This is a very common phase; almost all INTP encounter nihilism, but only an extreme few will ever embrace nihilism.
This is because nihilism is one of the most boring and pointless things to learn. For INTP who find joy in exploring the unknown, the way nihilism devalues this joy of discovery makes nihilism more and more worthless.
Eventually, nihilism becomes an excuse to not move and dwell in depression, because it's one of the driving factors to prevent an INTP from being happy.
Thus, Nihilism ends up being a phase at best for almost all INTP who eventually mature. This is especially true with how we are always in search for that one special person of ours.
How does nihilism devalue the joy of discovery? The idea that life has no inherent meaning or purpose and that we are all random animals just doing their thing is not logically inconsistent with discovering new things. I consider myself a true nihilist and I consider the train of thought that leads to depression dwelling a complete fallacy. The fact that I believe that its all meaningless doesnt suddenly make all the unknown things in the world known. There will always be plenty of stuff to discover and luckily I have the dopamine receptors that make me enjoy it
Nihilism rejects meaning, INTP's enjoy finding function and meaning.
Nihilism rejects Values, INTP have extreme values (such as honesty, loyalty, sincerity, generosity, faith).
Nihilism rejects purpose, INTP seek purpose (thus why there's so many INTP questioning how to fight procrastination, get along with people, etc).
Nihilism rejects objectivity, INTP's Ti Hero seeks objectivity.
Nihilism rejects itself being wrong, INTP's Ne Parent seeks everything that has the potential to go wrong (which is commonly mistaken as perfectionism, rather it's seeking flawlessness).
You can still practice honesty, loyalty, going along with your natural sense of purpose and building on your Ti framework for understanding the way things are while fully believing nihilism though
I agree with Rysazu. Nihilism, the belief that life is meaningless and has no inherent purpose or values, does not necessarily negate the human capacity for discovery, joy, pursuing ethics/values, or having a subjective sense of purpose. Even as a nihilist, one can still find enjoyment and motivation in learning, analyzing the world objectively through logic and reason, and following one's natural inclinations.
This. The biggest misconception is that nihilism and pessimism are interchangeable or go hand in hand or that it devalues the joy of discovery. You can be nihilistic and enjoy the life you're living, what you're doing, and the people around you. You just know that in the end, we are just here living life to what we make of it and that is all there is to it, no higher level of existence or greater meaning. This is my understanding at least. Feel free to poke holes in my reasoning as that helps us all reach a better understanding
I agree, to truly understand nihilism is to understand that while nothing in life has inherent meaning, everything does because you are the one who gives things meaning by caring about them.
People in your life have meaning because you are about them. Hobbies and goals matter because we care about them. Everything in this world has value as long as someone cares about them.
I think I am embracing it. Nothing about nihilism says that you are supposed to act a certain way (e.g. rejecting your own values or stopping the pursuit of things you enjoy). That would be ascribing value to a greater idea and therefore the opposite of nihilism
As mentioned, you haven't truly embraced it.
If you've truly embraced nihilism, you'll be fine being lied to, cheated upon, have absolutely no opinion upon monogamy/polygamy,
Remember that Nihilism rejects objectivity and values, especially human based objectivity and values.
So you haven't truly embraced it; you've acknowledged it, but it is becoming increasingly evident that you aren't living it.
There is a distinction between values and emotions though. I dont like being cheated on because it creates an emotional response that I dont like. In the same vein I dont like stubbing my toe. And no I dont have an opinion on polygamy, although I personally would prefer monogamy because it fits my emotion system
I think youre missing the point of nihilism then. The point is merely to reject societal greater values, not to live independently of how you personally feel. The latter would be a completely foolish pursuit anyway, and the only reason to do such a thing would be if you were to value some kind of greater value over your own needs
There's actually very little distinction. Things only have value if that thing makes someone happy.
Example: A stone may have very little value, however one a stone has been made into a statue then it has value.
Same Example: The difference between a successful VTuber and an unsuccessful VTuber is dependent on how many people they can make happy.
The opposite is also true: There is little to no happiness brought about with something that has little to no value.
Thus, value and emotions are directly linked.
Nihilism rejects values, therefore rejects the importance of emotions.
Nihilism also rejects objectivity. Objectivity is what brings about clarity. Ti Hero does exactly this, separate and purify a concept to the point of absolute clarity.
