NationStates Jolt Archive

When I was younger (and I know I'm not a hag, by any standards, being 28 years old), but when I was younger I used to consider myself a nihilist. Perhaps reading the books I was influenced me too much, or hanging around the people I did never helped, but I was a nihilist. Or perhaps I think I was.

What's a nihilist, you may ask? Let's start with a broad definition of Nihilism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism):
Nihilism is a philosophical position that argues that existence is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.

The term nihilism is sometimes used synonymously with anomie to denote a general mood of despair at the pointlessness of existence. Movements such as Dada, Futurism, and deconstructionism, among others, have been identified by commentators as "nihilistic" at various times in various contexts.

Nihilism is also a characteristic that has been ascribed to time periods: for example, Jean Baudrillard and others have called postmodernity a nihilistic epoch, and some Christian theologians and figures of religious authority have asserted that postmodernity and many aspects of modernity represent the rejection of God, and therefore are nihilistic.

I felt that there was a hopelessness surrounding my existence at the time. But, after a while it became exhausting to think and act like a nihilist. Has anyone else been through the same experience or a smiliar experience?

I am one of the few who hope that the universe is without objective meaning or purpose.

Why would I want some destiny or purpose, fabulous as it may be, to exist as an obstacle to my free will?

To stand with only your abilites, your freedom and your will. Not for some higher purpose, but because you want to.

I'm having a bad day... does that count as being a Nihilist?

I tried once. It was exhausting

I am one of the few who hope that the universe is without objective meaning or purpose.

Why would I want some destiny or purpose, fabulous as it may be, to exist as an obstacle to my free will?

To stand with only your abilites, your freedom and your will. Not for some higher purpose, but because you want to.

But, I mean, isn't it tiring? I stopped upholding a nihilistic life-style because I became exhausted. Maybe I, deep down, truly want to believe there's a greater purpose to life and the universe. Call me naive.:p

i still am, in some ways. certainly, if i take that first quote to be nihilism, then that's what i believe, and have done for some years.

however, when nihilism goes bad is when it influences the rest of your life to have no drive or motovation... the "there's no point in doing anything" outlook. that's what i took nihilism to be when i was depressed a few years ago. these days, it doesn't bother me - i just do the best i can at what i've got to do, and if that has no meaning then so be it.

I have never been nihilistic. Probably due to my judeo-christian libertarian worldview.

Yes and no. I do believe that our existence is more likely an accident without any definite purpose for it to exist. But I don't feel the despair or hopelessness associated with nihilism. I see it more as a blank slate than anything, something with which we have massive amounts of creative control over. We can shape our own purpose from nothing as individuals and as a collective society.

But, I mean, isn't it tiring? I stopped upholding a nihilistic life-style because I became exhausted. Maybe I, deep down, truly want to believe there's a greater purpose to life and the universe. Call me naive.:p

No. It's liberating.

It's like waking up on a saturday and realising you have no chores or errands to run all day.

I was like that as a teenager - thinking that all was pointless.

In the end I decided to stop thinking about it and enjoy the life I have - after all, its free! :)

I tried once. It was exhausting

That's exactly what happened to me. I got exhausted.

But, I mean, isn't it tiring?I'm full of energy. Not using it would be a shame. :D

I was like that as a teenager - thinking that all was pointless.

In the end I decided to stop thinking about it and enjoy the life I have - after all, its free! :)

Your forgetting about taxes.

I'm too old to expend that much energy.

Your forgetting about taxes.

I was talking about life silly, not the money part. :p

I'm full of energy. Not using it would be a shame. :D

But you're not particularly a nihilist. Are you?

I must confess you have reminded me of a dark chapter in my life. But I am proud to say I can now look back and laugh - because things have never been better for me! :D

I was talking about life silly, not the money part. :p

Ever heard of a head tax? Lots of places have them.. its a tax for being alive.

I must confess you have reminded me of a dark chapter in my life. But I am proud to say I can now look back and laugh - because things have never been better for me! :D

I blame Ferrous Oxide for it. His rant about not knowing what to believe made me think back of my nihilist phase.

I blame Ferrous Oxide for it. His rant about not knowing what to believe made me think back of my nihilist phase.

Yeah, me too. But I made peace with that anger. :)

I have contented myself with an agnostic position on the matter: it is unknowable whether there is any objective meaning, purpose or intrinsic value in existence, and any such meaning is itself unknowable. I do not reject the possibility that there might be one or more, but I do not believe the discovery of it to be an accomplish-able goal, so consequently, there is no point looking for it. Not quite a rejection of objectivity, but pretty close.

However, I do believe that there are many effective practical interpretations one can make of the world that is subjectively perceived, and while objectivity is certainly unknowable, there is still a plethora of subjective meaning and value that can be derived from the empirical model.

But you're not particularly a nihilist. Are you?I have some of the tendencies.

I recently had an epiphany of sorts effectively breaking my 3 year bout of nihilism.

While i cannot currently find a point to existing, and it seems extremely likely there isn't one, i hold the scientific method in high regard.
As such, until i have learned everything there is to learn before making a hypothesis on this issue (Given that Nihilism encompasses EVERYTHING) i must recognize that there may possibly be a point to it all.
So, in short, a hunger for knowledge is the """Point.""" so far for me :P

Insofar as I am alive, my life cannot help but have a point. The point could be "time must pass" or the point could be "eventually I will get hungry so I better start looking for food now."

I can see how Nihilism could be exhausting, in that it's never perfect. To stay Nihilist, one must keep delving into one's own motivations, and they become harder and harder to find the more one overthrows them. And then you have to ask: isn't this delving itself evidence of motivation?

