its just programming, but that is how I feel. And so do most others on this forum, I guess. So thats just how it is ... whether you like it or not http://emoticons4u.informationalot.com/cool/694.gif

It's like a water pump that is still gunning it's engine even though there isn't any water left. You are a self-conscious water pump that can see there isn't any water, that can see nothing is getting processed by what it's doing, but continuing to pump away because that's what you've been designed to do. I dont think the analogy is entirely accurate. http://users.telenet.be/eforum/emoticons4u/mad/011.gif

Its like the water pump which knows that one day the water will run out and it will stop pumping. But until then, it enjoys pumping ... so it continues to do so. And I do so hoping that the water will continue for a long long time. Its as simple as that.

I (the particular combination of GCATs thats me) need not have been born at all. But I was. And there's this nice order of complexity we call life which includes awareness and thought and emotions and what-not. Its not something I chose, but its something I've grown used to and even begun to like a bit. So, hey I'll enjoy it as long as it lasts ... even though it ultimately means nothing, but who cares all that much about "ultimately" ?? http://emoticons4u.informationalot.com/cool/cool19.gif
Yeah, the knowledge gives us some perspective ... helps us realise not to take ourselves and others too seriously. But thats about it.

epic

December 24, 2003, 12:35 PM

life is like waking up and you're behind the wheel of a car. only once you're in the car do you find out, though, that while you can drive anywhere you like, once the fuel runs out, the car will blow up in flames and you have no choice but to accept it.

ms siv, and others i'm imagining, would say that, sure, it sucks that this car trip is gonna end in my death, and i know this, but hey, at least i can have fun visiting people and driving around!

this is the outlook of most people and their lives.

for me, that car trip would be shite. i think it would be shite for everyone if they really admitted it. sure, i might enjoy driving through a rainforest at one part of the trip, but it's not solving anything, it's not changing the situation. sure it's nice but -- the car is still losing fuel as we speak!! what good then, is this bloody rainforest?? even if that person i met at the rainforest cafe decided to be a doctor because of the chat we had, it still doesn't mean anything to me or help my situation. it might mean that my car trip left some "impact", but what good is impact? everything impacts everything anyway.

the problem is the situation itself, which cannot be changed. life is just driving around trying to meet people and see things, waiting for your car to explode.

(no wonder drivers now and again tend to run straight into brick walls or drive other cars off the road. not only does it not matter, but at least it alleviates the monotony of driving those same roads every day.)

Impresario

December 24, 2003, 01:27 PM

the problem is the situation itself, which cannot be changed. life is just driving around trying to meet people and see things, waiting for your car to explode.
Why does the destination subsume the relevance of the journey? Ask yourself, what are the substantive experiences in your life and are they dependent upon your eternal existence? Answers will vary by the individual.

lostseason

December 24, 2003, 03:46 PM

Drahzar

December 25, 2003, 02:22 AM

But I think plenty of people wish to deny that by continuing to live they are in ignorance of the implications of a nihilistic death. That's the point I'm trying to make.

I deny this, because it's not true. I know I'm going to die, I know it will all be over. But I'm still having fun now. Why would I end it when I could just keep having fun instead? I don't get why people go from it doesn't matter to just end it. So what if it doesn't matter? I still enjoy it. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Ms. Siv

December 26, 2003, 01:25 AM

Originally posted by epic
for me, that car trip would be shite. i think it would be shite for everyone if they really admitted it. sure, i might enjoy driving through a rainforest at one part of the trip, but it's not solving anything, it's not changing the situation. sure it's nice but -- the car is still losing fuel as we speak!! what good then, is this bloody rainforest?? ...... {snip} ....... the problem is the situation itself, which cannot be changed. life is just driving around trying to meet people and see things, waiting for your car to explode. The analogy again isn't entirely accurate ... one because the end need not be a violent one (an explosion surely is a violent end!) ... second, we cant get out of this car even if we wanted to !
We dont have a choice, we're going to die anyway. Might as well enjoy what little time we do have alive, right ?

But its not as if we're doing nothing at all about it. Life expectancy is nearly double what it was ages ago. And we'll probably increase it further. We might find ways and means of transferring a part of our brains to a computer or another brain, thereby continuing to live for much longer etc.

Also, if life really were endless, it would be a terrible drudgery ! Think about it. It would be awful to go on living .. on and on and on ....
Nothing will mean much because life goes on and on. It never ends. What value will life have then ?

epic

December 26, 2003, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by Impresario
Why does the destination subsume the relevance of the journey? Ask yourself, what are the substantive experiences in your life and are they dependent upon your eternal existence? Answers will vary by the individual.

because once the destination was been reached, how can the journey have ever meant anything? it means something to you while you're alive, sure, but at death all those experiences are null and void, trapped in your memory bank that can function no more.

a sunstantive experience... let's say (if i was married) my marriage. this marriage would be vitally important to me while i was alive. so, if i lived forever, i would always cherish this memory (even though i'd have been remarried several billion times afterwards). seeing i can't live forever (i wouldn't want to anyway) when i die, the memory of the marriage and the love and whatnot will be gone and from that point on, will not matter to the subjective person involved, the "objective" not having ever cared about it anyway.

Originally posted by Ms. Siv
The analogy again isn't entirely accurate ... one because the end need not be a violent one (an explosion surely is a violent end!) ... second, we cant get out of this car even if we wanted to !

i considered changing the blowing up to just the car running out of fuel and stopping, but blowing up sounded cooler. :-P

also, change the analogy so that the driver can jump out if he wants, but he'll hit the road and die, and it still works.

We dont have a choice, we're going to die anyway. Might as well enjoy what little time we do have alive, right ?

right... we might aswell. this is why depressed people are, say, more inclined to smoke. hey, they're enjoying themselves!

there is possibility for enjoyment in life. the subjective life is important until death (although, only because/if we deem it to be "important" and "meaningful", which, coming from the host could be considered slightly biased), where it loses its importance (obviously). but i guess the key problem is the knowledge of this future fate is what impacts upon the present and effects the subjective determinents of meaning negatively.

i would call this negative effect the underlying sadness of existence, something all intelligent species who become aware of their place in the universe must face.

and i would say anyone stating that their own life matters are only speaking subjectively (and thus by defination this means nothing to anyone else) and only doing so to get by in life.

which is fine. it's all we can do. but the fact we must resort to this is indicative, IMO, of the affects the trials of existence play.