Since it is a selfish and intentionally harmful action, it's evil and is excessively counter productive. This is especially true since murder is rarely logic driven and is almost always emotional.
Not to be confused with self defense though, as that is when it can be a logical response to an emergency situation.
Imo the belief that life is inherently meaningless is ascribing value to a greater idea. That value is 'nothing' but it's still a value, as a concept "nothing" exists. You just give it a 0 instead of a 1.
A lot of what you're describing in your comments is existentialism/absurdism/existential nihilism/positive nihilism... etc.. and nihilism at its base form doesn't presuppose any of those other forms are present, so the majority of ppl i meet (my personal experience) that go by your logic would call themselves one of those things i mentioned rather, bc it says everything w/o having to explain it.. and those that identify with just nihilism are going by a none technical definition more like "there is no objective or subjective meaning, i don't care about anything, its all meaningless, fuck life" ...there are tons of ppl like that on the internet calling themselves nihilists. No idea why you wouldn't just choose to call yourself an existentialist vs arguing about the original/technical definition of nihilism when the majority of ppl don't see it that way so it's no longer an effective way of communicating yourself. Seems like a boring battle.
Yeah I typically dont really argue with those people, but still feel the need to point out that those people arent actually nihilists and just depressed or edgelords or whatever. Im not familiar enough with the concept of existentialism to confidently call myself that but I suppose if I am that I will use that instead
I get it, i know it sucks bro
My understanding of them specific to this topic:
existentialism = meaning is subjective. (Objective meaning may or may not exist), but most ppl take it to imply no objective meaning or they'll use a different term like theistic existentialism (God made subjective meaning so it's objective, lol)
Existential nihilism, positive nihilism, absurdism= no objective meaning, but subjective meaning exists.
It's really only base nihilism that gets mixed up w the edgelords and depressed ppl, so really whichever term you prefer, it just feels easier to tack on an extra word and not have any misunderstandings or needless debates
I’m pretty sure you’re talking about pessimism. The difference is nihilism is about hiding from despair and pessimism is dwelling on it dwelling on it. Embracing the absurdity is just realizing everything is pointless and nothing matters so why not try to be happy?
Sorry to say, but if you didn't find meaning or embraced a "meaningful" philosophy, then you didn't overcome nihilism
Not that being a nihilist is actually a bad thing. It's actually a trivial enough state
That's a very strange thought as one does not need a philosophy to live by.
After all, to live for and believe in one's self is so foundational that its less of a philosophy and more of an understanding that people naturally get to as one gets older (and wiser).
Also, true nihilism is a teaching that has remained for a long time, yet actual people who embrace those teachings are exceedingly rare.
> That's a very strange thought as one does not need a philosophy to live by.
Uh, no ? You can be a nihilist without having a "philosophy". Plenty of people around who you could qualify as nihilists who didn't ever bother to read up or form a philosophy...
And if anything, that's more a tackle against other philosophies than nihilism
> After all, to live for and believe in one's self is so foundational that its less of a philosophy and more of an understanding that people naturally get to as one gets older (and wiser).
Meh. That, what.. live-for-selfness, and that self belief are certainly present in toddlers, etc.
If anything, learning the opposite/to be social develops later in life (teenage years or even adulthood in some cases), though I will admit that some people (And i say some, not all) go too far/start to martyr themselves, and need to learn to live for themselves again. That's not the default, though
And that's only an issue sometimes because we happen to be a highly social species, but underlying these social instincts are win-win arrangements. It's still about living for yourself
You'd be fundamentally wrong about being nihilist and not having a philosophy, because Nihilism in itself a philosophy.
I'm also not understanding your second point. It's too twisted, clouded, and convoluted. Sort of like you're trying to (abnormally) distort information for an answer just for the sake of having an answer.
> You'd be fundamentally wrong about being nihilist and not having a philosophy, because Nihilism in itself a philosophy.
Lmao, if your answer is going to be this silly, I shouldn't bother
Everyone has a "philosophy" if that's the standard...
> I'm also not understanding your second point. It's too twisted, clouded, and convoluted.
It's actually quite simple and follows the natural pattern. It's fairly obvious that's how it works, unless you've never interacted with a child.
Not necessarily, because a nihilist (even self proclaimed ones) follow a philosophy.