I think everyone has their own comfort point on the spectrum between "life has a point so grand and dominating that I have no free will" and "life has no point at all, and I must fight any illusion that it does."

Personally, I'm well towards the Nihilist end of that spectrum. Allowing myself to believe in a point to life gets me into fear and uncertainty about my personal death.

I have contented myself with an agnostic position on the matter: it is unknowable whether there is any objective meaning, purpose or intrinsic value in existence, and any such meaning is itself unknowable. I do not reject the possibility that there might be one or more, but I do not believe the discovery of it to be an accomplish-able goal, so consequently, there is no point looking for it. Not quite a rejection of objectivity, but pretty close.

However, I do believe that there are many effective practical interpretations one can make of the world that is subjectively perceived, and while objectivity is certainly unknowable, there is still a plethora of subjective meaning and value that can be derived from the empirical model.

This ^^ :)

Subjective meaning can be very useful for motivation and such, though I'd never listen to others telling me what they think objective meaning should be.

Has anyone else been through the same experience or a smiliar experience?Hangovers.
:(

That's exactly what happened to me. I got exhausted.
Isn't believing something simply because you don't have the energy not to a fairly nihilist position? Not only did you not care, but you didn't care about not caring enough not to care.

Isn't believing something simply because you don't have the energy not too a fairly nihilist position? Not only did you not care, but you didn't care about not caring enough not to care.
I doubt there's much room left on your mantle, but ....
/thread

I tried once. It was exhausting

YEA BIG LEBOWSKI!


On topic though, I believe I'm nihilistic without even trying. After all, what really is the point of all this?

Nihilism means nothing to me.

Someone had to.

I tend to think that the reason or purpose for existance is just that. Existing. Not surprisingly, I tend to subscribe to Transcendentalism.

i've been accused of it, but i'm pretty sure that was a thoruoughly misinterpretation and misunderstanding by others, not anything of my own.

Insofar as I am alive, my life cannot help but have a point. The point could be "time must pass" or the point could be "eventually I will get hungry so I better start looking for food now."

I can see how Nihilism could be exhausting, in that it's never perfect. To stay Nihilist, one must keep delving into one's own motivations, and they become harder and harder to find the more one overthrows them. And then you have to ask: isn't this delving itself evidence of motivation?

I think everyone has their own comfort point on the spectrum between "life has a point so grand and dominating that I have no free will" and "life has no point at all, and I must fight any illusion that it does."

Personally, I'm well towards the Nihilist end of that spectrum. Allowing myself to believe in a point to life gets me into fear and uncertainty about my personal death.

Perhaps one can say Nihilism is a part of everyday life. One, maybe, never stops going through nihilistic phases.

When I was younger (and I know I'm not a hag, by any standards, being 28 years old), but when I was younger I used to consider myself a nihilist. Perhaps reading the books I was influenced me too much, or hanging around the people I did never helped, but I was a nihilist. Or perhaps I think I was.

I felt that there was a hopelessness surrounding my existence at the time. But, after a while it became exhausting to think and act like a nihilist. Has anyone else been through the same experience or a smiliar experience?

I often feel that way but it's not an everday approach I have to life. I'm still young, so I suppose I have a lot of learning and deciding to do regarding my outlook on life, but yes, at more than one stage I have been nihilistic but I guess I wouldn't label myself a "nihilist".

Perhaps one can say Nihilism is a part of everyday life. One, maybe, never stops going through nihilistic phases.

Not really. It's been at least two years since I had such thoughts.

I often feel that way but it's not an everday approach I have to life. I'm still young, so I suppose I have a lot of learning and deciding to do regarding my outlook on life, but yes, at more than one stage I have been nihilistic but I guess I wouldn't label myself a "nihilist".

Exactly. We go through a nihilistic phase every once in a while. But we cannot, at least you and me, label ourselves as nihilists. Life occurs in stages, and for every stage, for every lesson learned, our outlooks change.

When I was younger (and I know I'm not a hag, by any standards, being 28 years old), but when I was younger I used to consider myself a nihilist. Perhaps reading the books I was influenced me too much, or hanging around the people I did never helped, but I was a nihilist. Or perhaps I think I was.

I felt that there was a hopelessness surrounding my existence at the time. But, after a while it became exhausting to think and act like a nihilist. Has anyone else been through the same experience or a smiliar experience?

Yeah, at my darkest moments a few years ago.

Then I realized that life does have a purpose, but only if you make one.

But, after a while it became exhausting to think and act like a nihilist.

Why? You'd think that you'd waste less energy if you try less.

Why? You'd think that you'd waste less energy if you try less.

Read BunnySaurus Bugsii's post further down the page.

You don't really 'practice' nihilism, but I am a nihilist, not because I want to be, but because that's how the universe seems to be.

You don't really 'practice' nihilism, not because I want to be, but because that's how the universe seems to be.

The universe as a nihilistic dance? Contastant "there's no purpose" outlook? You think?

I live by my motto - "Never give up!"

So long as there is strength in my back, and blood in my veins, No matter how pointless or silly life seems, I will not let it get to me! I will push on, I will enjoy the finer things in life, and should I die, and nothing happens, then i've lost nothing, have I? :)

The universe as a nihilistic dance? Contastant "there's no purpose" outlook? You think?