Big Neil

December 27, 2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Oxymoron
Why are you curious? After all, it doesn't really matter :)
Touche ;)

Big Neil

December 27, 2003, 06:32 PM

But living does matter to me as long as I live. I really am in no hurry to end my life. And thats not pretense. I really really dont want my life to end now even though I know that it will end some day and there doesn't seem to be anything beyond that point. Howmuchever you try and tell me that I should not be feeling that way, that is how I feel. I may be programmed to feel that way and I may even know that its just programming, but that is how I feel. And so do most others on this forum, I guess. So thats just how it is ... whether you like it or not

And thus I receive yet another irrelevant answer to the question 'Why do you tell yourself living matters?'

ans = "I just do and it just does"

Yippee. This is precisely what I mean by 'ignorance'. You have no interest in pursuing this further. Nothing wrong with that, but that is what you are doing.

exnihilo

December 28, 2003, 03:27 AM

Having read many of the responses, but not all, it seems clear that there are many different ideas of nihility here. For me nihilism doesn't necessarily mean that "nothing matters" or "nothing exists" it implies the rejection of all values altogether, thus nothing always already matters. Or something like that. What this necessarily implies is that there is no justification for life itself--no reason to live at all. The fact that we are even debating this seems to contradict that point, at least implicitly, which then leads us to the related issue of our individual purpose in life. Someone said that our reactions to events are largely hard-wired and the effect of evolution, but that seems insufficient and highly reductionistic. If anything, human evolution is leading towards destruction, not away from it, and there seems little evidence other than anecdotal that contradicts this.
Just because we append meaning to our lives doesn�t really make our lives meaningful, it is simply one way humans justify and explain their existence in the world. Obviously there is no real answer to the question of nihilism, except on an individual basis, unless humans can devise an overarching significance to life. Some do this through religion and others do it through scientific theories such as evolution. Even in the later case, however, existence doesn�t have to imply meaning, even if viewed from an evolutionary perspective since such a perspective is itself a human construct that isolates certain bits of information in order to create a certain way of knowing. Thus, to then impose a �meaning� to existence based on these isolated and arbitrary observations seems to be creating a world for itself that is after all anthropocentric in nature, since humans are positioned at the top of the evolutionary hierarchy (big surprise). As a result unless one can find a way to reject these and many other systems of explanation it is difficult to embrace nihilism, since in so doing one would be rejecting the idea of their own existence as well.
Many thinkers have considered the question of meaning that the problem of nihilism evokes since the dawn of human thought; perhaps, it has been the dominant subject of human thought all along, especially in the last 2000 years. The problem is nihilism represents a incommensurable part of this thought, which by necessity must always be marginalized and considered basically unthinkable for thinking itself to even exist as a meaningful activity. As a result it seems that he very activity of debating nihilism automatically contravenes its very possibility. I agree with much of what has been said concerning life�s apparent lack of meaning, especially as it concerns death and our total meaninglessness on the historical stage, however, I do not see that as a function of nihilism, but more precisely a question of the interplay between knowledge and power. For a nihilist, death could not be conceived of at all, much less as an end, because there would be nothing to end, just a vast meaningless nothingness with neither beginning nor end.

Ms. Siv

December 29, 2003, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by Big Neil
And thus I receive yet another irrelevant answer to the question 'Why do you tell yourself living matters?'

ans = "I just do and it just does"

Yippee. This is precisely what I mean by 'ignorance'. You have no interest in pursuing this further. Nothing wrong with that, but that is what you are doing. Well, Big Neil, if you're so convinced of your intellectual superiority in this discussion and pooh-poohing everyone else's opinions/views ... then there's really no point proceeding further, is there ? :confused:

But there is absolutely no logic in your claiming that there is no point living life because it is finite. No logic in saying that life has no meaning because it is going to end. Thats your individual opinion. Dont make it a logical absolute. Because it is not.

nerv111

December 29, 2003, 04:13 AM

Well that was a waste of time, I should have known better than to read a thread about nihilism. Big Neil, why don�t you offer us some actual arguments in support of the assertion of nihilism rather than proceeding to call all your opponents ignorant (ironic since nihilism denies knowledge, so then are we all not ignorant, yourself included?) then perhaps you will get a serious discussion on the matter going. So please enlighten us, and prove the merits of nihilism. *sigh* It seems as though philosophy these days has been reduced to refutation of postmodernist nonsense.

epic

January 1, 2004, 11:18 AM

shall i take the lack of responce to my last post as proof my position is accurate and impossible to object to?

:-D

i think nihilism could be the only way to achieve true freedom. you could relate it to the concept of "nirvana" from eastern mythology, without the need to believe in any related religion.

cybergeek

January 1, 2004, 03:44 PM

. I am more an existentialist than a nihilist.
If only because I find it difficult to be a real and consistent nihilist.
If I truely was a nihilist and nothing really mattered in life then I probably
would not even be alive right now.
If life is really meaningless then the temptation to end my petty existence
would be overpowering.
Why should I put with all the annoyances or inconveniences of living when
I could be dead?
At least when youre dead you won't have to worry about any problems or
struggle with anything.
Some people it seems live for whatever pleasure they can get out of life.
But to a genuine nihilist even pleasures would be meaningless and perhaps
a waste of time.
So then what is there to live for?

And I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time sitting in front of my pc posting
comments like this for others to read.
Of what use could this be if everything is meaningless?

To a certain extent however life is meaningless. The basic essence of what
we consider a state of existence as oppose to non-existence is purely mundane.
We breathe,we sense things thru our senses and our internal organs function.
If we come across someone who seems unconscious we check to see if
they're breathing and if they have a pulse.
If so then we declare that person alive.
That is how we define someone living as opposed to someone dead.
Merely being able to breathe and functioning organically(pulse beating,the senses working etc)however does not give life any meaning.

It is only that which we strive for,to accomplish,to obtain that seems to
give meaning or purpose to ourselves.
Whether it be conquering people and territories,collecting art and antiques,
playing basketball,painting pictures,womanizing etc.
What gives purpose or meaning to one's life will vary from person to person, as we all have our own perception of what is meaningful as opposed to meaningless.

For a genuine nihilist to be alive he/she would have to be a contradiction.
Because if everything was without purpose or meaning then why even try
to live?
Why bother going to work and support yourself if everything including yourself is meaningless?
If it's merely to avoid pain or suffering then even this could make life meaningful.
Otherwise as I said before one can terminate one's life and not have to feel
anything afterwards.
Because to maintain oneself while alive takes some effort.
But is that effort worthwhile if everything including yourself is meaningless
and not worth a damn?
:)

epic

January 2, 2004, 03:56 PM

i found this on nihilism, which looks like a pretty good description. looking for some objections, if any:

Nihilism is primarily skepticism coupled with reduction, furthermore it is the realization that there is/are no:

1. teleology
2. wrong or right - just cause and effect
3. sacred principles, along with taboo, heresy and blasphemy.

