PDA

View Full Version : Nihilism - What is the Solution?



Jack
Saturday, November 8th, 2003, 02:41 AM
What is the solution to nihilism?

I'm going to offer a definition of nihlism: the situation where the unanswered question is 'why'.

I have a feeling this could kick start an interesting discussion. Besides that, the question needs to be answered. Anyone with a possible answer - teleology, God, dialectical materialism, anything - is encouraged to post it. Discussion is encouraged.

Moody
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 06:40 AM
What is the solution to nihilism?

I'm going to offer a definition of nihlism: the situation where the unanswered question is 'why'.

I have a feeling this could kick start an interesting discussion. Besides that, the question needs to be answered. Anyone with a possible answer - teleology, God, dialectical materialism, anything - is encouraged to post it. Discussion is encouraged.

Nihilism is where the highest values lose their meaning.

Asking an unanswered 'Why' is not nihilism; that questioning could be of the Highest Value and meaning to the questioner.
Nihilism is when there is no 'why' ...

What makes you think your 'why' has an answer?
Why what?
Who is asking 'why' - and of what are they asking it?

Jack
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 07:43 AM
Nihilism is where the highest values lose their meaning.

Asking an unanswered 'Why' is not nihilism; that questioning could be of the Highest Value and meaning to the questioner.
Nihilism is when there is no 'why' ...

What makes you think your 'why' has an answer?
Why what?
Who is asking 'why' - and of what are they asking it?

Why exist. Why pursue happiness (if that's an objective). Why work to save Europe. Why live. "Because I feel like it" is the usual answer. "Why do you feel like it?" This is where no answer is provided. That's the problem. What is the solution to it?

Moody
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 05:24 PM
Why exist. Why pursue happiness (if that's an objective). Why work to save Europe. Why live. "Because I feel like it" is the usual answer. "Why do you feel like it?" This is where no answer is provided. That's the problem. What is the solution to it?

Those positions suppose Free Will for a start.
Existence is posited as a choice or an accident, rather than as a Destiny.

So, two solutions to Nihilism immediately present themselves;
Fate,
Destiny.

As to the 'pursuit of happpiness', shouldn't it be the concept of 'pursuit' that we address first?
Am I free to do anything else than pursue?
Does the Hunter have a 'choice'?

So the questioning problem is due to the false inculcation of 'freewill' in this culture via 2,000 years of Christianity.

'Why' makes no sense to the Man of Destiny.

"No conqueror believes in 'chance' ".
[Nietzsche]

Jack
Friday, November 28th, 2003, 06:43 AM
Those positions suppose Free Will for a start.
Existence is posited as a choice or an accident, rather than as a Destiny.

Destiny towards what?


So, two solutions to Nihilism immediately present themselves;
Fate,
Destiny.

Fate - oh well, event X is going to happen anyway, so let's just sit back, relax, and watch it happen. That's fate.
Destiny - Requires suspended contemplation. That's not an answer to nihilism, that's closing your eyes altogether and leaping into the abyss.


As to the 'pursuit of happpiness', shouldn't it be the concept of 'pursuit' that we address first?

The ends provides motivation for the means. I think the ends are what needs discussing.


Am I free to do anything else than pursue?

Yes. One can choose inaction over action, death over life, suicide over existance. Some people do.


Does the Hunter have a 'choice'?

He can starve to death if he chooses to. Political prisoners often go on hunger strikes and die.


So the questioning problem is due to the false inculcation of 'freewill' in this culture via 2,000 years of Christianity.

Actually, under pure interpretation of Christianity everything is 'God's will'. What makes 'free will' false?


'Why' makes no sense to the Man of Destiny.

Destiny for what?


"No conqueror believes in 'chance' ".
[Nietzsche]

Nietzsche did not believe the universe was an organism or a machine, but chaotic.

Moody
Friday, November 28th, 2003, 07:29 PM
"Destiny towards what?
Fate - oh well, event X is going to happen anyway, so let's just sit back, relax, and watch it happen. That's fate.
Destiny - Requires suspended contemplation. That's not an answer to nihilism, that's closing your eyes altogether and leaping into the abyss".

That's a nihilistic view of Destiny and Fate.
Think of the Greek Tragedies; something like Oedipus Rex.
Or else the Norse Ragnarok; indeed, the whole concept of cyclic history suggests a Destiny, a Fate ...
'Towards what?' - towards the life of the cycle, depending where you are on the wheel - prebirth, birth, youth, maturity, oldage, death, rebirth - and so it goes on.
We all either struggle against time [here I am thinking of Savitri Devi's Lightning and the Sun], within time, or we are above time; depending on the quality of our Will.


"One can choose inaction over action, death over life, suicide over existance. Some people do".

Prove to me that you have taken a choice. Show me how you could do otherwise.


"Nietzsche did not believe the universe was an organism or a machine, but chaotic."

He believed that things in the Universe Recurred Eternally in the EXACT form, thereby suggesting in that sense a supreme Order.
He also thought that the Strong Will desires, above all, Order of Rank.

Ominous Lord Spoonblade
Friday, November 28th, 2003, 09:12 PM
Why exist. Why pursue happiness (if that's an objective). Why work to save Europe. Why live. "Because I feel like it" is the usual answer. "Why do you feel like it?" This is where no answer is provided. That's the problem. What is the solution to it?

The answer to "why?" can always be "why not?" :)

Could a nihilist come up with a better answer to "why not?" than something along the lines of "because I don't feel like it?"


I don't see how there could be a "solution" to something like nihilism (anymore than you could find a "solution" to the opposite). It is more the whims of an individual -to believe in something or to not. To act, to not act. "To be, or not to be" :P lol The "solution" to nihilism rests in the nihilist. Isn't everything like this?

FadeTheButcher
Saturday, November 29th, 2003, 11:11 AM
What is the solution to nihilism?

To answer that one must determine what caused nihilism in the first place. Furthermore, why should one even try to solve nihilism? Why not say YES to nihilism? Perhaps nihilism is necessary. Nihilism can be a useful weapon.

friedrich braun
Saturday, November 29th, 2003, 11:26 AM
Nihilism is its own reward.

Jack
Monday, December 1st, 2003, 06:43 AM
Aloysha; "Destiny towards what?
Fate - oh well, event X is going to happen anyway, so let's just sit back, relax, and watch it happen. That's fate.
Destiny - Requires suspended contemplation. That's not an answer to nihilism, that's closing your eyes altogether and leaping into the abyss".