By the way I edited that sentence if it didn't make any sense. But now I'm confused as to what you're trying to say here. :p

By the way I edited that sentence if it didn't make any sense. But now I'm confused as to what you're trying to say here. :p

:tongue:
Hydey-tan, all I meant was that it's odd to think the universe is an endless nihilistic dance. The universe conspires, as my mum says, to make us nihilistic towards certain things. Perhaps that's a way or mechanism to help us deal. I don't even know what I'm trying to say or mean anymore. Don't mind me too much.

:tongue:
Hydey-tan, all I meant was that it's odd to think the universe is an endless nihilistic dance. The universe conspires, as my mum says, to make us nihilistic towards certain things.

That would be a rather non nihilistic view, as if the universe was somehow purposefully being nihilistic, but there is no purpose. I think a big myth about nihilism is the idea that just because there is no objective purpose to life, does not mean that anything you do is pointless.

I hardly ever see any porpoise in my life... :(




But then, I don't live close to the sea, so that's to be expected. :D

When I was younger (and I know I'm not a hag, by any standards, being 28 years old), but when I was younger I used to consider myself a nihilist. Perhaps reading the books I was influenced me too much, or hanging around the people I did never helped, but I was a nihilist. Or perhaps I think I was.

What's a nihilist, you may ask? Let's start with a broad definition of Nihilism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism):






I felt that there was a hopelessness surrounding my existence at the time. But, after a while it became exhausting to think and act like a nihilist. Has anyone else been through the same experience or a smiliar experience?

I consider myself nihilist, but don't agree with your interpretation of nihilism.

You say:

Nihilism is a philosophical position that argues that existence is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value

The key word here is...

Nihilism (my nihilism) is a philosophical that argues that existence is without objective meaning, purpose or intrinsic value.

Meaning, purpose and values... are NOT objective

These are all man (or woman) made. People create their own meanings, purposes and values... and then they get high and start believing these things are greater than themselves.

I consider myself nihilist, but don't agree with your interpretation of nihilism.

You say:

Nihilism is a philosophical position that argues that existence is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value

That, Santiago, is not my definition of Nihilism. That's a dictionary definition.:wink:

NO NO NO

Nihilism (my nihilism) is a philosophical that argues that the exist no absolute meaning, purpose or intrinsic value.

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. I don't think that in your absolutism are you being true to nihilism. In fact, by proclaiming that there is absolutely no meaning, purpose on instrinsic value in life or in something specifical, you're negating nihilism. At least that's the way I see it.

That, Santiago, is not my definition of Nihilism. That's a dictionary definition.:wink:



Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. I don't think that in your absolutism are you being true to nihilism. In fact, by proclaiming that there is absolutely no meaning, purpose on instrinsic value in life or in something specifical, you're negating nihilism. At least that's the way I see it.

Dictionaries are made by people who hate nihilist. Look at the definition here... www.anus.com no, its not porn...

Most self proclaimed nihilist think like you do, but you people are not true scot....nihilist.

I have always have conflicts with false nihilist like yourself because unlike me they believe in too many things for my liking.

Most self proclaimed nihilist think like you do, but you people are not true scot....nihilist.

I never proclaimed myself a nihilist. I merely said I thought like one when I was younger. I'm not of that mindset anymore.

I have always have conflicts with false nihilist like yourself because unlike me they believe in too many things for my liking.

Once again, I am not a nihilist in any way. Nihilism is a tiring thing. There is, in my experience, a purpose to life, there is a purpose to all things. And spare me if you think I'm a Christian, I'm not.

Now, I have a problem with self-proclaimed nihilists like yourself who, obviously need to shout to the 7 winds that they're nihilists because it's easier to ascribe their apathy to a certain philosophy than to aknowledge the fact that they're just empty shells. I call that useless self-justification and I dislike it.

And you're not a nihilist. If you were, you wouldn't find it necessary to justify nihilism to me or tell me that you are a true nihilist and I'm not. I know I am not a nihilist. But I did had, at some point, nihilistic tendencies.

Once again, I am not a nihilist in any way. Nihilism is a tiring thing. There is, in my experience, a purpose to life, there is a purpose to all things. And spare me if you think I'm a Christian, I'm not.
I was making a joke earlier, but I still don't understand how you can say that you found a purpose (or spirituality, whatever) by being exhausted with nihilism.

I was making a joke earlier, but I still don't understand how you can say that you found a purpose (or spirituality, whatever) by being exhausted with nihilism.

The exhaustion, on my part, was the very absence of purpose.

nothing can be known or communicated.

That isn't quite nihilism, that's more anti-realism or perhaps extreme existentialism.

Dictionaries are made by people who hate nihilist. Look at the definition here... www.anus.com no, its not porn...
Yeah, I've been reading that site since you posted the link. I'm still not sure whether it is an elaborate piece of self-parody or not, though I'm definitely leaning in that direction.

I have always have conflicts with false nihilist like yourself because unlike me they believe in too many things for my liking.

Pardon, but I had to intrude on this strange discussion to point out a couple highly humorous contradictions in your post (mostly centering around this particular statement).

Firstly, by using the word "false" before "nihilist", you are stating that there is some kind of objective standard by which one can say, "This person is a nihilist; that person is not." You are claiming to have some kind of objective authority to proclaim true 'believers' from false ones, which is absolutely antithetical to the very idea of nihilism. Nihilism doesn't just claim that there is no purpose to existence; nihilism claims that any proposition of "meaning" is inherently contradictory (or "meaningless")--as Nietzsche stated, it is what happens when the "world-denying idealist" becomes an ideal-denier as well. When both the physical world and the ideal world are denied, nothing remains--all justification, all meaning, all purpose, all ideas, all objects, are inherently without meaning and cannot be given meaning through any process. (This is part of why I was so baffled to find that the "American Nihilist Underground Society" believed that nihilism could produce "practical" meaning--but that is a wholly separate discussion.) Because you have stated that you are a "true" nihilist and that another is a "false" nihilist, you are saying there is some kind of "ideal" nihilist which you are like, and which another is not. Thus, you have made a logical contradiction--ideal things have already been denied, yet you lay claim to them.