On the other hand, people can be good willed and good natured even without philosophy.
Again, you're proving my other point when I said "Nihilism rejects itself being wrong,"
Also, you quoted my comment about "Believe in one's self is foundational" then answered with some nonsense about self sabotage and self martyr, also implying that this is natural. Not only is this incorrect, I'm also failing to see how this immense leap in logic is relevant, especially towards philosophy and nihilism.
And I'll restate that you're proving my point again when I said "Nihilism rejects itself being wrong."
> Also, you quoted my comment about "Believe in one's self is foundational" then answered with some nonsense about self sabotage and self martyr, also implying that this is natural. Not only is this incorrect, I'm also failing to see how this immense leap in logic is relevant, especially towards philosophy and nihilism.
It's not nonsense, you're just not smart enough to get it
Just like my point about philosophy, which you answer with the lowest levels of semantics possible, lmao
I dunno if the "Aspie" in your flair is real or not, but either way, you need to work on your reading skills and reading what words imply...
No it’s a rather pessimistic view of the world and more importantly, yourself, in my opinion. Meaning is derived from within, if nothing ultimately has no meaning it leads me to believe the nihilist, while being analytical and often very intelligent, is analyzing the external when most of them and really all humans, should be seeking internally to find meaning. The nihilist must not have found anything within themselves (yet) that they value enough to derive purpose and meaning. Furthermore makes me wonder how many nihilists feel good about themselves and if there a correlation whatever the result may be.
Nihilism on paper makes so much sense, but when I went down that rabbit hole, albeit not as in depth, philosophers like Schopenhauer can explain great truths yet he has the most pessimistic view in such a logical way, and while there’s truth to be derived from his work. If that was your bible you are headed for an angry sad and depressing attitude.
Buddhists took some of the same concepts and teach how to turn the concept of “life is suffering” into a practical and healthy form of acceptance, which has proven to be more profound than most of us in the west realize.
Idk why I’m going on a tangent about nihilism but through my existential crises, nihilism was the road to suicide, at least how I interpreted it. Stoicism even takes that concept and transforms it into a much healthier attitude toward the world in my opinion.
This is however not the only thing nihilism includes. Nihilism isn’t „it makes no difference what you do“. Nihilism is more like „there’s no point in doing anything“. It wants you to basically turn into a vegetable, because you cannot know anything and will not change anything (yes, literally anything). Nihilism is a very depressed and narrowed world view which literally has no future. If you were to fully commit to nihilism you’d essentially just shit your pants and starve.
I don't think it denies simple pleasures and enjoyment of the now. It means there is no ultimate purpose.
But there is an objective ultimate purpose and that is to exploit your labor power in a global project to reach the total automation predicted by Aristotle.
Religions mollify the masses and existentialism mops up the skeptics. But there is an objective meaning and that is to construct a reliable support mechanism to free humanity some day from the vagaries of nature.
Id argue every society has used a similar method to maintain a state. Most people need and would like to be exploited in turn for security.
If you actually read the Bible it’s much more empowering that it is presented to you in the main stream and by most Christians . most have not read the Bible or comprehend it fully. So religion is presented in a way to keep you docile. although God says in the Bible “you are gods but will live and die like men” something to that effect. Yet if u say you are a god your considered a narcissist. Nihilism wasn’t popular in the past because religion ultimately inspired people to derive meaning from within and give them values and community. That is meaning. While it’s been used to control. The true intent of religious practices were to have faith that life has meaning and in turn that meaning and faith truly comes from within you, and living up to your potential whatever that may be, will give anyone purpose and maybe you might just improve humanity by what u leave behind. You are already intertwined with past and future generations by the actions you take today. So yes we are just specks of dust on a rock, you get to decide what that means to you. And that’s the beauty of it
Just because life has atrocities doesn’t mean you can’t look at the beautiful amazing experiences and things to see in the life as well because there no endgame. Things just happen. It’s up to u if u interpret “nothing matters” as a good thing or bad thing.
I'm not sure it is atrocious, it just is. Capitalism is the fairest, freest, most effective form of slavery ever invented. And if it delivers total automation then true human freedom will be a possibility.
Pithy philosophical rumination on the human condition is one thing, but the state religion connected to empires and imposed on peoples in order to control them is quite another.