... and that:
4. artificial morality and values are subjective, elastic, fungible and impermanent
5. that which is self-evident requires no belief, for it has an independent, objective existence and self-continuation.

While Nihilism rejects:
6. faith, and everything necessitated by it.

And Nihilism uses:
7. Occam's Razor
8. logic

While recognizing:
9. natural selection
10. sustainable idea-sets have minimized internal contradictions.

Furthermore even if it can be shown that one element has flaws this does not demonstrate that any or all of the remaining points are flawed as well.

5) Self-Evident. For example, one does not need faith in the objective principle or the word-symbol 'gravity' to know that if you jump off a cliff you will fall to the bottom, or that if you punch a wall it will hurt your fist. This concept segues into the idea of pain and sensations which although they can be distorted, they are still consistent and these neurological signals are the same throughout the animal kingdom. A needless fixation on the basic chemical and electrical properties (or beyond) does not invalidate the fundamental purpose they serve for the biological organism.

9) Natural Selection. One path is selected over another for a reason. "Natural selection is a mechanism for generating an exceedingly high degree of improbability." R. A. Fisher. Nor through divine guidance since this is unsupported by any evidence and rejected using the principle of Occam's Razor. Rather natural selection outcome is a product of surroundings and the unceasing struggle of adaptation and the search for success. This process should not be confused with a value, which is an arbitrary choice by a human mind such as saying the color blue is better than the color purple. Whatever mind-games the philosophers want to play, one can debate where it leads and why, but none of that matters. Occam's Razor again - because natural selection reflects the framework that not only we as biological entities exist within but the entire universe operates upon that principle as a result of being a finite system. Everything either succeeds or it fails.

http://www.counterorder.com/faq.html#6

Robert Anthony

January 3, 2004, 06:53 AM

You are suffering from the aftereffects of the Judeo-Christian pestilence. While you recognize intellectually this falsity, emotionally you have yet to overcome its grip. The decadent Judeo-Christian equation, life equals nothing if not redeemed by some romantic Beyond, has infected your psyche involuntarily. Nietzsche was the first to recognize this phenomenon. In short, the way back to psychological balance is understanding that the purpose of life is life itself, the enhancement and intensification of paganic power. Shift your mentality from expecting "transcendent, objective" reasons for living, because nonfulfillment will be the inevitable result. I hope that you will overcome this neurasthenic servitude to the memory of the false leveller and necrophobe Christ. I myself was in your position a few years ago. Then I discovered the philosophy of Heraclitus, and the vast treasury of pre-Christian thought not immolated by the Church. You must change the cognitive tools you use to evaluate the world, and discard the destructive Platonic assumption that meaning must be some secret beyond this universe. Life is autotelic, requiring no "moral justification"! Reading Nietzsche helped to strengthen my understanding of the historical development of the anti-earthly, anti-natural concepts of Judeo-Christianity, and their role as weapons of terror by the Roman-dominated slave underclass in waging war against "the privileged". As the proto-bolshevik Christ says, �The last shall be first and the first last.� This is the essence of world-hating liberalism, the oppressive delusion of our age, and I think, the nonimmediate cause of your depression.

variant 13

January 3, 2004, 07:59 AM

Robert you do know that Nietzsche died insane don't you?

epic

January 3, 2004, 12:28 PM

Robert:

The decadent Judeo-Christian equation, life equals nothing if not redeemed by some romantic Beyond, has infected your psyche involuntarily.

i was thinking something along these lines about theists and nihilism. from a nihilistic viewpoint, perhaps the theists opinion of a godless life is true -- thus them choosing to follow god in the first place.

Nietzsche was the first to recognize this phenomenon. In short, the way back to psychological balance is understanding that the purpose of life is life itself, the enhancement and intensification of paganic power.

but what kind of answer is that? the purpose of life is life itself? that seems to me a copout.

i think even TRYING to find "purpose" or "meaning" in life is futile, because it's not there and it's mere human constraints.

Shift your mentality from expecting "transcendent, objective" reasons for living, because nonfulfillment will be the inevitable result.

but how is a subjective reason for living any better? the end result is the same. that's the point.

You must change the cognitive tools you use to evaluate the world, and discard the destructive Platonic assumption that meaning must be some secret beyond this universe.

i don't proclaim (anymore) that there is meaning in some secrety beyond. i'm saying that there is NO meaning. period.

and i agree that life requires no "moral justification". further, even if life is autotelic, that in itself still doesn't mean anything.

trendkill

January 3, 2004, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by epic

i think even TRYING to find "purpose" or "meaning" in life is futile, because it's not there and it's mere human constraints. Exactly. It isn't there to be found. You've discarded half the lie, but the other half is still there. The part of the lie that you still believe is that meaning is something that is to be "found" rather than created.

Really, I have no problem with nihilism. I agree that "life is its own purpose" is a copout. If you can't generate meaning, then you can't generate meaning and you're out of luck. The only thing that annoys me about nihilists is that the ones you meet are invariably hypocrites, as illustrated by the fact that they're still alive.

epic

January 3, 2004, 02:37 PM

trendkill:

The part of the lie that you still believe is that meaning is something that is to be "found" rather than created.

i don't think meaning CAN be "found". i agree. but what i'm saying is that any created notions of "meaning" are just that -- created -- created to satisfy the occupant so they can survive in life. there's nothing inherently wrong with this.

If you can't generate meaning, then you can't generate meaning and you're out of luck. The only thing that annoys me about nihilists is that the ones you meet are invariably hypocrites, as illustrated by the fact that they're still alive.

i'm not so sure that being a nihilist must necessarily equate to some necessity to kill yourself right away. if nothing means anything to the nihilist, whether he kills himself right then and there or waits 50 years and dies by natural causes shouldn't matter.

just because someone doesn't think anything matters are they somehow forced to not live life. or even enjoy parts of it.
you could say it even validates (possibly the wrong word) their experience and tells them that they can indeed do whatever the hell they want*.