Moody Lawless; That's a nihilistic view of Destiny and Fate.

Obviously.


Think of the Greek Tragedies; something like Oedipus Rex.
Or else the Norse Ragnarok; indeed, the whole concept of cyclic history suggests a Destiny, a Fate ...

So what? Why is it worth reaching?


'Towards what?' - towards the life of the cycle, depending where you are on the wheel - prebirth, birth, youth, maturity, oldage, death, rebirth - and so it goes on.

In short, there's no point at all for anything, and there is no rational importance for anything.


Aloysha; "One can choose inaction over action, death over life, suicide over existance. Some people do".

Moody; Prove to me that you have taken a choice. Show me how you could do otherwise.

Prove to me I haven't.


Aloysha; "Nietzsche did not believe the universe was an organism or a machine, but chaotic."

Moody; He believed that things in the Universe Recurred Eternally in the EXACT form, thereby suggesting in that sense a supreme Order.

After chaos recycled itself that many times, yes, it would recur in exactly the same form. That's not 'Supreme Orderô', that's a cycle.


He also thought that the Strong Will desires, above all, Order of Rank.

Great to see you'll take advantage of a thread on nihilism to promote fascism, eh? No, I disgaree. The strong will carves his own path and it is of no importance to him whether others obey him or not, only that he creates for himself.

Siegfried
Monday, December 1st, 2003, 07:36 AM
In short, there's no point at all for anything, and there is no rational importance for anything.

Exactly. Rationalism brought about nihilism, and only instinct and spirituality will get us out (which is not to say we should all start acting in an irrational way; we just need to realize once more that reason is just one faculty among many others; it should be an integrated part of our being, nothing more). I suppose it is needless to say that nihilism is a sure sign of decaying civilization.

Jack
Monday, December 1st, 2003, 09:20 AM
Thanks for ruining the thread, Siegfried :(

Yeah, that's my entire point. Not metaphysical abstractions or God or anything like that. Just instinct. Life contains its own meaning. Happiness is the victory of the instincts through the mind.

Moody
Monday, December 1st, 2003, 08:13 PM
"Nihilistic? - Obviously.
So what?
Why is it worth reaching?
In short, there's no point at all for anything, and there is no rational importance for anything".

Look at the foundation - The Family.
Is there 'no point' in the family?
Why don't you take that nihilism to its logical conclusion?


"Prove to me I haven't made a choice".

I cannot prove a negative; YOU are the one claiming that choices CAN be made, not I. Anyone who makes such a claim should be able to back it up.


"After chaos recycled itself that many times, yes, it would recur in exactly the same form. That's not 'Supreme Order', that's a cycle".

And would things occur in the 'same order' in this recurring cycle?
Yes, hence a kind of order.
Take the example of aleatoric music, where repetition gives order.
A cycle has within it the notion of a return to its beginning - another aspect of ordering.


"Great to see you'll take advantage of a thread on nihilism to promote fascism, eh? No, I disgaree. The strong will carves his own path and it is of no importance to him whether others obey him or not, only that he creates for himself".

Moody; Show me where I mentioned "fascism"?
In case you don't know, 'Order of Rank' was Nietzsche's phrase [Rangordnung in the German].
Nietzsche says that the Strong Will desires this Rangordnung, not I; although I tend to agree with him!

Jack
Monday, December 1st, 2003, 10:37 PM
Jack; "Nihilistic? - Obviously.
So what?
Why is it worth reaching?
In short, there's no point at all for anything, and there is no rational importance for anything".

Moody Lawless; Look at the foundation - The Family.
Is there 'no point' in the family?
Why don't you take that nihilism to its logical conclusion?

I am taking it to its logical conclusion. Yes, that's right, there's no rational point to the family, or survival, or racialism or anything in particular.


Jack; "Prove to me I haven't made a choice".

Moody; I cannot prove a negative; YOU are the one claiming that choices CAN be made, not I. Anyone who makes such a claim should be able to back it up - you obviously can't, and seek to tiresomely answer a question with a question.

Nice. But I'm afraid free will/fate/destiny is a matter of faith, there are no bulletproof arguments for or against. Even ER can be extended to include free will.


Jack; "After chaos recycled itself that many times, yes, it would recur in exactly the same form. That's not 'Supreme Order', that's a cycle".

Moody; And would things occur in the 'same order' in this recurring cycle?

When it eventually comes about, yes. Though you're going to have a lot of cycles in which every other possibility were actualised.


Yes, hence a kind of order.

Ok.


Take the example of aleatoric music, where repetition gives order.

Or rap :)


A cycle has within it the notion of a return to its beginning - another aspect of ordering.

So? There's order. And every possibility in between (and there's a lot of them) are always realised


Jack; "Great to see you'll take advantage of a thread on nihilism to promote fascism, eh? No, I disgaree. The strong will carves his own path and it is of no importance to him whether others obey him or not, only that he creates for himself".

[quote]Moody; Show me where I mentioned "fascism"?


Your discussions are almost always geared towards it and you managed to find a way to insert 'order of rank' etc., into an argument about nihilism, something I find fairly irrelevant.


In case you don't know, 'Order of Rank' was Nietzsche's phrase [Rangordnung in the German].
Nietzsche says that the Strong Will desires this Rangordnung, not I; although I tend to agree with him!

Tend? You push it in most your threads. I accept Nietzsche uses the phrase. Nietzsche however is not God (metaphor).

dacoit
Tuesday, December 2nd, 2003, 11:57 AM
what's the difference between nihilism and stirnerite anarchism?

Moody
Tuesday, December 2nd, 2003, 06:18 PM
"I am taking it to its logical conclusion. Yes, that's right, there's no rational point to the family, or survival, or racialism or anything in particular".

There you have it - you say there is no point to racial survival: THAT is why I am opposed to you.
But even so, you have left out the last logical step: if there is no point, then why do you live?
The fact that you still live, BELIES you own stance - what keeps you living is the very point of life.
So your nihilism is not sincere - another reason why I am opposed to your position.

[quote]"Your discussions are almost always geared towards fascism and you managed to find a way to insert 'order of rank' etc., into an argument about nihilism, something I find fairly irrelevant".

One cannot speak of Nihilism without the figure of Nietzsche intruding; just as Nietzsche studied Nihilism, so did he too study Order of Rank [OR] - he put the latter in relief against the former.
That's why OR is COMPLETELY relevant here.
On my basic politics being fascist/N-S ... yes, and I will not apologise for that; nor will I change my politics with the wind.
I don't think you have shown the kind of analytical perception necessary to decide whether something of mine is 'relevant' or irrelevant', anyway.

