nihilism

[Iwannaplato]

We could continue with this dialogue if out of all the faults who've chosen to underline, there was one inkling of understanding--- so basically, I am out of here.

I think I have an inkling of understanding right from the get go.

Here's the first thing you said....

Just a misunderstanding. It is well known in philosophy that subject and object can never be separated

This is a manipulative move on your part. A claim that philosophy has a single position and one that agrees with you. I said...

It's a postion some philosophers have. There are others. We have various realisms, idealisms, phenomenalisms, and more.

I can understand not wanting to try to defend such things. And that was just the first. You take care now.

[iambiguous]

What Are the Five Theories of Nihilism?
Curated by TheCollector

2] Cosmic Nihilism

Cosmic Nihilism is one of the more extreme theories of Nihilism.

And it is best explored theoretically because sans sim worlds/dream worlds and the like, there appears to be no getting around the fact that there is a world around us. And one way or another we have to make sense of it. And then all the parts in the world that are clearly either this or that. Not only can we attach meaning to them, but the meaning itself is applicable to all of us.

[Proponents of cosmic nihilism] look out into the wider universe, arguing that the cosmos is so vast and unintelligible that it acts as evidence of our minute insignificance.

Okay, but does that make our day to day interactions here on planet Earth any less substantive and substantial? Yes, it seems to be the case that if we mere mortals are not able to attach our life [and the meaning we give it] to one or another God or to one or another "spiritual path", what does anything at all ultimately mean given the truly staggering vastness of "all there is"? And even here that includes the assumption that we have the capacity to freely opt for the meaning we do ascribe to our lives "out in the world" with others.

Cosmic Nihilists noted how the universe is completely indifferent to our daily lives, thus reinforcing the argument that nothing we do matters at all, so why bother believing in anything or anyone?

Same thing, of course. The universe may be completely indifferent to us, but our families and our neighbors and our communities and our employers and our governments, etc., certainly are not. Yeah, "theoretically" or "philosophically" human existence may be essentially meaningless ontologically and purposeless teleologically...but our obligations don't just go away. And the bills still have be paid.

So, sure, technically, this...

Some even went a stage further, arguing that the things like love, family, freedom and happiness we hold on to so tightly are merely distractions to divert us away from the underlying truth that we are all just waiting to die.

...may all be true [and I believe that it is] but "so what?" For whatever personal reasons in a free will world, we choose to continue to do what we can from day to day to day to get the most pleasure and the least pain out of our "human existence".

We just happen to be the only species around able to explore the meaning of that in places like this.

[iambiguous]

What Are the Five Theories of Nihilism?
Curated by TheCollector

3. Ethical Nihilism

In contrast with the two theories of Nihilism discussed above [existential nihilists, cosmic nihilists], Ethical Nihilists focused specifically on the questions around morality.

In fact, I call myself a moral nihilist. Why? Because what can possibly be more important in our lives than in pinning down a meaning and a purpose such that we come to anchor our self in a foundation that permits us to differentiate good from bad, right from wrong behavior? No such foundation -- God or No God -- and those who embrace might makes right can prevail. Or the sociopaths who anchor morality in "me, myself and I" and can make life a living hell for others. And it is in rejecting objective moral absolutes that the best of all possible worlds can revolve instead around democracy and the rule of law.

Or, sure, differentiate it another way:

They argued that there was no such thing as an objective right or wrong. Ethical Nihilism is usually divided into the three sub-categories: Amoralism – a complete rejection of moral principles, Egoism – a view that the individual should only be concerned for themselves and their own private and interests, and Moral Subjectivism – the idea that moral judgements are up to the individual to choose, rather than being dictated by an outside authoritarian force such as religion or government, even if they don’t make sense to anyone else.

Either way and, from my own frame of mind, each of us as individuals will come to prefer one rather than another direction based largely on the manner in which I construe the nature of dasein out in a particular world understood in a particular way. The crucial point being that given nihilism as the starting point there does not appear to be a way [philosophically or otherwise] to concoct the most rational direction. And depending on the ever-shifting contexts in our actual lived lives, we will all slide in and out of them in various complex and convoluted ways.

[iambiguous]

duplicate post

[popeye1945]

The physical world is utterly meaningless, Nihilism is only true if you deny the meaning to your experiences. I know of no such creature.

[iambiguous]

What Are the Five Theories of Nihilism?
Curated by TheCollector

4] Epistemological Nihilism

If Epistemology is the philosophy of knowledge, Epistemological Nihilists were concerned with what knowledge was. They argued that knowledge is a false construct based on another person’s point of view, rather than unquestionable fact.

The bottom line here would seem to revolve first and foremost around the gap between what we think we know in what is presumed to be a free will world, and all that we clearly do not know about human knowledge itself going back all the way back to what we do not know about the existence of existence itself. Then the truly speculative parts where some posit sim worlds and dream worlds and solipsism and the like.

Me? It's straight back to the distinction I make between objective knowledge in the either/or world -- knowledge able to be demonstrated empirically and communicated among ourselves with little or no contention -- and knowledge in the form of "personal opinions" regarding conflicting moral and political and spiritual issues.