*which still means nothing.

trendkill

January 3, 2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by epic

i don't think meaning CAN be "found". i agree. but what i'm saying is that any created notions of "meaning" are just that -- created -- created to satisfy the occupant so they can survive in life. there's nothing inherently wrong with this.Except that meaning doesn't necessarily entail survival--it's not that unusual for people to find meaning by finding a cause worth dying for.

i'm not so sure that being a nihilist must necessarily equate to some necessity to kill yourself right away. if nothing means anything to the nihilist, whether he kills himself right then and there or waits 50 years and dies by natural causes shouldn't matter.Logically, it seems, if there's literally nothing to live for, then it only makes sense to commit suicide. And if there's something to live for, than life isn't meaningless. Maybe it's not as meaningful as one would like, but "insufficient purpose for full enjoyment" isn't the same as no purpose at all.

epic

January 4, 2004, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by trendkill
Except that meaning doesn't necessarily entail survival--it's not that unusual for people to find meaning by finding a cause worth dying for.

i would say, on average, most people create meaning in their lives, in some way, to help them cope with the demands of life. i don't think that's wild speculation.

as for people finding a cause worth dying for... firstly, they've found a cause -- something to create meaning -- secondly, with the threat of actual death presented to the average human -- it would be a vast minority who would actually willingly die for a "cause". "worth dying for" is more a cute expression than anything. or maybe i'm just overly cynical.

Logically, it seems, if there's literally nothing to live for, then it only makes sense to commit suicide. And if there's something to live for, than life isn't meaningless. Maybe it's not as meaningful as one would like, but "insufficient purpose for full enjoyment" isn't the same as no purpose at all.

choosing to live for something does not correlate to a meaningful existence. this is what i'm saying -- that most people CHOOSE to follow a cause, follow a religion, ANYthing to give their life "meaning", but the mere enjoyment of something does not change the fact that that enjoyment means nothing.

however, while it means nothing, it's still enjoyment. thus the nihilist can still enjoy things on earth -- a sports game or naked women, while still regarding that enjoyment itself meaningless.

but it's okay to reject meaning.

i think, re-reading, the meaning and thus enjoyment the nihilist would associate with, say, a sports game, would be different to the meaning attributed by a hardcore dedicated sports fan who "lives" through the game, that is, follows the game to give him meaning in life.

a nihilist could choose to kill themselves, and instead of the tragedy that it would be made out to be, in the end, to another nihilist, it would mean nothing -- it was their choice.

likewise, a nihilist could, as far as i can see, choose not to kill themselves, and live their meaningless existence if only for the hell of it, or like Big Niel said (where did he disappear to, anyway?), just through the emotive instinct to live.

trendkill

January 4, 2004, 06:17 PM

secondly, with the threat of actual death presented to the average human -- it would be a vast minority who would actually willingly die for a "cause". "worth dying for" is more a cute expression than anything. or maybe i'm just overly cynical.When I said it wasn't that uncommon, I didn't mean it was the norm, I meant it was common enough that in order to be reasonable you have to acknowledge it as a forseeable result of at least some peoples' perceiving meaning.

choosing to live for something does not correlate to a meaningful existence. this is what i'm saying -- that most people CHOOSE to follow a cause, follow a religion, ANYthing to give their life "meaning", but the mere enjoyment of something does not change the fact that that enjoyment means nothing.Alright, fair enough. I suppose I was just going to far before.

but it's okay to reject meaning.It still seems silly to do so. I still don't think nihilists tend to have a grasp of what meaning really is. If they did, they wouldn't say that meaning doesn't exist and people who think it does are fooling themselves, they would say that meaning exists, they just aren't able to find any of their own. Meaning isn't like God, where if it doesn't exist objectively, belief in it is false. Meaning doesn't need to be believed in, it just needs to be perceived. If it's perceived, it exists. Period.

Big Neil

January 4, 2004, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by nerv111
Well that was a waste of time, I should have known better than to read a thread about nihilism. Big Neil, why don�t you offer us some actual arguments in support of the assertion of nihilism rather than proceeding to call all your opponents ignorant (ironic since nihilism denies knowledge, so then are we all not ignorant, yourself included?)
Given that I have stipulated in this very thread that I too am ignorant which is the only reason why I continue to live, I can only suppose you haven't spent quite as much time reading the thread as you are griping about.

For someone concerned with wasting time you have done little to help things along.

Big Neil

January 4, 2004, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by exnihilo
Having read many of the responses, but not all, it seems clear that there are many different ideas of nihility here. For me nihilism doesn't necessarily mean that "nothing matters" or "nothing exists" it implies the rejection of all values altogether, thus nothing always already matters.
Saying 'nothing matters' is more than adequate if you realise the full implications of this statement.

As a result unless one can find a way to reject these and many other systems of explanation it is difficult to embrace nihilism, since in so doing one would be rejecting the idea of their own existence as well.

Inaccurate. You may do as I have done and 'embrace' the logical truth of nihilism and yet emotively reject it at the same time. Thus basking in ignorance.

As a result it seems that the very activity of debating nihilism automatically contravenes its very possibility.
Not at all. You are assuming that for someone to accept a philosophy to be true they must necessarily live by that philosophy. My continued posting shows the error in that.

For a nihilist, death could not be conceived of at all, much less as an end, because there would be nothing to end, just a vast meaningless nothingness with neither beginning nor end.
You're correct in one sense, death is not an 'end' as such. But you are wrong to assume that death cannot be conceived of at all. It is not an end but an erasure of time and experience. It doesn't come as the full stop, it erases life from ever having existed. So the state of death cannot be perceived, but the implications certainly can be.

nerv111

January 4, 2004, 09:15 PM

Originally posted by Big Neil
Given that I have stipulated in this very thread that I too am ignorant which is the only reason why I continue to live, I can only suppose you haven't spent quite as much time reading the thread as you are griping about.

For someone concerned with wasting time you have done little to help things along. Simply because you find yourself in a state of complete ignorance do not attribute it to others as well, you deny knowledge, not I. You have no hope for an escape from ignorance if you proceed by denying knowledge.

I never said about being concerned with wasting my time, in fact I consider it to be quite a fun pastime, debate and all. I was merely pointing out that it was a waste of time.

StillDreaming

January 4, 2004, 10:55 PM

Big Neil,

could you perhaps give an example of something that *would* give meaning to life for a nihilist?

I'm asking because I'm suspecting, like others in this thread, that nihilists have weird ideas about 'meaning'. In fact, the 'logical truth' of nihilism seems to boil down to the statement "something that we cannot conceive of, and of which we have no clue what it would look like if it existed, does not exist." In my view, that's not a particularly interesting conclusion, let alone a conclusion that would make me decide to stop living.

I think an answer like 'an eternal afterlife', like theists do, would be rejected by nihilists. Because since life in itself is pointless, how would an even longer life become meaningful? It's still molecules following the laws of physics.

Big Neil

January 4, 2004, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by StillDreaming
Big Neil,

could you perhaps give an example of something that *would* give meaning to life for a nihilist?

I'm asking because I'm suspecting, like others in this thread, that nihilists have weird ideas about 'meaning'. In fact, the 'logical truth' of nihilism seems to boil down to the statement "something that we cannot conceive of, and of which we have no clue what it would look like if it existed, does not exist." In my view, that's not a particularly interesting conclusion, let alone a conclusion that would make me decide to stop living.