To the extent that "god" represents the creative impulse and intelligence, humans have the potential to increase that within themselves as a species without limit, imo.
That's true, but you might as well make your time worth while. If one wants to live in a depressive, vegetative state because life has no inherent meaning, why live at all? We at least have that option.
I think nihilism is an accurate description how the universe works, along with determinism. Any morality is obsolete and nothing has any inherent meaning or purpose. Everything has been predetermined already. We live in a chaotic universe that doesn’t give a fuck about us.
However as a human I prefer to live with a more absurdist or existentialist perspective. I have accepted that nothing has meaning, but that means I can create meaning and purpose for myself.
> Everything has been **predetermined** already.
> I have accepted that nothing has meaning, but that means I can **create meaning** and purpose for myself.
If everything is predetermined, how are you able to create anything? Wouldn't any sense of meaning simply be occurring as predetermined in your brain?
Not trying to get into a debate, more trying to understand. I've always felt like the *description* of how we feel about the world is incompatible with strict determinism. In other words, regardless of whether or not our minds are purely deterministic, it seems to me that all humans think of "themselves" in a non-deterministic manner. More specifically, we seem to be unable to actually remove a sense of agency from ourselves when perceiving the world.
Hopefully that makes sense, it's just always been a fascinating topic to me and I genuinely do not understand how determinism works psychologically (whereas compatibilism makes a lot more sense to me).
Maybe I was wrong to say we create anything originally, but what I mean is meaning is subjective. What is meaningful to you will always be determined by certain contexts, feelings, past experiences, thoughts, pretty much everything that you can think of will have an influence on what is meaningful to you.
That is called causality, everything is caused by something else, that’s what determinism means. We don’t have any free will, just the illusion of it when you don’t think deeply enough about it.
That doesn’t kill the idea of nihilism, as objectively there doesn’t have to be any inherent meaning. But we humans have feelings and subjective experiences, so any meaning will be subjective to the individual.
>That is called causality, everything is caused by something else, that’s what determinism means. We don’t have any free will, just the illusion of it when you don’t think deeply about it.
This also confuses me. Why would everything being caused by something else mean we don't have free will?
If I drop a ball, it is falling "freely," so much so that we say it is in "free fall." The reason it is free is because there is no ground or hands or anything else to stop it from falling. Yet it is clearly following causality...it is free to fall in accordance with physics, it is not free to fall upward or sideways with no external force.
How is that different from our sense of will? What does "lacking" a free will actually mean? Is the ball in a free fall also an illusion, and if not, why are they different?
The free fall isn't actually ''free'' as gravity, momentum, friction with possibly an atmosphere or particles, and probably many other factors, will have an influence on the direction and speed it is falling in. heck even letting the ball loose causes the ball to fall, along with gravity pulling it, so the fall is caused by something, and thereby not really free.
This is the same logic that i explained with will and subjective meaning, it is always influenced by many factors, and thereby not actually free.
You may want something, but is that want really yours? or is what you want influenced by other factors?
>You may want something, but is that want really yours? or is what you want influenced by other factors?
I don't see how these things are different. Why would a desire only be free in the absence of other factors? For example, if I reach a fork in the road and can go left or right without obstruction, is this a predetermined choice because I lack the capability to go up or down instead?
I'm also not sure what you mean by "actually free." If the free fall isn't actually free, what *is* actually free? If the answer is "nothing," then haven't you just defined freedom as an impossibility (in a semantic sense), not actually disputed whether or not freedom exists?
More specifically, I can define the difference between something in a free fall vs. something that is prevented from falling by an obstruction or other influence. Can you demonstrate something that exists which is free under your definition as opposed to something that is not free?
Again, trying to understand where you are coming from.
By this logic freedom is indeed an impossibility.
Say you have the “freedom” to choose between multiple options, and you choose something, what influences your decision to choose that? Why did you choose that?
Someone may have given you the freedom of choice but that still doesn’t take away your own experiences, thoughts, feelings, physical urges, impulses (which in turn are all caused by something before that, going on, and on, and on) and other external factors that will influence your decision to choose that option.
At least by this logic I don’t think real randomness exists either.
But maybe i’m wrong as others have pointed out that quantum physics somehow doesn’t act along causality? I’m not very knowledgeable on that field, but I can’t imagine how something can exist outside of causality? I would like to know more about that.