Secondly, I wanted to make specific references to the website you linked, www.anus.com (which I have to admit, the title took me aback at first). Particularly, I wanted to quote:

Nihilism needs no justification. It follows the pattern of nature, which is evolution: successive replacement of previous forms of organization ("order","design") with better ones. (taken from The Nihilist Manifesto (http://www.anus.com/zine/nihilism/))

This is extremely interesting, because it means that the author of this section (I will avoid presuming that only one person wrote the entire manifesto) has assumed that there is some way by which different forms of "order" or "design" can be compared--that is, the overall system can "evolve" through some form of selection. That sentiment seems highly contradictory to the idea of philosophical nihilism, which is, "A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated."
Logically, it is required that if one system of "order" or "design" is to be used over another, it must be more valuable in *some* sense, be it idealistically, realistically, materialistically, "universe-holistically" (my term, used to describe the mind/body unification as discussed on anus.com). There must, of necessity, be a rational difference in the value of the two things, or else the choice is made irrationally, which does not seem to be the indication of the website.
Therefore, whoever wrote this section of the Nihilist Manifesto cannot logically be a nihilist. They obviously have seen that, regardless of whether or not objective truth exists or can be accessed, it is possible to place some form of value on anything encountered in existence, and that differences in that value can be used as rational justification for decisions made. This is not nihilism, it is simply a form of nondualistic, nondeterministic skepticism which isn't above re-checking its prior decisions.

If I have made an error in my reasoning, please, point it out so that it may be corrected. I definitely prefer to be corrected than to be wrong. (How else can I become better?)

As for my response to the initial post of this topic, I have never been able to really understand nihilism. Of course, I was raised a Christian, which certainly doesn't improve one's chances of holding a nihilistic viewpoint, but I have very carefully thought over my beliefs and philosophies and have chosen what I believe, rather than simply accepting them blindly because I was told to. Abdication of one's free will is a terrible thing, whether it be abdicating because of perceived social or familial requirements, or because of emotional reason (such as becoming Satanist to "get back" at one's parents).
I have always believed that there is a purpose and a reason for things being the way they are. One of those reasons is Natural Law. Before Newton codified the universal law of gravitation, did it still work? Yes. The equation still had meaning, even before there were living things on the Earth to experience it, and certainly before there were beings advanced enough to cognitively perceive it and rationally explain it. Another reason is the Cosmological Argument; all things which exist could also not exist, therefore, all things could *not* exist, which forces us to conclude that there is a *reason* why things exist in the way they do and not in some other way (such as not existing at all).

I believe that objective truth exists, and that it can be accessed, but that it is difficult to reach because we have to work through so many nuances of interpretation, situation, and definition. Thus, I believe that there is one, and only one, framework which is correct in all situations, under all logically possible interpretations, when the definitions are accurate and precise (that is, "correct," true both in theory and in practice).

Anywho, that's my two bits. It'll probably take three hours for the content filter to check to makes sure I haven't used any vulgar language, and by then my post may be so horrifically outdated that it's become moot, but that's to be expected. Hope you all have a good day.

I reject the idea of "objective" meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Objectivity are for scientific observation and measurements, things that can be represented in numbers and mathematical formulas. It has no place for inherently subjective topics like meaning, purpose, or values. I for one do not need some external values, create by yet another human, force upon me as though it is empowered by higher beings. To label them as objective makes it too easy for some people to push their beliefs as absolute truth.

For those who actually believe in objective values, is it not depressing to know that all your thoughts, consciousness, and ideas means absolutely nothing in the face of this greater objectivity? How is this external grand purpose, which undermines all your desires as a human being, empowers you at the personal level?

I fail to see how the rejection of nihilism offers any relief.

On the other hand, I believe that human, through their interaction with the world, are fully capable of creating meaning and purpose on our own. A nihilism view of the world does not make it meaningless. Rather it will bring out the true richness of human creativity and innovation.

How is this external grand purpose, which undermines all your desires as a human being, empowers you at the personal level?

I dislike the fact that you are inserting a 'stolen concept' into this sentiment. By answering this question, I would be agreeing that I believe that the existence of objective truth in a moral sense is preventing me from exercising my free will. This is not at all the case.

There is no physical law of the universe which requires that all beings kowtow to the truth. I am no less able to act in accordance with what I believe is objective truth than I am to act in contradiction to it. Nothing whatever is categorically preventing me from acting however I see fit.

However, if I wish to be a being which uses reason and which conforms to reality (because, by definition, objective truth would be a part of reality, no less than 3.14159265.... is a part of reality), I would have to act in accordance with my alleged objective truth. A mathematician can use any value they like for pi, but if they're interested in getting the right answer, they'll need to use one whose first nine digits look like the one I mentioned above. It's not a matter of being beholden to anything, as you claim; I am not enslaved by this objective truth I have claimed exists, any more than you are enslaved to the idea that the only function for which f(x) = f'(x) (the only function whose derivative is identical to the original function) is f(x) = e^x.