I think an answer like 'an eternal afterlife', like theists do, would be rejected by nihilists. Because since life in itself is pointless, how would an even longer life become meaningful? It's still molecules following the laws of physics.
I could see that if a deity existed and the supernatural were true, there could conceivably be a purpose to living. I'm not sure if the 'eternity of bliss' in heaven necessarily cuts the mustard, but I'm more than willing to admit that a supernatural god would have a better understanding of cosmological signficance to Life the Universe, and Everything than myself.

But the thing is, to be a nihilist you must first be an atheist. So it's an academic question. There could conceivably be theistic nihilists, however I think they would be the very group you accuse of having strange definitions of 'meaning'.

The thing to remember is that nihilism is not a doctrine, there aren't set rules and practices which a nihilist does or does not conform to. It is simply a conclusion reached when one realises the true nature of life.

StillDreaming

January 5, 2004, 11:59 AM

Then why would the existence of a deity or the supernatural make life meaningful? I'm aware that it is an academic question but I would like to know what difference it would make, because it makes no sense to me.

I can imagine the existence of a deity or the supernatural, but their existence would not make my life more meaningful to me unless it would result in the fulfillment of more of my desires. Otherwise I couldn't care less about its existence.
Still, this reasoning is only valid for a non-nihilist, because it bases the added value of the existence of the supernatural on the increased fulfillment of desires, which according to nihilists is not a purpose or a reason to call life meaningful. So I still wonder how the existence of the supernatural could lead a nihilist to the conclusion that life is meaningful.

Perhaps this deity has some purpose for me in mind, but I fail to see what his personal purposes have to do with mine, or those of a nihilist. So it seems to me, the life of a nihilist could have some purpose for a deity, but it still wouldn't have meaning for the nihilist.

So, how do you jump from "Life is meaningless if deities or the supernatural do not exist" to "Life could be meaningful if deities or the supernatural do exist"

Big Neil

January 5, 2004, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by StillDreaming
So, how do you jump from "Life is meaningless if deities or the supernatural do not exist" to "Life could be meaningful if deities or the supernatural do exist"
Elementary. The purpose or meaning could not be gained in this life. As you say, haing more material desires fulfilled and greater emotions felt does not provide meaning nor purpose. Any actual meaning would have to be of some supernatural variety that my fallible intellect would be unable to comprehend in this life and world.

The short and curlies of it is: if we are alone, no one knows better. Therefore what we see is what we get. But if there does happen to be a god, then there is equally an entity which has a far better idea about the actuality of existence than we do. For as soon as the supernatural is apparent, one must immediately dispense with naturalist theory.

Since, however, there appears no such evidence for the supernatural, naturalism and therefore nihilism become apparent.

StillDreaming

January 5, 2004, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Big Neil
Elementary. The purpose or meaning could not be gained in this life. As you say, haing more material desires fulfilled and greater emotions felt does not provide meaning nor purpose. Any actual meaning would have to be of some supernatural variety that my fallible intellect would be unable to comprehend in this life and world.

The short and curlies of it is: if we are alone, no one knows better. Therefore what we see is what we get. But if there does happen to be a god, then there is equally an entity which has a far better idea about the actuality of existence than we do. For as soon as the supernatural is apparent, one must immediately dispense with naturalist theory.

Since, however, there appears no such evidence for the supernatural, naturalism and therefore nihilism become apparent.
So we seem to agree that the nihilist definition of 'meaning' refers to something that does not only not exist, but cannot even be imagined (by us humans). Yet you seem to suggest that it *could* have referred to something real, otherwise it would just be a meaningless word. How are you so sure that your usage of the word could have referred to something real?

I cannot imagine any way in which life could possibly have purpose in the sense you seem to be talking about - unrelated to someone's desires. It seems absurd. It's not that it merely *has* no purpose, but that it is absurd to even suggest that it *could* have had some purpose - to suggest that that would mean something.

So I have no idea what it would mean; this way of speaking about 'purpose' is meaningless to me. Therefore, I don't say that life has no purpose (again in the sense you're talking about), but I claim that the sentence 'life has no purpose' is meaningless. It's not a statement and as such it cannot have a truth value.

So if I get the question "what is the purpose of life", the only meaningful thing I can make of it is that the intended question was something like "why don't you commit suicide". Because purpose/meaning requires someone/something who assigns or perceives purpose/meaning - that's probably me if the question is directed to me. And furthermore the question suggests that I am *using* life in order to reach some goal and since I never decided to *start* living, the question can only refer to the part on which I do have some influence, i.e., my death.

If that was not the intended question, then I have no idea what on earth the questioner is talking about. My reaction would be the same as to someone who asked me "asdf wer sfd wer liop?"

exnihilo

January 6, 2004, 02:36 AM

Big Neil: Inaccurate. You may do as I have done and 'embrace' the logical truth of nihilism and yet emotively reject it at the same time. Thus basking in ignorance.
Logical truth, those are entirely un-nihilistic ideas. Nihilism neither recognizes logic nor truth, much less is it predicated upon such ridiculous notions. You seem to be slipping severely...

Big Neil:
Not at all. You are assuming that for someone to accept a philosophy to be true they must necessarily live by that philosophy. My continued posting shows the error in that.
Your posting definately shows error, but not in the way you think. Speculative philosophy is not meant to be true, but only useful. The search for Truth is the realm of science, religion and analytic philosophy and has nothing whatever to do with nihilism.

You're correct in one sense, death is not an 'end' as such. But you are wrong to assume that death cannot be conceived of at all. It is not an end but an erasure of time and experience. It doesn't come as the full stop, it erases life from ever having existed. So the state of death cannot be perceived, but the implications certainly can be.
Unless you are simply making up your own definition of nihilism, in which case all you have said "doesn't matter" anyway, you are wrong again. Nihilism neccessarily rejects all values and meaning, so to invoke terms such as time and experience makes absolutely no sense coming from a perspective that is purportedly nihilistic. The rejection of all values means all values. A nihilist would never appeal to notions of logic and truth to support the idea that such things don't exist.

Big Neil

January 8, 2004, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by exnihilo
Logical truth, those are entirely un-nihilistic ideas. Nihilism neither recognizes logic nor truth, much less is it predicated upon such ridiculous notions. You seem to be slipping severely...
I have no idea what strange brand of nihilism you seem to be envisioning but it is neither practical in the real world, nor is it relevant to what I'm talking about.

Nihilism is a conclusion. In order to reach that conclusion, a logical process is followed. By your logic - the complete rejection of logic and truth - the state of nihilism could not even be conceptualised, since it is only by logic and truth that one could arrive at such a conclusion.