I subscribe to "grand racialism"; that is, I recognise [as did Spengler, Gobineau, Jung et al.,] how a racial archetype is interwoven with the particular activities and characteristics of a race.

Jack
Wednesday, December 3rd, 2003, 12:08 AM
Jack; "I am taking it to its logical conclusion. Yes, that's right, there's no rational point to the family, or survival, or racialism or anything in particular".

Moody Lawless; There you have it - you say there is no point to racial survival: THAT is why I am opposed to you.[/quote]

No rational reason.


But even so, you have left out the last logical step: if there is no point, then why do you live?
The fact that you still live, BELIES you own stance - what keeps you living is the very point of life.
So your nihilism is not sincere - another reason why I am opposed to your position.

:)


Jack; "Your discussions are almost always geared towards fascism and you managed to find a way to insert 'order of rank' etc., into an argument about nihilism, something I find fairly irrelevant".

Moody; One cannot speak of Nihilism without the figure of Nietzsche intruding; just as Nietzsche studied Nihilism, so did he too study Order of Rank [OR] - he put the latter in relief against the former.

If you could put some more information (say, quotes or something) I'd be interested to see how Nietzsche contrasts OR with Nihilism. Personally I haven't seen it done - then again, I don't read the Will to Power.


That's why OR is COMPLETELY relevant here.

Fair enough then - let's hear it.


On my basic politics being fascist/N-S ... yes, and I will not apologise for that; nor will I change my politics with the wind.

I've figured that out by now. To be honest, I was and remain an Anarch of the type Siegfried covered in the other thread - the free spirited individualist. I am try to learn, and as such I have not had an ideology set in concrete in a long time, but I've come to believe Anarcho-Capitalism with my own personal racialism (whatever you may think of it) is the right way (for me - it might (and probably is) entirely inappropriate for you). But I shall continue debating regardless.


I don't think you have shown the kind of analytical perception necessary to decide whether something of mine is 'relevant' or irrelevant', anyway.

Analogy. Spengler was a fan of it. Let's you understand something of the organism you're studying.


I subscribe to "grand racialism"; that is, I recognise [as did Spengler, Gobineau, Jung et al.,] how a racial archetype is interwoven with the particular activities and characteristics of a race.

I understand the Spengler part - as for Gobineau, I haven't read him, and I'm only beginning to read Carl Jung right now - for my information, where did Jung cover racial archetypes (I know he wrote about archetypes of the collective unconscious - where about racial archetypes?).

Moody
Thursday, December 4th, 2003, 07:27 PM
"No rational reason".

Ad hoc qualification made after the event; you said that there is "no point in anything", first [on this thread], only adding 'rational' afterwards to try and get out of the hole you had dug yourself.


"If you could put some more information (say, quotes or something) I'd be interested to see how Nietzsche contrasts OR with Nihilism. Personally I haven't seen it done - then again, I don't read the Will to Power [WTP]".

You can't really discuss Nietzsche's ideas in this context if you haven't read the WTP. The first book of WTP is entitled 'European Nihilism', and it discusses just that in a very thorough analysis.
The fourth and final book of the WTP is entitled 'Discipline and Breeding', and it describes Nietzsche's philosophical response to this Nihilism.
Order of Rank is a key political response to Nihilism [just as the Eternal Return is a key cosmological response].
To show how wrong your interpretation of Nietzsche is, I can make this quick quote;
"My philosophy aims at an Ordering of Rank: NOT at an individualistic morality".
[WTP 287]


"I'm only beginning to read Carl Jung right now - for my information, where did Jung cover racial archetypes (I know he wrote about archetypes of the collective unconscious - where about racial archetypes?)".

The key text is the short essay called 'Wotan', written about 1936. Jung's fairly pro-N-S and anti-Semitic attitudes were manifest in the 1930s, but he 'revised' them out after the war.
See his attitude towards Freud's ideas as typically Semitic in this pre-war period; see also 'Mind and Earth' in Jung's Collected Works, X:46: also 'The Complications of the American Psychology', X:508.
See also the books on Jung by Richard Noll, which include 'The Jung Cult', and 'The Aryan Christ'.

Jack
Friday, December 5th, 2003, 12:15 AM
Aloysha; "No rational reason".

Moody Lawless; Ad hoc qualification made after the event; you said that there is "no point in anything", first [on this thread], only adding 'rational' afterwards to try and get out of the hole you had dug yourself.

Pretty short amount of time after the even then - "In short, there's no point at all for anything, and there is no rational importance for anything."


Jack; "If you could put some more information (say, quotes or something) I'd be interested to see how Nietzsche contrasts OR with Nihilism. Personally I haven't seen it done - then again, I don't read the Will to Power [WTP]".

Moody; You can't really discuss Nietzsche's ideas in this context if you haven't read the WTP. The first book of WTP is entitled 'European Nihilism', and it discusses just that in a very thorough analysis.
The fourth and final book of the WTP is entitled 'Discipline and Breeding', and it describes Nietzsche's philosophical response to this Nihilism.
Order of Rank is a key political response to Nihilism [just as the Eternal Return is a key cosmological response].
To show how wrong your interpretation of Nietzsche is, I can make this quick quote;
"My philosophy aims at an Ordering of Rank: NOT at an individualistic morality".
[WTP 287]

It's going to be a while before I read Nietzsche's Will to Power. Is it hosted on the net somewhere? If you've got a link that'd be useful, and I'd check it out as soon as I can. I've demonstrated how Eternal Return does not avoid nihilism. That WTP 287 quote - if that is what Nietzsche wrote, and not his sister, then I am not a Nietzschean. However I still believe his sister distorted much of his writings in 'The Will to Power'.


Jack; "I'm only beginning to read Carl Jung right now - for my information, where did Jung cover racial archetypes (I know he wrote about archetypes of the collective unconscious - where about racial archetypes?)".