To argue that everything we know can only be deconstructed into personal opinions rather than objective truths still seems ridiculous to me. It's only when we grapple to connect the dots between the either/or world and the imponderables embedded in the truly mind-boggling Big Questions that, sure, none of us really have anything approaching a TOE. Let alone the capacity to demonstrate it "for all practical purposes".

Their philosophy might be best summed up with the phrase “we can’t know.” Instead, they argued that nothing is really known at all, and we should instead take a skeptical approach to life’s supposed truths, questioning everything around us and asking whether it has any meaning at all.

Again: We can't know what?

There are clearly things that we do know whereby we can sustain interactions from day to day to day in such a manner that we don't get into heated disputes regarding literally everything that we do.

I think the most intriguing question here pertains to whether or not the human brain itself has the capacity to finally grasp an understanding of existence itself.

Though one thing seems certain: that all of us here will be long dead and gone before, if we can, we do.

Not counting those able to think themselves into accepting that what they now believe "in their head" is true need be as far as they go to in order to make it true.

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=195600

[Agent Smith]

"Yes, yes, I know why apples and tomatoes are fruits," half-screamed Tom. "Then what's the problem?!" Dick asked, irateish. "Harry! Harry's the problem!" said Tom "What?! Why?! Did he say they're not fruits?!" Dick pushed back. "No! He didn't ... say ... that!!" Tom. "Harry's nuts! Don't listen to him!" Dick went. "You're a fruitcake Dick! And you, Tom, you're a vegetable!" Harry was smiling from ear to ear. He'd been in the other room all this time. "I'm nuts, huh?" Harry chuckled.

[Iwannaplato]

The physical world is utterly meaningless, Nihilism is only true if you deny the meaning to your experiences. I know of no such creature.

The suicidal. The clinically depressed.

[Flannel Jesus]

The physical world is utterly meaningless, Nihilism is only true if you deny the meaning to your experiences. I know of no such creature.

The suicidal. The clinically depressed.

People in general, I think, are only concerned with the "meaning of life" when they're not having fun or are not engaged in projects they find meaningful. I feel like it really only comes up as a problem when people are bored. People who aren't bored aren't worrying about the meaning of their life.

[Iwannaplato]

The physical world is utterly meaningless, Nihilism is only true if you deny the meaning to your experiences. I know of no such creature.

The suicidal. The clinically depressed.

People in general, I think, are only concerned with the "meaning of life" when they're not having fun or are not engaged in projects they find meaningful. I feel like it really only comes up as a problem when people are bored. People who aren't bored aren't worrying about the meaning of their life.

Or you could say that they can actively enjoy what they consider meaningful or struggle for what they consider meaningful when they aren't bored (or depressed).

[Flannel Jesus]

Do you find a consistent source of "meaning" in your life? If so, what is it?

Some people are drowning in meaning, no shortage of it, and other people can't seem to find it anywhere. In my experience the people in the former category are almost always involved in a social project (or many) that helps other people. That's why I've centered my own idea of where to find meaning in those types of things

[popeye1945]

The physical world is utterly meaningless, Nihilism is only true if you deny the meaning to your experiences. I know of no such creature.

The suicidal. The clinically depressed.

People in general, I think, are only concerned with the "meaning of life" when they're not having fun or are not engaged in projects, they find meaningful. I feel like it really only comes up as a problem when people are bored. People who aren't bored aren't worrying about the meaning of their life.

Well, in discussing this one assumes a healthy individual, depression can be as simple as a chemical imbalance. The world/apparent reality, is only real to biology, your senses provided you with experience, meaning and knowledge; which is how what is out there affects your biological being. This is the only reality we know, that which is experienced is relative to the growth and well-being of your life, it is not the thing itself which you sense, for there are no things, for as science tells us today all is energy. In this sense, apparent reality is self-creation, it is biological effect or biological reaction to the energies that surround us. In the absence of a conscious subject the world is utterly meaningless, put another way, subject and object stand or fall together. You live in a self-simulation, if you wish to experience a different reality all you need to do is alter your biology. People who are totally engaged with life tend not to think too deeply. As the poet says, "Those who know the most must mourn the deepest orr the fatal truth, the tree of knowledge is not that of life."

[Flannel Jesus]

People who are totally engaged with life tend not to think too deeply.

Which is why I'm almost tempted to say, the solution for people who are lamenting over the struggle to find meaning in life is to find out how to have fun, how to "totally engage". As shallow as it sounds, it may actually work.

[popeye1945]

People who are totally engaged with life tend not to think too deeply.

Which is why I'm almost tempted to say, the solution for people who are lamenting over the struggle to find meaning in life is to find out how to have fun, how to "totally engage". As shallow as it sounds, it may actually work.

Flannel,

I couldn't agree more, the tree of knowledge is not that of life, experience is the holy grail.

[Gary Childress]

People who are totally engaged with life tend not to think too deeply.

Which is why I'm almost tempted to say, the solution for people who are lamenting over the struggle to find meaning in life is to find out how to have fun, how to "totally engage". As shallow as it sounds, it may actually work.

Fun is not what we need to be producing.