Your posting definately shows error, but not in the way you think. Speculative philosophy is not meant to be true, but only useful. The search for Truth is the realm of science, religion and analytic philosophy and has nothing whatever to do with nihilism.
Nonsense. The philosophy of nihilism is a commentary on cosmological truth. Which could only be arrived at logically.

Unless you are simply making up your own definition of nihilism, in which case all you have said "doesn't matter" anyway, you are wrong again. Nihilism neccessarily rejects all values and meaning, so to invoke terms such as time and experience makes absolutely no sense coming from a perspective that is purportedly nihilistic. The rejection of all values means all values. A nihilist would never appeal to notions of logic and truth to support the idea that such things don't exist.

You seem to be confused with 'rejection of values'. That does not mean that the nihilist states 'time does not exist', to suggest as such is ridiculous. One of the common errors made in regards to nihilism - which you are currently making in fine style - is to assume nihilism rejects the existence of elements of reality. It does not. It rejects the significance of these elements and states that their existence in reality is temporary in nature only and therefore do not matter.

Nihilism does indeed reject human values and meaning, but this is the embracement of absolute insignificance of human perception, not a rejection of the actual existence of physical properties.

exnihilo

January 9, 2004, 11:22 AM

Big Neil: I have no idea what strange brand of nihilism you seem to be envisioning but it is neither practical in the real world, nor is it relevant to what I'm talking about.

Nihilism is a conclusion. In order to reach that conclusion, a logical process is followed. By your logic - the complete rejection of logic and truth - the state of nihilism could not even be conceptualised, since it is only by logic and truth that one could arrive at such a conclusion.

Apparently, you have no idea what Nihilism is. {edit- ex-xian} Nihilism entails a total rejection of all values, it is the beleif in nothingness, which certainly holds no exception for truth or logic!!!!! Its radical lack of practicality has been one of its most glaring shortcomings and many philosophers have argued that due to its rejection of ALL values and belief in nothing, such a stance was not possible, neither in theory nor in practice. You would do well to read E.M. Cioran--perhaps, the most important nihilist philosopher--and Nishitani Keiji's work concerning the subject.

You maybe be right that what I am talking about is not relevant to you, however, what you are discussing is not nihilism. It seems to me what you are arguing is an existential question, not a nihilistic one.

Nonsense. The philosophy of nihilism is a commentary on cosmological truth. Which could only be arrived at logically.
Where do you get such a definition????? That is utterly ridiculous. If you don't agree I would love to see a logical demonstration of it.

You seem to be confused with 'rejection of values'. That does not mean that the nihilist states 'time does not exist', to suggest as such is ridiculous. One of the common errors made in regards to nihilism - which you are currently making in fine style - is to assume nihilism rejects the existence of elements of reality. It does not. It rejects the significance of these elements and states that their existence in reality is temporary in nature only and therefore do not matter.

Nihilism does indeed reject human values and meaning, but this is the embracement of absolute insignificance of human perception, not a rejection of the actual existence of physical properties.

Sorry, what you seem to be alluding to--"nothing matters"--is a question of meaning, which asks: does life matter? I.e. the existential question of absurdity and making sense of nothingness. For a nihilist, there is no making sense, only acceptance, and as many have already pointed out this does not lead to the affirmative answer a la the Myth of Sisyphus or Sartre's Nausea. There is no out for the nihilist, nothing is all there is, no logic, no truth, no meaning. To justify nihilism through logic is nothing more than a reductio ad absurdum and goes against the very idea of nihilism itself.

NearNihil Experience

January 9, 2004, 11:58 AM

"Where do you get such a definition????? "

I think Biggums has been painting a characature of nihilism the whole time. In not valuing, he values valuelessness....simple contradiction. Or, he has no idea about nihilism, whichever kind we are talking,(moral, value, ethical, mtea-physical, epistemological, etc...) and has been constructing it as this thread has rolled on.

Or, he has trouble accepting that nihilism is impractical, unreasonable, and unlivable....in its popularized form. When not treated as a Rawlsian "Veil of value ingnorance", that no one is in abetter position to dictate value to you than yourself, and that the best starting point in creating personal values is nihilism....nihilism becomes a cartoon of philosophy wrapped in Goth clothing and angst.

Nihilations are the inevitable conclusion of subjective skepticism. That anything can be reduced to dual aspect(Cartesian), and those two aspects of that thought create opposites which cancel out each other...creating a nihilation of knowledge or value. This process of annihilation allows for complete destruction of social insterts and values, and the that destruction leavs a clean slate for which to begin again to really personally choose what values appeal to them as life re-presents them.

Nihiliation gives one a choice of values by destroying values inhereited or socialized while developing. Nihilism offers and eraser and pencil for all the muck you never got to choose or only thought you choose.
Nihilism gives one the opportunity to deal with Kierkeggardian notion of "of want not to be who you are".

Properly understood and not exagerated or satirized, nihilism can make a useful psychological tool. Its trying to hold on to nihilism that creates the paradox of valuing valuelessness...and other such difficulties.

epic

January 10, 2004, 11:09 AM

i don't see how an atheist can't not be a nihilist.

in the end we're left with there being no objective meaning except the meaning which an individual creates for their own life/benefit. (which i think is what most atheists would agree with).

the step forward to nihilism from atheism is, as far as i can tell, admitting that even ones own subjective meaning doesn't count for anything in the end.

i'd be interested in hearing from atheists if they regard their personally attributed "meaning" as actually... meaning anything, beyond the individual. (which, if true, would also be a paradox)

if it doesn't, then i don't see how more atheists wouldn't consider themselves nihilists. i can't see how an atheist could think that anything we do on this little planet is really going to change anything or mean anything taking this whole 4d universe into account, given the fact we'll all end up wormfood... the universe will continue on its way with or without us, this is all fact...

i don't think this should be seen as a negative thing, though.

StillDreaming

January 10, 2004, 11:38 AM

I'd still be interested to hear what it actually would mean if something had 'objective meaning'.
There exist no square circles either, but I cannot even imagine them so I fail to see in which way such observations are interesting.
I agree that our existence probably has little influence on the universe as a whole. But I also don't think that the universe is able to care about that, and even if it was, or if we did have significant influence, why would that matter to me? If 'having significant influence on the universe' would be an example of objective meaning, then, well, why should I care about objective meaning?

exnihilo

January 10, 2004, 12:07 PM

the step forward to nihilism from atheism is, as far as i can tell, admitting that even ones own subjective meaning doesn't count for anything in the end.

