Nihilism

[Received]

You always have Heideggerian being-towards-death, authenticity meaning. Man.

 

[The Nihilist]

You always have Heideggerian being-towards-death, authenticity meaning. Man.

In my life, that has done a great deal for me as a medicine and antiseptic. Like any other medicine or antiseptic, it is useful for removing what is diseased and toxic, but makes a lousy diet. All it does for me now is make me ignore small talk.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Maybe you're just a lame-o, then.

 

[Received]

Being-towards-lame-o.

 

[The Nihilist]

Aren't Lameo's an offbrand breakfast cereal?

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

A nihilist cereal brand.

 

[Received]

Like Cheerios without the sugar.

 

[Kalimar]

Nihilism is the pasture of meaning. Without necessary meaning, contingent meaning becomes possible and accepted. The solution to nihilism is to create meaning -- any meaning. Project for yourself a God -- any. Science, Bearded White Male, Female with Dreads, A Computer, A Ocean... All are equally valid so long as the meaning provides your life the sustenance to deal with ubiquitous nihilism.

 

[The Nihilist]

Nihilism is the pasture of meaning. Without necessary meaning, contingent meaning becomes possible and accepted. The solution to nihilism is to create meaning -- any meaning. Project for yourself a God -- any. Science, Bearded White Male, Female with Dreads, A Computer, A Ocean... All are equally valid so long as the meaning provides your life the sustenance to deal with ubiquitous nihilism.

Yeah, that's the option, and some days that works fine. But what if I'm not up to creating meaning? What if one day I'm just tired of this s__t and don't feel like dealing with it anymore? If all options and all points of view are equally valid, why not jump off a building because it sounds like fun? Why not shoot up a school because I don't like Mondays?

 

[Kalimar]

Yeah, that's the option, and some days that works fine. But what if I'm not up to creating meaning? What if one day I'm just tired of this s__t and don't feel like dealing with it anymore? If all options and all points of view are equally valid, why not jump off a building because it sounds like fun? Why not shoot up a school because I don't like Mondays?

Why not jump off a building because it sounds like fun? I don't know. Sure, as long as you're not going to land on someone or cause someone suffering with your decision (like a dependent child of yours) then there are no moral absolutes barring your action of jumping off a building.

You'll see that my faith is "oneness". I believe some morals are products of reason, and reason I believe is on some level universal and ethics result from reason. Ethics then, while seemingly subjective and product of human mind, can be universally agreed on.

Why not shoot up a school? From you even using the example, it's very clear to you why that is not tenable.

Nihilism isn't necessarily "evil", or "good", but it's not absent from reason either. Reason has its failings, yes, but that doesn't mean there aren't apodictic or axiomatic ethics.

 

[Axioma]

Like Cheerios without the sugar.

Sugar is just molecules, really.

 

[The Nihilist]

I used the example of the school shooting because it happened. Some young woman did it, and when asked why, she replied that she it was because she didn't like Mondays. The young woman is clearly a nihilist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Ann_Spencer
I don't believe in moral absolutes. I think morality is a matter of sentiment, and not everyone always feels sentimental. But why not cause suffering with my decision? I don't feel like shooting up a school today, but what if I feel different about it tomorrow? At base, there's not a reason not to do these terrible things, and an appeal to universal ethics is unlikely to dissuade someone who has already made a decision to carry them out.

 

[Kalimar]

I don't believe in moral absolutes. I think morality is a matter of sentiment, and not everyone always feels sentimental. But why not cause suffering with my decision? I don't feel like shooting up a school today, but what if I feel different about it tomorrow? At base, there's not a reason not to do these terrible things, and an appeal to universal ethics is unlikely to dissuade someone who has already made a decision to carry them out.

Well yeah, fundamentally there are no universal ethics, but within a culture or within a species (Humanity) you'll see that there are arbitrary values imposed whether justified or unjustified. We are not ethical relativists, are we? Can we claim one action to be better than another? If so, then we are not ethical relativists.

 

[The Nihilist]

I'm an ethical relativist, but on a social scale rather than an individual one. The only real power behind ethics, in my opinion, is the ability of a society to punish. But if that doesn't bother me, because I'm can apply whatever value system suits me, then there is no power behind anything. There is no argument that exists that can dissuade a nihilist from a course of action he has chosen. Not because he is stubborn, but because the words might as well be in Japanese.

 

[Kalimar]

I'm an ethical relativist, but on a social scale rather than an individual one. The only real power behind ethics, in my opinion, is the ability of a society to punish. But if that doesn't bother me, because I'm can apply whatever value system suits me, then there is no power behind anything. There is no argument that exists that can dissuade a nihilist from a course of action he has chosen. Not because he is stubborn, but because the words might as well be in Japanese.

Yeah, this is a fairly good summary of my own belief, but I will tell you that individuals can have access to universal-like ethics through the employment of reason. I justify this in that while conditioned by society, institutions of laws, language, values, etc, an individual may still reflect or attempt to reflect on their standing in the world. They may not get far in removing them self from the context they're found in, but so long as they've able to provide any insight whatsoever on their situation that is different, provides the ability to stamp ethical relativism as impossible as it gives them a contrast to their context.

 

[Received]

The employment of reason as a mediator for our affects; our affects determine what we value (as Nietzsche rightly held), for affects ultimately determine happiness. That's the closest to the basis of a universal ethics that you can find, for we're all wired approximately the same, genetic mutations aside.

 

[Kalimar]

The employment of reason as a mediator for our affects; our affects determine what we value (as Nietzsche rightly held), for affects ultimately determine happiness. That's the closest to the basis of a universal ethics that you can find, for we're all wired approximately the same, genetic mutations aside.

The problem with Nietzsche is that you're never able to escape perspectivism and the death of absolutes makes the pursuit for any just as mistaken, whether it is reason, science, religion – any "God".

I'm an undergrad in Philosophy and Political Science. One colleague of mine in the graduate department of Philosophy believed Nietzsche failed to solve the problem of nihilism because of this, and is writing his thesis on the struggle of Nietzsche to overcome nihilism.

 

[The Nihilist]

Yeah, this is a fairly good summary of my own belief, but I will tell you that individuals can have access to universal-like ethics through the employment of reason. I justify this in that while conditioned by society, institutions of laws, language, values, etc, an individual may still reflect or attempt to reflect on their standing in the world. They may not get far in removing them self from the context they're found in, but so long as they've able to provide any insight whatsoever on their situation that is different, provides the ability to stamp ethical relativism as impossible as it gives them a contrast to their context.

I'm not at all clear on what claim you're making here. Why do you think ethical relativism is impossible?

 

[Kalimar]

I'm not at all clear on what claim you're making here. Why do you think ethical relativism is impossible?

Because while society, and instruments of society such as language can temper people into a belief, as long as they're able to challenge that belief or consider alternatives, all ethics are not relative – they may be judged accordingly, but under what standards of judgment I do not know.

 

[Received]

The problem with Nietzsche is that you're never able to escape perspectivism and the death of absolutes makes the pursuit for any just as mistaken, whether it is reason, science, religion – any "God".

You'll have to explain this a little further. The term "mistaken" is a misnomer assuming that perspectivism is the case; the term implies an absolute -- or deviation from a standard within a set ethics based on perspectivism, which would also be a mistake given that perspectivism is the case. But I don't think Nietzsche was a full-blown perspectivist. He did believe in power as the absolute; cf. The Antichrist, where goodness, badness, and happiness are determined through the rubric of power.