Moody Lawless; The key text is the short essay called 'Wotan', written about 1936.[/QUOTE]

I'll check it out when I've got time.

infoterror
Saturday, December 18th, 2004, 12:53 AM
Much has been written about nihilism, most because for any great good in life, one needs an opposite, and that is the belief in nothing: that nothing is worth striving for, that nothing can have any meaning, that the individual and the world together are nothing. I refer to this as fatalism because, quite honestly, if one believes that little - not even in the pleasures of being alive, the basest of joys - then death is a gift and a deliverance. If your fate is so terrible, embrace it, and die well. Perhaps you can bestir yourself long enough to strap an explosive device onto your person and, running into some commercial orgy such as a mall during Christmas shopping, detonate yourself, clearing others of a subtler fatalism from amongst us.
(Read the rest...)
http://www.anus.com/zine/articles/nihil/

Nihilism
Plato created his famous metaphor of the cave to illustrate the two states in which humans live. He said that what we know of reality is like shadows projected on the cave wall by objects in front of a fire; silhouettes of what really exists. There's several ways to interpret this.
The first is the most popular way, in which there's a pure world somewhere and the physical objects we sense are pale shadows of that world. This creates a causal problem, because if this pure world exists, what created it, and why is there duality with this world? The usual response here is "God did it," which just gets silly when you consider the modern nature of God: some absolute being who like a democratic leader makes sure we all get tucked into bed at night. WTF LOL
Another way is the method chosen by the ancient Indo-European scribes who wrote the Vedas: to suggest that we can only know impressions of physical objects as filtered through our senses, thus the shadows we see on the wall are those impressions - whether of our own perception, or of social conditioning, is a questions moderns, who are beset by a constant stream of electronic images, have to contend with more than ancients, who actually had some peace and goddamn quiet in which to contemplate reality.
A nihilism is one who denies all value except the inherent; this means that nothing can be filed in neat categories like "good" or "evil" or even "profitable," but exists as it functions as part of the larger structure and design of nature. To a nihilist, most of what we know as "reality" is value associations conditioned into us by society and linked to objects, such that when we perceive the objects, we're seeing them as an adjunct to the socially conditioned value.
Nihilism is a mental bleach to remove these external, centralized, absolute controlling values, because if we're going to get anywhere in thought or even life itself, it helps to recognize reality (this would seem more evident than it apparently is to most people in this time). When these barriers are gone, we can begin to perceive life as a continuous system, instead of a barrage of values in conflict with one another.
For this reason, nihilists of the modern type consider nihilism a gateway philosophy, in that one can branch on to other disciplines, such as existentialism or integralism or naturalism, without becoming confused in the initial definitions required to appreciate such philosophies without projecting onto them the imprint of the social logic we've been taught, which in a modern time is a mishmash of scientific progressivism, utilitarianism, secularized Judeo-Christian dogma and industrial capitalist "Social Darwinist" rhetoric.
Nihilism, in the definition which we use, is not compatible with fatalism, or the belief that one can never know anything, do anything to change the world, or even have any values system whatsoever. Fatalism is the philosophy of those who would rather be dead, and thus it's healthy to be skeptical of any fatalists you encounter, because they seemingly lack the ability to off themselves yet persist in preaching their hopeless, dead-end, self-pitying dogma at you. Fatalism is not "modern" nihilism, as we call the kind of values-denial practiced here at ANUS.com.
One other thing that will conflict with nihilism is a type of quasi-fatalism disguised as the most positive philosophy over. In our society, the "progressive" worldview is quite popular; it states that we have steadily through morality and technology been pulling ourselves up from a primitive state, and someday we'll achieve a Utopic society. This view is bigotry against the natural world, and descends from the Christian ideal of a moral society, which in turn descends from the Jewish concept of "Tikkun Olam," or "repairing the world" - a world which doesn't need repairing, if one isn't so afraid of death that one cannot see its inner beauty.
It's precisely to escape this kind of insane worldview that nihilism is used in a modern time. We grow up under this doctrine of death-fear, which implements its disease by creating values that are contrary to death, such as ways of convincing you that you will live forever or that your life can be made meaningful only by implementing a progressive agenda, at which point you can feel good about your depressed and self-pitying self because you're doing the Absolute right thing.
Nihilism removes all this; it's like jumping out of an airplane without checking for your chute. Death is certain. Life is not. But reality is always preferrable to imaginary worlds and false values. If you can follow this trip, welcome to the world of nihil.
http://www.anus.com/zine/nihilism/

Nuovo Vesuvio
Friday, December 24th, 2004, 03:00 PM
let me think...eg WHY do i eat...WHY do i sleep...WHY do i go to college

a generalized answer could be because either society has required it of you, or you need it to survive, or it is for your enjoyment-out of your own will-because of emotion.

Is there any question based on WHY these three things don't answer? My brain is frying

In fact, it could be generalized further - the answer being emotion. You go to work buz you gotta earn money and you earn money to survive so you dont get disease etc so you dont experience PAIN STRESS SADNESS, and you earn more money so you can have FUN ENJOYMENT HAPPINESS. You listen to your mum cuz you dont want her to get ANGRY and you dont want to feel SAD. You go to sleep cuz you want to feel REFRESHED in the morning and you dont want to feel TIRED and LAZY. You eat so you dont feel BAD and WEAK and PAIN and so you feel HAPPY.

You get the idea...these all go back to emotions. Notice I have mentioned earthly activities. Spiritual activities to evolve as a spiritual entity that do not intervene with modern society are for spiritual evolution of self.

fms panzerfaust
Tuesday, August 9th, 2005, 10:54 PM
Nihilism emerges from frustration. Nihilism is about hate and contempt for society or humanity. Nihilism is not only about why but about how too, how to escape, how to find the middle way. Buddism is nihilistic, they try to reach the nirvana to escape from this reality and find something better than a cruel world.

Analise the history of humanity, it's always the same thing: men fighting each other for something that leads to procreation. This something is called 'status', in the past this was land, in the capitalistic era is money. The procreation is continuity of lineage, but is repetition too, the son will do the same as the father to acquire status, and then women, and then children, and this continues indefinitely. The man of ideas, founder of religions or a philosopher, generally is not a breeder, this can be seem in numerous examples throughout human history. He sees the repetition, and when try to think about it, nihilism emerges. Nihilism is escape from the repetition. The great nihilists, like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Evola, are not too much different from the buddists, as they too try to find the middle way through their philosophies. The escape from repetition, the liberation, this is nihilism, because you'll need to challenge the nothingness that comes from this thinking. Overcome the nothingness, try to put a bridge over the abyss to fo to the other side. Nihilism is a dangerous doctrine, especially to breeders.

Scholar
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 02:54 AM
I think its human nature to wants things and to have status. And procreation, are you kidding? That's the only reasonwe are alive is to procreate. Also, I feel it is a pitty that most religeous leaders do not procreate. The Greek Orthodox priests however can have children and they can pass on their ideologies and wisdom to the next generation.