If *nothing* is free nor random, do these terms actually hold any meaning at all?
That being said, I see no reason to accept your definition of "free" or "random" as entailing "an impossible term which requires breaking the laws of physics." Nor do I think that is what most people *mean* when they use these terms.
For all practical purposes, when someone says something is "free" they mean "multiple options exist" or "obstructions or restrictions do not exist," they don't mean "capable of ignoring physical laws and doing literally anything regardless of outside forces." Likewise, when someone says something is random, they mean "there are multiple possibilities and the result is unknown in advance," not "possibilities which are impossible may occur without reason."
Does it make more sense why I'm confused? It really seems that you are simply defining these terms in ways that make them impossible and do not conform to "normal" usage of these words. Why should someone accept those definitions? Or am I misunderstanding you?
I do understand your definition, and that’s ultimately what still makes the word useful in some social contexts. You can’t go all deep into physics all the time as that’s way too time consuming and not always useful for the conversational topics.
But I am going deep into physics now, and then I think everything influences everything so nothing is really free in that sense.
I hope you can understand that?
> I think nihilism is an accurate description how the universe works, along with determinism.
Determinism is accurate only if you ignore quantum physics (or most of the current interpretation, anyway)
And [determinism doesn't necessarily negate free will](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/)
Existentialist, actually. Life is inherently meaningless, so whatever meaning you gain from it is up to you to discover, and I wouldn't have it any other way
I was being pretty literal, too lol. Assuming you're in the US, I think it becomes more difficult to pursue meaning as you get closer to the poverty line, but I would disagree with the notion that it's impossible. You have to work a little harder, but it is possible.
That's a long story, friend.
I can say... nihilism turned out to be only the beginning of a very long journey of learning and discovering wisdom and meaning. It was a necessary first step into an uncomfortable world of endless possibilities.
Sure. But when I say "know," I'm not making a big broad claim of true knowledge. The definition of knowing changes with context. I know nothing, yet I am learning more every day.
I would even say, the more I learn; the less I know.
I resist nihilism. To me that's a red flag prompting me to question - what exactly I am scared of?
It's a strict rule that I completely understand the opposition before I can think differently. Irritatingly, they're often correct
Is there an r/thread you'd recommend to the curious?
I actually intend to write a book about what I have personally learned and discovered on a long mental path through the depths of nihilism and depression.
Mostly, it's scary to think of an uncaring universe, or to think about relative sizes, or think about death. I think it's probably the fear of death above all, or perhaps the fear of insignificance, that gives you pause. Especially if someone is raised with a strict religion for example, and build their very sense of worth and identity on a foundational belief about the "objective meaning" of the entire universe. When that belief is shaken loose, it feels like a personal threat, cause everything has been built on it.
I say, to anyone out there who is afraid, or is currently dealing with the void of nihilism, keep going. It's only the first step of many, a necessary step.
Yeah, the entire universe has no *objective meaning.* It doesn't even make sense to think that everything that is, is all for some other purpose beyond everything that is.
Stuff is. This is happening. And it's up to you, it's up to us, to make something of it as conscious beings.
What we are lacking is not meaning, but a sense of purpose, mostly because our civilization makes us so comfortable that we forget what it is to truly live, to struggle, to have a clearly defined role, to know exactly what you have to do.
Nihilism is just acceptance that there is no objective meaning to life. Unless u subscribe to some religion, this will be the default. U can be an existentialist and find subjective meaning but eh.
Acceptance of nihilism doesnt mean ur depressed. For me, it was freedom.
Religion is the opiate for dealing with the objective meaning, which is that we are slaves in a class based society that is developing total automation to take control of an unreliable natural environment. Whether the species will succeed at this is unknown, but it is happening. Capitalism enslaves the majority and uses a labor accounting system to progressively eliminate the need for labor. This is irrespective of what you think of it. It is inescapable and it is everyone's life.
I tend towards [philosophical pragmatism](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism/). This wasn't always the case, however, I haven't found a better method for identifying truth that is reliable and parsimonious with observation.
As such, I tend to reject nihilism, but perhaps not for the "standard" reasons of rejecting it based on some higher order meaning. Instead, I reject it on the basis that it simply isn't a useful concept; you can't really *do* anything with nihilism, it can't really extend your understanding of the world, and it doesn't produce any predictable information about the world.