Free will enables me to choose any path I like, morally, ethically, and valuationally. But, in order for my path to be the correct path, I believe it has to follow certain knowable, objective guidelines to one degree or another; what those specific guidelines are is a matter of debate. But just because I believe in guidelines doesn't mean I am somehow robbed of the ability to think and feel and choose.

Thus, because I do not have any sensation of "enslavement to the objective", and because logic tells me that the existence of objective moral truth does not preclude my ability to freely choose, I do find objectivity in the moral/ethical/value sphere to be quite a bit better than nihilism. Nihilism tells me that I am a meaningless nothing, everything I do is merely a string of meaningless nothings, and that all of the spectacular things I have ever encountered in existence are nothing but spurious fluctuations in the entropic equilibrium, random and temporary phenomena that signify nothing beyond being random and temporary. Objective morality, valuation, and ethics, however, tells me that all of the aforementioned things DO have some sort of meaning, which can be determined, and that what nihilism calls a fluke is, in fact, a precious, desirable, and worthy state of affairs.

We are not a gas in thermal equilibrium, we are people who can think and feel and choose to be better. How we become better is something we have to work on, but that we can become better is undeniable, in an objective setting. We may still be working on finding all the pieces of the objective framework, may still be figuring out how those pieces connect together correctly, but we *can* do it. Nihilism says we can't. So, in the end, I feel more limited by nihilism than I do by objectivity--objectivity says there is one path which is right, and that that path can be found; nihilism says there is no path, and no one can find anything like a path, no matter what we do. I'd personally much rather the former be true, and both my logical understanding and my emotional understanding points me in that direction.

Firstly, by using the word "false" before "nihilist", you are stating that there is some kind of objective standard by which one can say, "This person is a nihilist; that person is not." You are claiming to have some kind of objective authority to proclaim true 'believers' from false ones, which is absolutely antithetical to the very idea of nihilism.

No actually, this is not the case. You seem to misunderstand what nihilism actually is. Nihilism is not against objective characterisation, only against objective meaning or value, to be against objective characterisations altogether, that would make you an anti-realist, which is similar, but not quite the same.


Nihilism doesn't just claim that there is no purpose to existence; nihilism claims that any proposition of "meaning" is inherently contradictory (or "meaningless")--as Nietzsche stated

And Nietzsche is a lot more than just a nihilist, and Nietzche is not in any way an ultimate authority on this matter either.

I never proclaimed myself a nihilist. I merely said I thought like one when I was younger. I'm not of that mindset anymore.


Nihilism is not tiring. Is relaxing and liberating.


Once again, I am not a nihilist in any way. Nihilism is a tiring thing. There is, in my experience, a purpose to life, there is a purpose to all things. And spare me if you think I'm a Christian, I'm not.


I know, you have shouted to the 7 winds you are an agnostic deist. :p


Now, I have a problem with self-proclaimed nihilists like yourself who, obviously need to shout to the 7 winds that they're nihilists because it's easier to ascribe their apathy to a certain philosophy than to aknowledge the fact that they're just empty shells. I call that useless self-justification and I dislike it.


Don't start a thread about nihilism and you wont hear about us. I am no apathetic in any sense, neither empty. I just believe that all meaning that fill me come from myself not from something objective or absolute.


And you're not a nihilist. If you were, you wouldn't find it necessary to justify nihilism to me or tell me that you are a true nihilist and I'm not. I know I am not a nihilist. But I did had, at some point, nihilistic tendencies.

Sure those were nihilistic tendencies an not just teen angst? I went all the way from teen angst to fatalism to nihilism. And when I reached nihilism i felt liberated and much more relaxed.

Yeah, I've been reading that site since you posted the link. I'm still not sure whether it is an elaborate piece of self-parody or not, though I'm definitely leaning in that direction.

The guy who wrote it is death serious about it. That shows you how self proclaimed nihilist have nothing to do with dictionary definitions.

Pardon, but I had to intrude on this strange discussion to point out a couple highly humorous contradictions in your post (mostly centering around this particular statement)....


Yes Aelyria, not sure if you noticed the "true scot(man)...nihilist" ironic part of my post. Let me make it clear, I disagree with the guys from www.anus.com as much as i disagree with Nanatsu No Tsuki on their definition of Nihilism. I post the site as an example of how differently self proclaimed Nihilist saw themselves from dictionary definitions.


I reject the idea of "objective" meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Objectivity are for scientific observation and measurements, things that can be represented in numbers and mathematical formulas. It has no place for inherently subjective topics like meaning, purpose, or values. ... .

This is much more similar with what I understand as nihilism.

So thats what its called.
Well sort of, I guess it fits my basic beliefs that there is no meaning or purpose to life, it just is. I dont know how I would go about practicing it though.

Right now, I'm just too happy with my life to question my existance. :)

Right now, I'm just too happy with my life to question my existance. :)

A nihilist doesn't questions his existence, he questions absolutes.

Nihilism is not tiring. Is relaxing and liberating.

I know, you have shouted to the 7 winds you are an agnostic deist. :p

Because I am an agnostic.:wink:

Don't start a thread about nihilism and you wont hear about us. I am no apathetic in any sense, neither empty. I just believe that all meaning that fill me come from myself not from something objective or absolute.

I created this thread precisely to hear about others who've through it, same as I did.

Sure those were nihilistic tendencies an not just teen angst? I went all the way from teen angst to fatalism to nihilism. And when I reached nihilism i felt liberated and much more relaxed.

Not me. My nihilism exhausted me.

I dislike the fact that you are inserting a 'stolen concept' into this sentiment.

Since you accuse me of stealing a concept,

Define stolen concept.
also define what's not a stolen concept.