Jack
Tuesday, August 30th, 2005, 12:25 PM
Nihilism emerges from frustration. Nihilism is about hate and contempt for society or humanity. Nihilism is not only about why but about how too, how to escape, how to find the middle way. Buddism is nihilistic, they try to reach the nirvana to escape from this reality and find something better than a cruel world.

Analise the history of humanity, it's always the same thing: men fighting each other for something that leads to procreation. This something is called 'status', in the past this was land, in the capitalistic era is money. The procreation is continuity of lineage, but is repetition too, the son will do the same as the father to acquire status, and then women, and then children, and this continues indefinitely. The man of ideas, founder of religions or a philosopher, generally is not a breeder, this can be seem in numerous examples throughout human history. He sees the repetition, and when try to think about it, nihilism emerges. Nihilism is escape from the repetition. The great nihilists, like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Evola, are not too much different from the buddists, as they too try to find the middle way through their philosophies. The escape from repetition, the liberation, this is nihilism, because you'll need to challenge the nothingness that comes from this thinking. Overcome the nothingness, try to put a bridge over the abyss to fo to the other side. Nihilism is a dangerous doctrine, especially to breeders.

Interesting. But incorrect.

Nihilism is dangerous, but for other reasons than what you speak. What it does is open up - it punches holes in every logical accounting for 'why' something ought to be done and it vapourises the barriers that account for 'why not?'. Nihilism is essentially about the liberation of man - from other men, from ideals, from Gods. It leaves him standing in a vacuous space with nothing to stand on and nothing to look up to. The idea is hardly as horrific as many would think it to be, but it has dangers enough to scare many away. We knew it as children. Why should we do something? Well, there is no reason why we should or shouldn't, but desire is enough :) But as our parents forbade us certain things - and reinforced these forbiddings with threats of various kinds - and then this 'forbidding' authority was somehow turned over to our 'reason', 'conscience', nihilism leaves this in tatters as well. Well then - these threats, instilled in us from childhood, driven into our minds and now called conscience - one could do little but accept those threats then. But were you threatened as you are now with the same threats, have you the strength to challenge them? No? Then have you the means to form a union of egoists and bring down the challenging power and stand over its ruins and claim all that none can take from you as your own?

Stirner's challenge beckons ;)

That said, nihilism generally isn't suited for most.

Q.
Tuesday, August 30th, 2005, 05:47 PM
Nihilism, in my opinion, proposes and spreads the idea of impious reflexion, scrutinising every criteria and aspect of life per se. Henceforth it is indeed maximum freedom of the individui (which doesn't aggrandise it though). But nonetheless, through this aspiration, it bears discord and even mental antagonism against the nature of human being. This pertains to the point, that the will to life is however the most active moment of mankind; it wields and ponders every single action;always, even if it is utmost unconscious, we try to preserve our personal, singular life, as the most precious of the things laden on ourselves. Nihilism on the contrary, as a weltanschauung:D, counters and oppugns this will, since it disavows even the most basal rules, set by anyone, even nature. Conclusively, Nihilism negates the principal of life, of nature as itself, and by all means can therefore be called, without being hyperbolic, unnatural. It enhances man above nature or god, if you believe in such a supranaturalistic phenonemenon.
This doesn't constrict someone from following and practicing this theorem, though.

Jack
Wednesday, August 31st, 2005, 01:09 AM
Nihilism, in my opinion, proposes and spreads the idea of impious reflexion, scrutinising every criteria and aspect of life per se. Henceforth it is indeed maximum freedom of the individui (which doesn't aggrandise it though). But nonetheless, through this aspiration, it bears discord and even mental antagonism against the nature of human being. This pertains to the point, that the will to life is however the most active moment of mankind; it wields and ponders every single action;always, even if it is utmost unconscious, we try to preserve our personal, singular life, as the most precious of the things laden on ourselves. Nihilism on the contrary, as a weltanschauung:D, counters and oppugns this will, since it disavows even the most basal rules, set by anyone, even nature. Conclusively, Nihilism negates the principal of life, of nature as itself, and by all means can therefore be called, without being hyperbolic, unnatural. It enhances man above nature or god, if you believe in such a supranaturalistic phenonemenon.
This doesn't constrict someone from following and practicing this theorem, though.

Nihilism does not bring discord/mental antagonism - this 'mental antagonism' is a result of nihilism meeting a mind not healthy enough to handle it. Nihilism cannot oppose life because life is not a slave to logic - rather, logic developed out of life as a necessary mechanism to enhance the practical potential of life. Nihilism is not unnatural simply because this distinction between 'man' and 'nature' is false - man is a part of nature, and anything man creates is therefore a part of nature also. Rather, nihilism frees man from his own creations, and opens up a path for man to heal his link with nature which he has ignored for so long. Nihilism compels nothing. Life compels everything.

Q.
Wednesday, August 31st, 2005, 02:56 PM
Nihilism does not bring discord/mental antagonism - this 'mental antagonism' is a result of nihilism meeting a mind not healthy enough to handle it.
No, I asserted, that Nihilism has, as a necessity, have to collide with the nature of human entity, since it denies or despises every kind of reglement, even those made and implemented by nature. And therefore is unnatural or rather: against nature. And this conception is independent and segregated from claiming, whether man and all his actions are natural, just because man is a part of nature. You abstract too much!



Nihilism cannot oppose life because life is not a slave to logic

So what?

vale

Karnos
Friday, December 8th, 2006, 07:40 AM
A little late on this but anyway, I'm a nihilist.

I don't ask for any "whys" or "hows" or any such questions; asking them would mean that there is a mystery to be solved, said mystery being the nature of existence, meaning, purpose, all of that meaningless crap.

I don't believe in any meanings or any other sugar coated ideas that will take some sense out of the nonsensical mess we live in. I see us humans as just hairless apes with an over evolved brain whose abstract triune evolution makes us looks for unnatural justifications in natural matters such as life and death and our inability in finding any sound explanation results in the endless array of religions, folk believes and scientific manifestos that try to give a squat meaning to something that very likely doesn't have any. I think Wessel Zapffe said it best ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Wessel_Zapffe ). Religion? Science? Philosophy? The beliefs might be different, but the dependence is the same; Jorge Luis Borges said it best: "I think Philosophy and Metaphysics should be considered as another form of Fantasy literature". For me, thinking there is a higher purpose, plan, or reason to behave like this or that is no different to Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy or Michael Jackson.

I chose to follow a path I laid before me because it is of convenience for me, as a living organism that consciously and unconsciously is looking for the best for itself, nothing more, nothing less... as crude as that.