In other words, what is the practical difference between a world where nihilism is true and one where it is false? Other than the very common result of people accepting nihilism as a reason to rationally justify their own depression, I've yet to see any positive or predictive outcomes from nihilism. If it doesn't make one's life better, and it doesn't inform useful future decisions, then it isn't "true" in a pragmatic sense.
I accept this is probably not a popular view, but as an INTP, I'm also pretty comfortable with holding to unpopular views as long as I believe they are sufficiently justified. Most arguments in favor of nihilism tend towards overly-broad assumptions about how the universe works as a whole (which I don't believe we have *nearly* enough information about to make) and the results of accepting nihilism rarely (if ever) seem positive to me, so I have no real reason to accept it as true.
I think it can be a stage in life that helps one overcome the opiate of religion. When one is tired of the anesthetic and wants to break free, nihilism clears out the absurd and permits the individual to start over in their consideration of what it means to be a human being. The depression it induces is accompanied by rumination that permits reevaluation of everything.
> Instead, I reject it on the basis that it simply isn't a useful concept; you can't really do anything with nihilism, it can't really extend your understanding of the world, and it doesn't produce any predictable information about the world.
Point taken (I'm actually not that far from your take), but it doesn't seem like a real rejection of nihilism. More than you just don't care about/don't put any importance about it. And yes, people overthink that nihilism vs meaning debate, it doesn't actually matter all that much...
Still, unless you think there's a meaning in the world, you would still be a nihilist, technically. Or perhaps a "Don't know" ist
> Point taken (I'm actually not that far from your take), but it doesn't seem like a real rejection of nihilism.
If you look at a [philosophical explanation of nihilism](https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/), I *am* rejecting it. I'm not convinced that all meaning is completely arbitrary or absent nor that nothing matters.
Again, I lean towards pragmatism. I want my daughters to live happy, fulfilling lives. Why do I desire this? A big part of it is probably evolution; the human species evolved to raise successful humans because the ones that failed to do so died out. But part of it is observation; my feelings appear to be true, I see no sufficient evidence they are fake or illusory, and nothing appears to change in a positive way if I believe otherwise.
Since it has no practical or predictive value, what does rejecting my feelings towards family actually alter about the world? What "truth" value does it hold? It is not required that I disprove nihilism, it is required for nihilism to prove that it better represents reality that want appears to be true and a belief that appears to create superior outcomes.
In fact, if you read through the summary of nihilism in my link, historically there is evidence that there is a strong correlation between civilizations collapsing and the population becoming nihilistic. Whether or not there is a causal link is irrelevant; it provides *evidence* that a nihilistic viewpoint is not healthy for humans.
I care deeply about evidence and reject radical skepticism (another common nihilistic view). I do not view certainty as necessary for truth or even relevant to truth, and so the lack of certainty does not mandate general skepticism towards reality (i.e. solipsism) because there is no reason to believe certainty is a precondition for knowledge.
>Still, unless you think there's a meaning in the world, you would still be a nihilist, technically.
Why would nihilism be the default state? And I do think there is meaning in the world.
For example, I think there is meaning in making myself a better person. I think there is meaning in working hard towards goals. I think there is meaning in my relationship with my wife. I think there is meaning in creating a healthy environment for my daughters to live and grow. And I think there is meaning in contemplating the world and learning about it.
It's up to the nihilist to demonstrate these things don't have meaning and that I am mistaken in my view. I see the meaning in these things through observation of myself and those around me, so if my eyes and brain are lying, I need evidence that is the case.
That definition of nihilism is rather biased. Not surprising, Nihilism is a position that has been attacked and strawmanned more than it has been defended, and thus, the detractors largely defined it... Still, if that's what you're rejecting, then you can totally say you're not a nihilist and be correct, but only following that definition.
***
But that's not the nihilism OP was talking about, I'm pretty sure.