If someone else said the same thing, I am sorry I didn't read it. Although I am not surprise if someone else did.

Thus, because I do not have any sensation of "enslavement to the objective", and because logic tells me that the existence of objective moral truth does not preclude my ability to freely choose, I do find objectivity in the moral/ethical/value sphere to be quite a bit better than nihilism. Nihilism tells me that I am a meaningless nothing, everything I do is merely a string of meaningless nothings, and that all of the spectacular things I have ever encountered in existence are nothing but spurious fluctuations in the entropic equilibrium, random and temporary phenomena that signify nothing beyond being random and temporary. Objective morality, valuation, and ethics, however, tells me that all of the aforementioned things DO have some sort of meaning, which can be determined, and that what nihilism calls a fluke is, in fact, a precious, desirable, and worthy state of affairs.

We are not a gas in thermal equilibrium, we are people who can think and feel and choose to be better. How we become better is something we have to work on, but that we can become better is undeniable, in an objective setting. We may still be working on finding all the pieces of the objective framework, may still be figuring out how those pieces connect together correctly, but we *can* do it. Nihilism says we can't. So, in the end, I feel more limited by nihilism than I do by objectivity--objectivity says there is one path which is right, and that that path can be found; nihilism says there is no path, and no one can find anything like a path, no matter what we do. I'd personally much rather the former be true, and both my logical understanding and my emotional understanding points me in that direction.

From what I am seeing, you freely choose to believe in objective meanings, purposes, and values. That it has no influence in your free will. Would that be accurate?

Just out of curiosity, what guidelines do you follow in determining that a value, meaning, or purpose is objective?

....

Nihilism doesn't denies the existence of an objective true. Only of an objective meaning, purpose or value. Those things are human-made, subjective not objective and NOT ABSOLUTE.

Not me. My nihilism exhausted me.

*Hugs Nanatsu no Tsuki*

Then you did well to move on.

*Hugs Nanatsu no Tsuki*

Then you did well to move on.

Huggles?:eek2:

I always think back on that period as being one influenced by the people I was hanging out with and the books I was reading.

:fluffle:

Huggles?:eek2:

I always think back on that period as being one influenced by the people I was hanging out with and the books I was reading.

:fluffle:

Aren't all periods influenced by people you hang out and the books you read? :p

but I understand what you mean. I had my very special ninja period...:$

A nihilist doesn't questions his existence, he questions absolutes.

I question nothing. :)

I question nothing. :)

GOOD!... nothing is an absolute concept.

*gives VKZ a cookie*

Aren't all periods influenced by people you hang out and the books you read? :p

but I understand what you mean. I had my very special ninja period...:$

:D
It is, in many ways. But at some point you have to start developing a way of being that's free of influence by peers or what you read or listen to.

I had, what Mexicans call, a "fresa" stage. I'm not too proud of it.:$

GOOD!... nothing is an absolute concept.

*gives VKZ a cookie*

Yayz! *Eats cookie*

Right now, I'm just too happy with my life to question my existance. :)

Is this an invitation for me to make you miserable?
or les miserables?


Sorry pun was horrible

Since you accuse me of stealing a concept,

Define stolen concept.
also define what's not a stolen concept.

If someone else said the same thing, I am sorry I didn't read it. Although I am not surprise if someone else did.

I must apologize, I used an incorrect term. (I'm currently operating on about five hours sleep in the last day or so, and should have been in bed several hours ago, so I ask that you forgive my error.)

I had meant to say that you had used the fallacy of the loaded question as described here on Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question)

A loaded question is a question which actually has a second, "hidden" question embedded in it. Two common examples--usually used as jokes, because most people can immediately see the fallacy, but can't solve it--are as follows:

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? (This question is the same as assuming that the wife has been beaten, even if she isn't. If the answerer says yes, then that means he used to beat his wife; if he answers no, that means he hasn't stopped beating his wife. Either way, he admits to beating his wife, even if he hasn't.)

Have you told your parents that you are gay? (This one presumes that the person answering is gay, regardless of whether or not they actually are gay. If they say yes, that means they told their parents they're gay. If they say no, then that means they're still in the closet--but still, admitting to being gay.)

I was basically saying that you were forcing me to agree that objective truth, particularly in the moral/ethical/value sense, implies the nonexistence of free will, which has not been proven, and I endeavored to show that the opposite could in fact be true (that objective morals/ethics/values could be less opposed to free will than nihilism).

((Incidentally, if you're still interested in what "stolen concepts" are, you can read about that on Wikipedia too. It's only one section in an article dealing with a broader topic, but it may help anyway: Self-refuting ideas: indirectly-denying statements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea#Indirectly_self-denying_statements_or_.22fallacy_of_the_stolen_concept.22), also known as "the fallacy of the stolen concept."))

Just out of curiosity, what guidelines do you follow in determining that a value, meaning, or purpose is objective?

Well, as I stated earlier, I'm a Christian (I might have been a little ambiguous about that, I tend to get a little wordy if you haven't noticed. *rolls eyes at self*) so I use the words, philosophies, and instructions of Christ as my foundational principles.

Particularly, I hold the two passages in the Bible regarding "the greatest commandment, and the second, which is like it," as being some of the most important. I'll quote one of them for you here; just in case anyone is interested, I will give the verse numbers for the other, as well. (Please note, all quotations will be taken from the New International Version, as I find it to be the clearest for reading and understanding.)