The great nihilists, like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Evola, are not too much different from the buddists, as they too try to find the middle way through their philosophies. The escape from repetition, the liberation, this is nihilism, because you'll need to challenge the nothingness that comes from this thinking. Overcome the nothingness, try to put a bridge over the abyss to fo to the other side. Nihilism is a dangerous doctrine, especially to breeders.

The problem is this: There is no escape. Distraction is the best cure for an otherwise powerful drug commonly referred as "reality". Not thinking about any of this is the best thing one can do, and hey, this is the one solution Iíve found actually gives results.

For me nihilism is the contemplation of this situation. There is no backdoor to the universe, no way out of this charade, not even in death, because if life is meaningless then so is death. Trying to look for a way out of this mess means there is an exit out of the universe, but I don't think there is any at all. Buddhists can fool themselves all they want, and they might succeed at that, but when the **** hits the fan, their illusory escape will crumble as their brains turn to mush.

Moody
Saturday, December 9th, 2006, 02:47 PM
The great nihilists, like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Evola, are not too much different from the buddists, as they too try to find the middle way through their philosophies.

Schopenhauer was more of a Pessimist than a Nihilist [they are not the same thing], while Nietzsche believed that one had to go through Nihilism civilisation[/i]] and come out the other side with an [b]Affirmative philosophy.


A little late on this but anyway, I'm a nihilist.

It is never too late!
I believe that the Philosophy forums differ to many of the others in that long term discussions can take place over years, as they have here.

There are different positions in Nihilism;

"1. Total rejection of established laws and institutions."

This can be done in a passive resistance way, as well as;

"2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity."

This is slightly contradictory as "revolution" implies that one actually possess some values.
Only in the next case would it make sense;

"3. total & absolute destructiveness."

Even here we might say that destruction is given a value in and of itself.

This works around to the view that Nihilism is a belief in Nothingness.

So this needn't be destructive, angry etc.,

This leads to;

"4. Philosophical Nihilism:
a) an extreme form of scepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.
b) nothingness or nonexistence."

This is where our main interest should lie on a philosophy forum, although the more religious position of the next definition is related;

"5. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, especially as an aspect of mystical experience."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nihilism


I don't ask for any "whys" or "hows" or any such questions; asking them would mean that there is a mystery to be solved, said mystery being the nature of existence, meaning, purpose, all of that meaningless crap.

Is everything meaningless? Is your own Nihilism meaningless?


I don't believe in any meanings or any other sugar coated ideas that will take some sense out of the nonsensical mess we live in.

Do you believe in meaninglessness, poisonous ideas that are completely nonsensical?
Can you really escape belief itself?


I see us humans as just hairless apes with an over evolved brain whose abstract triune evolution makes us looks for unnatural justifications in natural matters such as life and death and our inability in finding any sound explanation results in the endless array of religions, folk believes and scientific manifestos that try to give a squat meaning to something that very likely doesn't have any.

But you believe in the "natural"; surely the "natural, the life and death" you speak of has a meaning to you - you certainly oppose that to the "unnatural".
So you believe in the "natural" as a positive value; you are not a true Nihilist.


I think Wessel Zapffe said it best ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Wessel_Zapffe ).

Thanks for that reference; although Zapffe seems to be more of a Pessimist than a Nihilist.


Religion? Science? Philosophy? The beliefs might be different, but the dependence is the same; Jorge Luis Borges said it best: "I think Philosophy and Metaphysics should be considered as another form of Fantasy literature". For me, thinking there is a higher purpose, plan, or reason to behave like this or that is no different to Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy or Michael Jackson.

If all this is fantasy, then what is "Reality"?


I chose to follow a path I laid before me because it is of convenience for me, as a living organism that consciously and unconsciously is looking for the best for itself, nothing more, nothing less... as crude as that.

So you believe in the outlook developed by the Theory of Evolution?


The problem is this: There is no escape. Distraction is the best cure for an otherwise powerful drug commonly referred as "reality". Not thinking about any of this is the best thing one can do, and hey, this is the one solution I’ve found actually gives results.

How is reality a "drug"? What is the non-intoxicated state?


For me nihilism is the contemplation of this situation. There is no backdoor to the universe, no way out of this charade, not even in death, because if life is meaningless then so is death. Trying to look for a way out of this mess means there is an exit out of the universe, but I don't think there is any at all. Buddhists can fool themselves all they want, and they might succeed at that, but when the **** hits the fan, their illusory escape will crumble as their brains turn to mush.

Isn't Buddhism essentially Nihilistic [Nirvana]?

You say "if life is meaningless" - are you not sure?

Or are you certain that life is meaningless?

What convinces you of that fact?

Is everything meaningless?

Is nature meaningless?

Is Nihiliism meaningless?

Ovid
Saturday, December 9th, 2006, 06:01 PM
The traditional definition of nihilism leads us to the conclusion: everything is meaningless, go and kill yourself, it does not really matter. But for me, nihilism is like the law of nature. It abandons all the values expect inherent ones. I mean, the values which are not created by human but the ones existing in the cosmos itself. When you remove all the unnecessary values, you may be able to find
which is really important. For example, the humans are not equal like most people nowadays claim. There are natural differences between the humans and we have to accept it; races are different.