Yes, but that would be a very radical step "forward," indeed, from the simple rejection of the belief in the existence of god, to the rejection of all values, morality, meaning, truth and knowledge. Just because we are athiests doesn't mean we don't still follow some set of morals--check out the political discussion form, it is chock full of them. To embrace nihilism is much morethan rejecting god, it is the rejection of everything, knowledge itself is not possible and thus athiesm itself is contradictory because to be a-anything requires there be a type of opposing knowledge. For one who beleives that there is no knowledge that simply could not be.

epic

January 10, 2004, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by StillDreaming
I'd still be interested to hear what it actually would mean if something had 'objective meaning'.

if there existed an objective meaning it would give us, obviously, a meaning or purpose to life outside of that which we create ourselves. as to the nature of this "meaning", i don't know, but it seems irrelevent anyway, given the non-existence of any objective meaning.

There exist no square circles either, but I cannot even imagine them so I fail to see in which way such observations are interesting.

you're half way there then.

now, if you also fail to see in which way observations of round circles are interesting, you're there.

I agree that our existence probably has little influence on the universe as a whole. But I also don't think that the universe is able to care about that, and even if it was, or if we did have significant influence, why would that matter to me? If 'having significant influence on the universe' would be an example of objective meaning, then, well, why should I care about objective meaning?

i also don't think the universe actually "cares". and i agree you shouldn't care about objective meaning. i don't. just think that if it does exist, it exists beyond human comprehension, and thus, as far as we're concerned, is irrelevent.

but, if you had the chance to have a significant influence on the universe, with whatever benefits and features that entailed in this speculatory freeway, surely you would find it more desirable than your current human fate?

epic

January 10, 2004, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by exnihilo
Yes, but that would be a very radical step "forward," indeed, from the simple rejection of the belief in the existence of god, to the rejection of all values, morality, meaning, truth and knowledge. Just because we are athiests doesn't mean we don't still follow some set of morals--check out the political discussion form, it is chock full of them. To embrace nihilism is much morethan rejecting god, it is the rejection of everything, knowledge itself is not possible and thus athiesm itself is contradictory because to be a-anything requires there be a type of opposing knowledge. For one who beleives that there is no knowledge that simply could not be.

it doesn't take too much knowledge to ascertain the non-existence of god.

and i'm not saying that atheists don't follow a set of morals, where did you get that from? a nihilist, like an atheist, is free to follow a set of morals, too -- whatever set of morals he wants.

StillDreaming

January 10, 2004, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by epic
if there existed an objective meaning it would give us, obviously, a meaning or purpose to life outside of that which we create ourselves. as to the nature of this "meaning", i don't know, but it seems irrelevent anyway, given the non-existence of any objective meaning.
I think the phrasing 'objective meaning' is a contradictio in terms[sp?]. Meaning supposes value, and value requires a valuer, so meaning is subjective by definition. Just as a purpose requires someone/something that sets the purpose.
I may be wrong, but until proven otherwise I don't agree that speaking about 'objective meaning or purpose' is even meaningful. That's why I consider it irrelevant, not merely because it happens to not exist.
You can't speak about meaning or purpose without referring to someone's or something's perspective.
Nihilism seems to consider things from the perspective of the universe - which I don't care about, or perhaps from no perspective at all - which doesn't make sense to me.

As for round circles, to me they are quite useful, and thus interesting. From the perspective of the universe they may be uninteresting, but what do I care about the perspective of the universe? Or about objective meaning - whatever that means?

i also don't think the universe actually "cares". and i agree you shouldn't care about objective meaning. i don't. just think that if it does exist, it exists beyond human comprehension, and thus, as far as we're concerned, is irrelevent.
Agreed (except that since I think it is a contradiction, it makes no sense to say that it may exist beyond our comprehension)

but, if you had the chance to have a significant influence on the universe, with whatever benefits and features that entailed in this speculatory freeway, surely you would find it more desirable than your current human fate? [/B]
Certainly, but only because this would affect *me*.

Philosoft

January 10, 2004, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by epic
if there existed an objective meaning it would give us, obviously, a meaning or purpose to life outside of that which we create ourselves.To whom does this apply? If I enslave you for your whole life as a means to some end for me, have I given your life objective meaning? Or must objectivity exist "outside" the scope of meaningfulness of all humans, or all beings capable of creating their own meanings?
as to the nature of this "meaning", i don't know, but it seems irrelevent anyway, given the non-existence of any objective meaning. Probably, but I'm curious nonetheless.

exnihilo

January 11, 2004, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by epic
it doesn't take too much knowledge to ascertain the non-existence of god.

and i'm not saying that atheists don't follow a set of morals, where did you get that from? a nihilist, like an atheist, is free to follow a set of morals, too -- whatever set of morals he wants.

I was simply pointing out a distinction between nihilism and atheism that you seem to ignore. Atheism is basically the rejection of one value, i.e. god. Nihilism is the rejection of all values. Yes an athiest could also be a nihilist, but athiesm and nihilism are not interchangeable.
One would be in error to claim that a nihilist "follows any set of morals" as that is in direct contradiction to the very tenets of nihilism itself: the rejection of all values.
I also agree with many that adhering to such a philosophy is very problematic and probably not achievable, but practicality is a different question altogether.

epic

January 11, 2004, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by StillDreaming
I think the phrasing 'objective meaning' is a contradictio in terms[sp?]. Meaning supposes value, and value requires a valuer, so meaning is subjective by definition. Just as a purpose requires someone/something that sets the purpose.

i agree that meaning is inherently subjective. even if a form of meaning or purpose WAS existent objectively, for us to understand it, we'd have to do so subjectively.

I may be wrong, but until proven otherwise I don't agree that speaking about 'objective meaning or purpose' is even meaningful. That's why I consider it irrelevant, not merely because it happens to not exist.

i don't really care about it either. you asked me about it, so i answered. i don't think there's objective meaning either. this is my point.

Nihilism seems to consider things from the perspective of the universe - which I don't care about, or perhaps from no perspective at all - which doesn't make sense to me.

i would say it considers things objectively.

As for round circles, to me they are quite useful, and thus interesting. From the perspective of the universe they may be uninteresting, but what do I care about the perspective of the universe? Or about objective meaning - whatever that means?

you shouldn't care, you should just note that your subjective opinion of round circles is futile and pointless to existence beyond your own mind, that's all.

Certainly, but only because this would affect *me*.

of course.

but you wouldn't have even had the chance of being subjectively affected if there hadn't already existed a meaning outside of your own brain. once you partake, it becomes subjective yes, but prior to that, by your logic, it never existed. it's like the tree falling in the forest.