Matthew 22:34-40:
Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:

"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
(Links to the appropriate verses:
Matthew 22:34-40 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:34-40&version=31), Mark 12:34-40 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2012:28-34;&version=31;))

I also use 1 Corinthians 13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2013&version=31) as my definition for what Jesus was telling us to do when he instructed us to "love your neighbor as yourself." It's a little long to quote all of it here, so I'll just let you click the link if you're interested in the specifics.

I hope that this helps. I try very, very hard to stick to the teachings of Christ. I miss the mark. A lot. But I get back up again because he told us that humans miss the mark, being imperfect beings, but through him we are forgiven. I understand if you disagree; I would, of course, prefer that you agree with me, but I think the feeling is mutual in that regard no matter what the argument is about, yes? :P

EDIT:
I apologize for the double-post. I had thought someone would have already replied by now...if needed, I can c/p this post into the previous one and then delete this post.

I must apologize, I used an incorrect term. (I'm currently operating on about five hours sleep in the last day or so, and should have been in bed several hours ago, so I ask that you forgive my error.)

I had meant to say that you had used the fallacy of the loaded question as described here on Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question)

A loaded question is a question which actually has a second, "hidden" question embedded in it. Two common examples--usually used as jokes, because most people can immediately see the fallacy, but can't solve it--are as follows:

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? (This question is the same as assuming that the wife has been beaten, even if she isn't. If the answerer says yes, then that means he used to beat his wife; if he answers no, that means he hasn't stopped beating his wife. Either way, he admits to beating his wife, even if he hasn't.)

Have you told your parents that you are gay? (This one presumes that the person answering is gay, regardless of whether or not they actually are gay. If they say yes, that means they told their parents they're gay. If they say no, then that means they're still in the closet--but still, admitting to being gay.)

I was basically saying that you were forcing me to agree that objective truth, particularly in the moral/ethical/value sense, implies the nonexistence of free will, which has not been proven, and I endeavored to show that the opposite could in fact be true (that objective morals/ethics/values could be less opposed to free will than nihilism).

((Incidentally, if you're still interested in what "stolen concepts" are, you can read about that on Wikipedia too. It's only one section in an article dealing with a broader topic, but it may help anyway: Self-refuting ideas: indirectly-denying statements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea#Indirectly_self-denying_statements_or_.22fallacy_of_the_stolen_concept.22), also known as "the fallacy of the stolen concept."))

Thanks for clearing this up. As far as it being a loaded question,

me:
How is this external grand purpose, which undermines all your desires as a human being, empowers you at the personal level?
your response:
I dislike the fact that you are inserting a 'stolen concept' into this sentiment. By answering this question, I would be agreeing that I believe that the existence of objective truth in a moral sense is preventing me from exercising my free will. This is not at all the case.

As I said before, i do not believe that meaning, purpose, or values can be objective. But for the moment I will assume it does exist.

Objectiveness comes from a representation of an absolute state. To say meaning, purpose, and value can be objective is to also give them an absolute state. Correctness will then be considered by how close the representation is in compare to this absolute.

Note that it doesn't stop you from exercising free will. You certainly have the choice to deviate from the absolute values. But doing so will, by definition, make you immoral and unethical. To me that's enough to be passed as "undermines all your desires as a human being", because this one set of absolute is inherently greater than any human values that isn't the same as it.

Or to rephrase the question

How is this external grand purpose, which offers a standard definition of correctness in both moral and ethical sense, empowers you at the personal level as it simultaneously undermines all the other meanings, purpose, or values that you might have?

I dislike the fact that you are inserting a 'stolen concept' into this sentiment. By answering this question, I would be agreeing that I believe that the existence of objective truth in a moral sense is preventing me from exercising my free will. This is not at all the case.


I agree, believing something doesn't prevents you from exercising your free will.


There is no physical law of the universe which requires that all beings kowtow to the truth. I am no less able to act in accordance with what I believe is objective truth than I am to act in contradiction to it. Nothing whatever is categorically preventing me from acting however I see fit.

However, if I wish to be a being which uses reason and which conforms to reality (because, by definition, objective truth would be a part of reality, no less than 3.14159265.... is a part of reality), I would have to act in accordance with my alleged objective truth. A mathematician can use any value they like for pi, but if they're interested in getting the right answer, they'll need to use one whose first nine digits look like the one I mentioned above. It's not a matter of being beholden to anything, as you claim; I am not enslaved by this objective truth I have claimed exists, any more than you are enslaved to the idea that the only function for which f(x) = f'(x) (the only function whose derivative is identical to the original function) is f(x) = e^x.


No. Functions do NOT exist in the real world. e^2 is a human construct, an abstraction of an observable and objective reality. But abstractions are inevitable subjective. Fortunately we have come to an agreement and accept an standard. As with PI. The relationship between a circle circumference and its radius belongs to reality but the abstraction (the number) of that relation its a human construct.


Free will enables me to choose any path I like, morally, ethically, and valuationally. But, in order for my path to be the correct path, I believe it has to follow certain knowable, objective guidelines to one degree or another; what those specific guidelines are is a matter of debate. But just because I believe in guidelines doesn't mean I am somehow robbed of the ability to think and feel and choose.


... unless you accept them without questioning them.


Thus, because I do not have any sensation of "enslavement to the objective", and because logic tells me that the existence of objective moral truth does not preclude my ability to freely choose, I do find objectivity in the moral/ethical/value sphere to be quite a bit better than nihilism. Nihilism tells me that I am a meaningless nothing, everything I do is merely a string of meaningless nothings, and that all of the spectacular things I have ever encountered in existence are nothing but spurious fluctuations in the entropic equilibrium, random and temporary phenomena that signify nothing beyond being random and temporary. Objective morality, valuation, and ethics, however, tells me that all of the aforementioned things DO have some sort of meaning, which can be determined, and that what nihilism calls a fluke is, in fact, a precious, desirable, and worthy state of affairs.