SuuT
Saturday, December 9th, 2006, 06:34 PM
"As research probes further into the complexities of the human mind, it becomes clear that the mind is far from being a composite thing which is an actor upon its world through thoughts; rather, thoughts compose the mind, in the form of connections and associations wired into the tissue of the brain, creating circuitry for future associations of like stimulus. The schematic of this intellectual machine builds separate routing for situations it is likely to encounter, based on grouped similarities in events or objects. In this view of our computing resources, it is foolish to allow pre-processing to intervene, as it creates vast amounts of wiring which serve extremely similar purposes, thus restricting the range of passive association (broad-mindedness) or active association (creativity) possible within the switching mechanism of the brain as a whole. As here we are devout materialists, the brain and mind are seen as equatable terms.
The "positive" effects of nihilism on the mind of a human being are many. Like the quieting of distraction and distortion within the mind brought about by meditative focus, nihilism pushes aside preconception and brings the mind to focus within the time of the present. Influences which could radically skew our perceptions - emotions, nervousness, paranoia, or upset, to name a few - fade into the background and the mind becomes more open to the task at hand without becoming spread across contemplations of potential actions occurring at different levels of scale regarding the current task. Many human errors originate in perceiving an event to be either more important than it is, or to be "symbolically" indicative of relevance on a greater scale than the localized context which it affects, usually because of a conditioned preference for the scale of eventiture existing before the symbolic event.
Nihilism as a philosophical doctrine must not be confused with a political doctrine such as anarchism; political doctrines (as religions are) remain fundamentally teleological in their natures and thus deal with conclusions derived from evidence, where nihilism as a deontological process functions at the level of the start of perception, causing less of a focus on abstracting a token ruleset defining the implications of events than a rigorous concentration on the significance of the events as they are immediately effecting the situation surrounding them. For example, a nihilistic fighter does not bother to assess whether his opponent is a better fighter or not that the perceiving agency, but fights to his best ability (something evolution would reward, as the best fighter does not win every fight, only most of them). As a result of this conditioning, nihilism separates the incidence of events/perceptions from causal understanding by removing expectations of causal origins and implications to ongoing eventiture.
Understanding nihilism requires one drop the pretense of nihilistic philosophy being an endpoint, and acceptance of it being a doorway. Nihilism self-reduces; the instant one proclaims "There is no value!" a value has been created. Nihilism strips away conditiong at the unconscious and anticipatory levels of structure in the mind, allowing for a greater range of possiblity and quicker action. Further, it creates a powerful tool to use against depression or anxiety, neurosis and social stigma. Since it is a concept necessarily in flux, as it provides a starting point for analysis in any situation but no preconditioned conclusions, it is post-deconstructive in that it both removes the unnecessary and creates new space for intellectual development at the same time" (S.R. Prozak)


(http://www.anus.com/)

sheriff skullface
Saturday, December 9th, 2006, 08:45 PM
The traditional definition of nihilism leads us to the conclusion: everything is meaningless, go and kill yourself, it does not really matter. But for me, nihilism is like the law of nature. It abandons all the values expect inherent ones. I mean, the values which are not created by human but the ones existing in the cosmos itself. When you remove all the unnecessary values, you may be able to find
which is really important. For example, the humans are not equal like most people nowadays claim. There are natural differences between the humans and we have to accept it; races are different.

that use to be my defination of Nihilism too, when I was really young in junior high school and actually thought of fashioning myself as one and trying to vote in favor of making one president

but if you look at what Nihilism is really about, and what Nihilists and their organizations are really about, you see that there is nothing intellucually sound, noble or even helpful or worthwhile about it, nowadays I see Nihilism as nothing better than the opium of the masses

SuuT
Saturday, December 9th, 2006, 10:01 PM
...if you look at what Nihilism is really about, and what Nihilists and their organizations are really about, you see that there is nothing intellucually sound, noble or even helpful or worthwhile about it...

I'm afraid Nietzsche, Heidegger, Camus, and Derrida would beg to differ.

You might want to do some research on the distinction between Active v. Passive Nihilism. You seem to only be aware of the former (I think).

All Nihilists must deal with the issue of if and how life has value. This is the very topic which propelled Albert Camus' writing career, and as he observed, the Nihilist is not committed to life denial or suicide. He may, instead, elect to suffer through life in uncertainty, struggling each and every day with feelings of negativity as an option against suicide and death. As another option, he may choose to rebel against this negative propensity and instead of feeling resentment towards his situation, will himself to experience the exhilaration of interpretive freedom. The choice of the Nihilist is, then, not necessarily the choice between living or dying, but the choice between adopting a passive or an active stance towards the world. Both Camus and Nietzsche advocate the choice of Active over Passive Nihilism.


Passive Nihilism is indicative of a decline in spiritual power. It is characterized by the inability to create, or in the extreme, even to react. The Passive Nihilist is one who, when faced with the world's uncertainty, withdraws and refuses to engage the world. For him, uncertainty is a sufficient condition not to proceed through life, and so paralyzed by fear of the unknown and unknowable - he does nothing. Nietzsche describes this tendency as "...the weary nihilism that no longer attacks...a passive nihilism, a sign of weakness."

Active Nihilism, on the other hand, is indicative of a relative increase in spiritual power. The Active Nihilist sees freedom where the Passive Nihilist sees absurdity or meaninglessness. He chooses action and creation instead of passivity and withdrawal. For him, the lack of objective standards of truth motivates self created standards and criteria. The Active Nihilist is not active despite the unknown, but because of it. He possesses a store of creative energy and power which allows him to impose personal meaning on the world while never forgetting that he is the source and progenitor of that meaning. He is heroic in this sense, facing the world with courage and purpose.

Nihilism is its own cure - its own solution: a means of the purification of consciousness by an inversionary fire, sparked by Will.

fms panzerfaust
Sunday, December 10th, 2006, 01:53 PM
If I say that the earth was flat do you believe me? I read about this idea in a book by Tolkien, that is fantasy, but I saw a reality inside the myth, even it's was not materially aprehensible.

See for example, the myth about the fall into flesh. There is no scientific proof of a golden age where humans were immortals because there is no skeleton to analise.

Science is just another creed. Everything is a matter of what you believe or not.

I myself believe in seven senses, common people in five. I add intuition and reason to the five senses. A scientist can say that this is not right because cannot be aprehended materially. Some animals have less than five senses. Probably a eighty sense can be added, that of reality perception, but that is more far removed in terms of practicity.

The senses itself can be a value. The animals dont recognize the senses. They dont call vision "vision" because they dont known language. Heidegger said that the animal lives in a limited circle, enclosed by a "poverty" of world, that is not poverty at all, he tries to explain, is simply a limitation on reality of being.

If you thrown a ball to a dog and orders him to take it, he still dont perceive the ball as a ball, and the word "ball" for him is just a password to activate his running to get the ball.

So, the question of nihilism is not only about nothingness, or frustation about life, or a trying to escape. But it's about reality itself. The question of existence can be added to the question of nihilism in trying to re-define certain concepts that are always limited by the human nature or a human point of view. To see things from above, outside the human sphere, this is the contemplation in the active form of nihilism. Contemplation too, is possible, and can be put side by side with action without limiting the person (high being who knowns in a schopenhaurian sense, or high person in the evolian sense).

Karnos
Monday, December 11th, 2006, 03:07 AM
Thanks for the warm welcome, Moody. :)



Is everything meaningless? Is your own Nihilism meaningless?

Yes, everything's pretty much meaningless, my views (nihilism, whatever) included, since I (and everything that constitutes me) am in no way above this universe.


Do you believe in meaninglessness, poisonous ideas that are completely nonsensical?
Can you really escape belief itself?

