Again, let's bring this down to Earth. The mass shooting in Buffalo. It certainly seems to have unfolded in the cosmos. The shooter as well.
But then this part: his motives, his intentions.
Why did he choose to do what he did? How are the cosmic and the existential elements intertwined here? His Self in the either/or world and his "self" in the is/ought world.
And then our own individual reactions to it. What can be pinned down as in sync with the cosmos itself? And what seems instead to be embedded subjectively in our own individual lives lived in our own individual ways predisposing us to think our own individual opinions about things like "replacement theory" and race?
Again, who is arguing that anything unfolding here on planet Earth relating to race and the "great replacement theory" is not in the cosmos?
It's the fact that because each of us as individuals at any given time and place in any given society will bring our own childhood indoctrination and our own unique trajectory of personal experiences to these issues that precipitates the conflicts.
Something else to you perhaps, but my argument is that moral and political conflicts abound around the globe. And the objectivists turn to their own God or No God font: one of us vs. one of them.
Fine. But you more than anyone else here know that in discussing nihilism my main interest revolves around the question, "how ought one to live in a world awash in both conflicting goods and in contingency, chance and change?"
If you wish to go elsewhere with nihilism, fair enough. But my interest pertains to connecting the dots between morality here and now and immortality there and then.
Sure, if this cosmic meaning -- a God, the God, your God, say -- carved a list of Commandments in stone, there would still be conflicts regarding what God means. But to the extent this God revealed Himself as the Real Deal and set Himself up to resolve disputes, come on, we would be interacting in a very different world, right?
But it's not at all fiction for any number of, among others, evangelical Christians. For tons of Christians [some here no doubt], Jesus Christ/God is due to return any day now. And it's not micromanaging everything that most religious folks concern themselves with. It's who goes up and who gets "left behind".
Back to Buffalo then? Or over to Ukraine?
Yes. Though, of course, my mind frame of mind here is clearly different from yours.
Mine revolves around the conflicting moral and political narratives employed by those on opposite ends of the religious/ideological/deontological/genes vs. memes spectrum in regard to the "great replacement theory" and race. And in regard to Ukraine, Russia and Putin's attempt to bring the Soviet Union back together again...sans Marxism, socialism or Communism.
Yes, that's my point. We can talk about Buffalo and Ukraine here..."philosophically". But out in the real world actual flesh and blood people are choosing behaviors that bring about actual consequences for other flesh and blood people.
As a moral nihilist, my aim is to explore Buffalo and Ukraine and all other global conflagrations given my own set of assumptions about dasein at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, "rival goods" and political economy.
Not interested in taking nihilism there? Again, fair enough. Explore different aspects of it with others here. I've made it crystal clear, however, where my own emphasis lies.
As for your own emphasis on living taking place within the cosmos...I don't get it. Who here would deny that? Instead, the mystery here revolves around The Big Questions like why is there something instead of nothing, why this something and not something else, sim worlds, dream world, the Matrix. The multiverse. And truly perplexing quandaries that revolve around solipsism and around determinism.
The first step is to decide if there is a "human condition" or not. The author said that there is. Then logically, meaning is tied into that human condition in some way. But she avoids that conclusion. She disconnects meaning from the human condition and therefore from the cosmic. This seems to be a completely arbitrary decision on her part.
Or an existential decision rooted in dasein.
Again, trivial to you perhaps.
What do you think she is missing? And discuss that given a particular context. Or given your own interactions with others from day to day.
No, the part about connecting the dots between the existential and the cosmic that seems to be far more problematic is in the realm of conflicting moral and political and spiritual value judgments. How do we acquire them? Why ours and not theirs?
What can in fact, objectively, be pinned down here?
As a moral nihilist, I have my set of assumptions. As a moral objectivist, you have yours.
Okay, examine the assumptions and reasoning made by those on both sides of the political fence in regard to the great replacement theory and Ukraine. Is the truth [or lack thereof] here more a reflection of subjective personal opinions rooted in dasein or an objective reality rooted in God or ideology or deontology or nature.