Nihilism doesn't stands for anything like this. Nihilism tells you to create your own meaning. That those meanings are yours and not absolute doesn't means they are worthless. The universe for the nihilist is full of meaning, just there isn't one absolute unique true meaning. There may exist a true and an objective reality but the meanings we create from it are subjective.


We are not a gas in thermal equilibrium, we are people who can think and feel and choose to be better. How we become better is something we have to work on, but that we can become better is undeniable, in an objective setting. We may still be working on finding all the pieces of the objective framework, may still be figuring out how those pieces connect together correctly, but we *can* do it. Nihilism says we can't. So, in the end, I feel more limited by nihilism than I do by objectivity--objectivity says there is one path which is right, and that that path can be found; nihilism says there is no path, and no one can find anything like a path, no matter what we do. I'd personally much rather the former be true, and both my logical understanding and my emotional understanding points me in that direction.

How many times I have to say it....Nihilism doesn't denies the existence of an objective reality nor it means that the universe is meaningless.

I agree, believing something doesn't prevents you from exercising your free will.

I am still not sure how my statement gets interpreted as an argument against free will.

I am still not sure how my statement gets interpreted as an argument against free will.

Neither do I. I was commenting on Aelyria statement.

It seems the term nihilism has some confused. To clear the air, why don't we all give our definition of it. What is nihilism, according to you?

Nihilism is the belief which labels all values as worthless, therefore, nothing can be known or communicated. It also associates itself with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism, having no loyalties.

One can also make distinctions between:

Epistemological nihilism- denies the possibility of knowledge and truth, and is linked to extreme skepticism.
Political nihilism- advocates the prior destruction of all existing political, social, and religious orders as a prerequisite for any future improvement.
Ethical nihilism (moral nihilism)- rejects the possibility of absolute moral or ethical values. Good and evil are vague, and related values are simply the result of social and emotional pressures.
Existential nihilism- the most well-known view, affirms that life has no intrinsic meaning or value.

According to Helmut Thielicke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Thielicke), "Nihilism literally has only one truth to declare, namely, that ultimately Nothingness prevails and the world is meaningless." (http://openlibrary.org/b/OL4261475M)Of course, this is a Christian view of Nihilism.

It seems the term nihilism has some confused. To clear the air, why don't we all give our definition of it. What is nihilism, according to you?

Nihilism is the belief which labels all values as worthless, therefore, nothing can be known or communicated. It also associates itself with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism, having no loyalties.

One can also make distinctions between:

Epistemological nihilism- denies the possibility of knowledge and truth, and is linked to extreme skepticism.
Political nihilism- advocates the prior destruction of all existing political, social, and religious orders as a prerequisite for any future improvement.
Ethical nihilism (moral nihilism)- rejects the possibility of absolute moral or ethical values. Good and evil are vague, and related values are simply the result of social and emotional pressures.
Existential nihilism- the most well-known view, affirms that life has no intrinsic meaning or value.

According to Helmut Thielicke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Thielicke), "Nihilism literally has only one truth to declare, namely, that ultimately Nothingness prevails and the world is meaningless." (http://openlibrary.org/b/OL4261475M)Of course, this is a Christian view of Nihilism.

You forgot Zen Nihilism : the sudden and permanent flash of enlightenment involving coming to terms with the complete denial of the existence of anything including zen itself.

my nihilism is a mix of zen nihilism and ethical nihilism

You forgot Zen Nihilism : the sudden and permanent flash of enlightenment involving coming to terms with the complete denial of the existence of anything including zen itself.

my nihilism is a mix of zen nihilism and ethical nihilism

Agreed that that's your brand of nihilism.

I seem to have forgotten, too, Scientific Nihilism, which concieves theoretical science in general on the model of contemporary theories of physics.

I also would like to clarify that Ethical Nihilism doesn't means that there shouldn't be ethics or morals or laws in a society. But that those are human based and not absolute. And just as human societies change with time ethics and morals do the same.

I also would like to clarify that Ethical Nihilism doesn't means that there shouldn't be ethics or morals or laws in a society. But that those are human based and not absolute. And just as human societies change with time ethics and morals do the same.

That means that, since Epistemological and Political Nihilisms are tied to societies, when they evolve, these must evolve too.

That means that, since Epistemological and Political Nihilisms are tied to societies, when they evolve, these must evolve too.

I'm not sure about epistemological, since it depends on the concept of true.

But Political Nihilism is completely tied to society.

I'm not sure about epistemological, since it depends on the concept of true.

But Political Nihilism is completely tied to society.

Perhaps if the society in question became a stoic one, like Roman society used to be, perhaps there can be an evolution for epistemological nihilism, in regards to skepticism that is.

Perhaps if the society in question became a stoic one, like Roman society used to be, perhaps there can be an evolution for epistemological nihilism, in regards to skepticism that is.

In the sense of what knowledge is and how it can be obtained, yes.

hanging around the people I did never helped

Ahaha, what sort of friends were those?

Nihilism is the filthy truth They don't want you to realize.

Ahaha, what sort of friends were those?

Really weird, weird people. Those were my friends while I was a freshman and sophomore in college.

In the sense of what knowledge is and how it can be obtained, yes.

Nihilism, philosophy that evolves. I like that.