Believing in meaninglessness sounds a bit contradictory, since usually belief is placed upon something that makes sense to the individual. Belief in, say, God makes sense to those who believe (or need) in Him, just the same way belief in flying saucers from Zeta Reticuli makes sense to many conspiracy nuts. I don't think I, or anyone, could believe in something that doesn't make sense to them. (For instance, I believe in my abilities to make a good job) Believing in something, though, doesnít mean that it has to exist. I really don't know how to put into words, but getting past the limitations of language, -or the brain-, I can tell you that I do no believe in, but know, meaninglessness... being overtly dramatic, let us say that I feel it on the flesh.


But you believe in the "natural"; surely the "natural, the life and death" you speak of has a meaning to you - you certainly oppose that to the "unnatural".
So you believe in the "natural" as a positive value; you are not a true Nihilist.

Whoever said life or death carried any meaning to me? :)Life is meaningless, and so is death. If all of the summer roadkill, or all the dead on a graveyard, suddenly started walking again, surely there'd be a lot of scares, but a scientist, or someone detached of the situation, would simply say "hmm, that's unnatural". And that's what I mean when I say "unnatural justification", Iím just putting thing into a nice palette all of us comprehend (nature)... life and death (nature) are meaningless, therefore looking for any meaning in them is looking for something unnatural. People are free to give life as many meanings as they want to, but that doesn't mean that the phenomenon we call "life" has any objective meaning at all. There's no positive or negative value in any of this, I'm just saying things plainly... if people hold life as a positive value, with or without meaning, good for them. Me? I just mind about my day-to-day business, if I were to die two days from now, what do I care? So I couldn't publish that anthology of fiction I'm working on, big deal, somebody burry this corpse already...




Thanks for that reference; although Zapffe seems to be more of a Pessimist than a Nihilist.

You're welcome. If you speak German, there are a few unofficial German translations flying around, and I think there's an English translation of "The Last Messiah", it was out in a magazine called "Philosophy today" or something like that. (I read that in another forum, I can look it up if you're interested)




If all this is fantasy, then what is "Reality"?

I don't know, (and neither do you :)) maybe nothing. The important question here is not "what is reality" but "why reality?", why should there be something objective and tangible, to begin with? The idea of everything being just a game of fog and mirrors is difficult to grasp, after all we're just three dimensional beings used to three dimensional thinking, but maybe this "thing" we live in just doesn't make sense. For all that we know, this world could be anything; the dream of a serial killer; a spontaneous play with no audience and no director; a nonsensical mirage; a bizarre ripple in an infinite void; or maybe god is crazy and imagining the whole thing while locked somewhere on a smelly padded cell... or maybe things aren't that bohemially complicated and we're just bags of sh*t, flesh and bones ready to rot with no other amusing virtue other than being born just to die seven or eight decades latter.




So you believe in the outlook developed by the Theory of Evolution?

What outlook? That more complex organisms can come out of less complex organism and existing organism can build defenses against environmental hazards? If that's what you mean I don't need to believe on it to see its effects in the short term on insect populations. Thereís nothing grand or metaphysically meaningful about it


How is reality a "drug"? What is the non-intoxicated state?

That's a form of speech ;)

But playing along with the logic of this form of speech, I can't tell you what's the non-intoxicated state, since I am speaking with you, which means that I'm still on the effects of this drug. Once I shake out of it, if I come back, I'll tell you what "the other state" is like :P




Isn't Buddhism essentially Nihilistic [Nirvana]?

I'm really not sure, since I'm not well versed in Buddhism. Perhaps it is, if you know a Buddhist you can ask him/her for a concrete answer. But as far as I know the state of Nirvana is a means to escape existence (correct me if I'm wrong) the problem is that you cannot escape; you, me, everyone, we're bound to this flesh and bones and their corrosive effects. Any escapades Buddhists and junkies make are inside their heads, and once the life support system shuts down, down goes Nirvana as well.



You say "if life is meaningless" - are you not sure?

Or are you certain that life is meaningless?

We're going to go in circles with this one, again thanks to the limits of language, but we can all avoid this if we do not focus in dissecting the semantics and instead focus on what is sincerely being said; some things, it seems, cannot be expressed without finding a contradiction within the context of the conversation, but that seems to be the way language developed: I'm certain life is meaningless, thatís it.

It's difficult to explain in English, but in my native language (Castilian/Spanish) "if life is meaningless so is death" does not point to doubt towards the qualities (meaninglessness) of an object (life), but it is used as logical statement within the context of what is being discussed. Itís like saying ďWeíre playing an RPG with certain rules; if you follow these rules you will advance to the next levelĒ. The ďifĒ is being used in the context of what is being said in the whole statement. Thatís the way I used it for my paragraph.


What convinces you of that fact?

History, observations, personal reflections and anecdotes, etc. These are not the kind of things you just open a couple of books and you're ready to embrace a horrid form of universal observation. This is very personal and has to be lived to be partially understood, just like that.


Is everything meaningless?

Yup.



Is nature meaningless?

That one too.


Is Nihiliism meaningless?

Of course it is! And thatís the idiocy of the human phenomenon.:(


He possesses a store of creative energy and power which allows him to impose personal meaning on the world while never forgetting that he is the source and progenitor of that meaning. He is heroic in this sense, facing the world with courage and purpose.



Thanks for writing this, Suut. In very few words you managed to resume what I think.

The difference between a nihilist and a non-nihilist is that the nihilist is always aware of hi own delusion.

oneeyeisbetter
Monday, December 11th, 2006, 08:20 AM
I used to be a nihilist till I had kids and a series of eye opening dreams.

I think making life happen can be the cure.

SuuT
Monday, December 11th, 2006, 12:59 PM
...
The difference between a nihilist and a non-nihilist is that the nihilist is always aware of hi own delusion.

Hmmm...

Positing a purpose v. Purposelessness = Delusion...

One would have to argue that the delusive state lay in affirmation; or, if you like, turning to face the world: and further, running at it full charge.

I cannot agree.

Your Nihilism seems to be of some intermediary form: somewhere in the limbo of 'preservation/reservation/acceptance/relative stagnation': your not passive per se; but you find position delusive.

Simply put, if I am deluded, and if I have the choice of opting for an affirmative (Life affirming) delusion that I can never be certain is a delusion; then it is not affirmative to call my 'delusion' delusive. Moreover, I have the trifecta of decision complete: I have an emotional, rational, and logical reason/position to affirm.

Why should I not?