Originally posted by Philosoft
To whom does this apply? If I enslave you for your whole life as a means to some end for me, have I given your life objective meaning? Or must objectivity exist "outside" the scope of meaningfulness of all humans, or all beings capable of creating their own meanings?

i think the latter.

Probably, but I'm curious nonetheless.

god, or some kind of conscious, loving being would be an obvious example.

other than that, i think, if it existed, meaning would show itself through life -- evolution would be different, for one. evolution as a system works beautifully, but not for the individual. look at the food chain, nature feeding on itself, death, destruction... evolution has no goal or plan in mind. if there existed objecting meaning, there would, or at least could, be a plan.

Originally posted by exnihilo
I was simply pointing out a distinction between nihilism and atheism that you seem to ignore.

i didn't ignore it... you said that knowledge is impossible under nihilsim and that knowledge is necessary to be an atheist. i would say common sense is necessary to be an atheist.

as far as knowledge goes, again, it depends on what you're referring to as "knowledge". what, exactly, do you KNOW?

One would be in error to claim that a nihilist "follows any set of morals" as that is in direct contradiction to the very tenets of nihilism itself: the rejection of all values.

i said they could follow any set of morals, emphasis on ANY. i'm implying here that it matters not what set of morals one chooses, for to the nihilist, they all mean nothing anyway.

just because one is a nihilist and rejects values, does not mean all values and morals suddenly disappear from the earth. the nihilist isn't rejecting the existence of morals and values, he is rejecting any value or meaning of morals and values.

Big Neil

January 11, 2004, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by exnihilo
Apparently, you have no idea what Nihilism is. {edit- ex-xian} Nihilism entails a total rejection of all values, it is the beleif in nothingness, which certainly holds no exception for truth or logic!!!!! Its radical lack of practicality has been one of its most glaring shortcomings and many philosophers have argued that due to its rejection of ALL values and belief in nothing, such a stance was not possible, neither in theory nor in practice. You would do well to read E.M. Cioran--perhaps, the most important nihilist philosopher--and Nishitani Keiji's work concerning the subject.

The fact that you use the word 'shortcomings' should be ringing some alarm bells. People generally don't believe in nihilism because they want to...

I honestly think that your spin on nihilism is far removed from what I've described. I don't give a rats if what I'm talking about is the pure form of nihilism as Nietsche intended (in fact I can tell you right now it isn't), so your continued nit-picking at the minute level is irrelevant.

Where do you get such a definition????? That is utterly ridiculous. If you don't agree I would love to see a logical demonstration of it.
Language is largely about conceptualization of abstract concepts. You cannot, for instance, perceive a quark, but language gives us the opportunity to describe it.

Thus nihilism is the articulation of the (extremely) abstract concept that nothing we do matters (including articulating nihilism). It desribes the truth of the universe when that truth is absolute insignificance. And it is the same logical thought process as any other you embark upon that you utilise to arrive at a conclusion.

Sorry, what you seem to be alluding to--"nothing matters"--is a question of meaning, which asks: does life matter?
After you state 'nothing matters' no questions are further asked.
Certainly not the one you did.

For a nihilist, there is no making sense, only acceptance, and as many have already pointed out this does not lead to the affirmative answer a la the Myth of Sisyphus or Sartre's Nausea. There is no out for the nihilist, nothing is all there is, no logic, no truth, no meaning. To justify nihilism through logic is nothing more than a reductio ad absurdum and goes against the very idea of nihilism itself. [/B]
You forget who it is considering nihilism. It is a human who must operate logically. Nihilism is not some means of feeling better about the nature of the world, it highlights the anomoly that we are designed to feed off believing things matter when in fact nothing does.

I agree that the nihilism you define could not exist. But I think that's irrelevant. Perhaps instead of refuting classical nihilism or whatever it is you have envisioned, you should read the OP and refute that more specifically.

foolsparade

January 11, 2004, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by epic
i don't see how an atheist can't not be a nihilist.

in the end we're left with there being no objective meaning except the meaning which an individual creates for their own life/benefit. (which i think is what most atheists would agree with).

the step forward to nihilism from atheism is, as far as i can tell, admitting that even ones own subjective meaning doesn't count for anything in the end.

i'd be interested in hearing from atheists if they regard their personally attributed "meaning" as actually... meaning anything, beyond the individual. (which, if true, would also be a paradox)

if it doesn't, then i don't see how more atheists wouldn't consider themselves nihilists. i can't see how an atheist could think that anything we do on this little planet is really going to change anything or mean anything taking this whole 4d universe into account, given the fact we'll all end up wormfood... the universe will continue on its way with or without us, this is all fact...

i don't think this should be seen as a negative thing, though.

you've got alot to learn. you write; " i can't see how an atheist could think that anything we do on this little planet is really going to change anything or mean anything taking this whole 4d universe into account, given the fact we'll all end up wormfood.."

since when has a desire or action or and idealogy suppose to "change" anything? other than ourselves? really you have it backwards, it is the religious people who are Nihilists.

Big Neil

January 11, 2004, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by NearNihil Experience
I think Biggums has been painting a characature of nihilism the whole time. In not valuing, he values valuelessness....simple contradiction. Or, he has no idea about nihilism, whichever kind we are talking,(moral, value, ethical, mtea-physical, epistemological, etc...) and has been constructing it as this thread has rolled on.
As I stated to exnihilo, I really don't care if what I'm saying refers to nihilism as you understand it or not. I use the term because I think it is close enough to nihilism to forbid me to shamelessly dub it Big Neilism and start a revolution.

Or, he has trouble accepting that nihilism is impractical, unreasonable, and unlivable....in its popularized form.
impractical: of course, that's the point.
unreasonable: to whom?
unlivable: exactly.

When not treated as a Rawlsian "Veil of value ingnorance", that no one is in abetter position to dictate value to you than yourself, and that the best starting point in creating personal values is nihilism....nihilism becomes a cartoon of philosophy wrapped in Goth clothing and angst.
To what degree do you think this is relevant to what I've been saying?

Nihiliation gives one a choice of values by destroying values inhereited or socialized while developing. Nihilism offers and eraser and pencil for all the muck you never got to choose or only thought you choose.
Just an eraser, there's no pencil with what I've discussed.

Properly understood and not exagerated or satirized, nihilism can make a useful psychological tool. Its trying to hold on to nihilism that creates the paradox of valuing valuelessness...and other such difficulties.
When you say 'trying to hold on to nihilism' are you suggesting it is some kind of belief system that you can use to enhance your perspective of life? As far as I can see, the absolute acceptance of nihilism as I perceive it is absolute apathy and suicide.

I'm not trying to sell nihilism as the new and improved approach to a better, healthier lifestyle.