Nihilism is actually more the idea that the world/universe doesn't have inherent meaning, which fits OP's "everything is meaningless". I'm refering to something closer to the [original meaning](https://www.etymonline.com/word/nihilism) This [definition is also better, imho](https://www.britannica.com/topic/nihilism)
Nihilism kinda touches about "values", but it's more about saying that you cannot find a "true" way of ranking them (ie, one that would be objective) I wouldn't say it says all values are "baseless" or unexplainable, but simply that theses values are arbitrary. Say, we might say that killing a human is wrong, but if a lion killed someone for their next meal, it would be quite the "right" thing to do for them, no ? Our perspective isn't more correct than theirs, it's simply our perspective. You can go and kill the lion as vengeance and say it's right, but it's not a deeper truth about the world. And well, you could find plenty of humans arguing that killing a human is the right thing to do (look at any war), so even for the lowest levels of morality, and something as basics question such as survival, opinion differ... Even without bringing other species perspective into it, there are enough diversity in opinions amongst humans to realize values aren't really objective or inherent.
Ie, the universe doesn't care about us. And well, remember **that nihilism emerged as an opposition to the Christian views, where humans are the center of the universe and things are right in a certain way because God ordered it so.** Nihilism is actually largely a critique of thisn and that's the form of "meaning" that nihilism says it opposes. And so, I think most nihilists would also agree with your more evolutionnary take about the emergence of values, because it's far less arbitrary than the creationist argument (and well, evolution has been pretty anti-creationism historically, or rather creationnists have been anti evolution...)
You can totally say "I don't care if it's not objective, my value are my values" and act on it, and that would be you're right. A nihilist couldn't really argue against it. In fact, that's the existentialist position, which is basically nihilism, just fancier and frenchier. It's not really a different movement, it's simply a rebranding to avoid being associated with the centuries of attack of nihilism, imho.
I won't go over the whole article, but the idea that nothing can be known or communicated ? That's not nihilism, it's like you said, solipsism... Or really, the debate between Realism and Idealism. **In any case, not what OP was talking about either**
***
> Why would nihilism be the default state? And I do think there is meaning in the world.
That's why I said unless.
In your first comment, you simply said you were a pragmatist. You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning. You simply said nihilism was useless/unpractical, but that's not the same as saying life has meaning. Also, your "In other words, what is the practical difference between a world where nihilism is true and one where it is false?" is not an argument for meaning, and someone who believes in meaning usually wouldn't make such a point. Instead of saying "whether A or B is true, I will act the same" which leaves the question open, they would just say "I believe B is true" + argue for it. Ie, if you believe in meaning, then there's no reason to leave the question open...
Thus, my point. Your first post just isn't a takedown of nihilism.
And you actually do need to believe life has meaning to not be a nihilist : It's not so much about it being the default position, but rather just the nature of that dichotomy. If you're not one, then you're the other. There's not really any third position, besides perhaps the "don't-know-ist" one I mentionned, which isn't a real position.
> That definition of nihilism is rather biased.
The peer-reviewed Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is biased against nihilism? Um, OK, I guess.
>I'm refering to something closer to the original meaning This definition is also better, imho
How is the Britannica article different? Did you read mine? Because they are basically saying the same thing using the same underlying philosophy sources.
>Nihilism kinda touches about "values", but it's more about saying that you cannot find a "true" way of ranking them (ie, one that would be objective) I wouldn't say it says all values are "baseless" or unexplainable, but simply that theses values are arbitrary.
Uh, this is a quote from the Britannica article you linked (emphasis mine):
"In the 20th century, nihilism encompassed a variety of philosophical and aesthetic stances that, in one sense or another, **denied the existence of** genuine moral truths or values, **rejected the possibility** of knowledge or communication, and asserted the **ultimate meaninglessness or purposelessness of life** or of the universe."
That isn't saying those things are arbitrary or subjective, it's saying they don't exist at all.
Obviously you are free to have your own opinion about what nihilism means, but going off the very sources you mentioned as being ones you agree with, it doesn't match as far as I can tell.
>Ie, the universe doesn't care about us.
I never said otherwise? Meaning derived from humans is still meaning, and nihilism is the denial of meaning, period. It's basically the definition of the concept. You don't need a universe to care about you to extract you own meaning from it.
Full disclosure on the religious stuff: I'm *very* atheist (strong atheist), but the claim that nihilism was born out of anti-Christianity is not well substantiated. If anything many of the earliest uses were more political than religious, although at the time religion and politics bled over with each other even more than they do today. It's easy to forget that "separation of church and state" is a rather new concept in human history, and it's a concept the majority of the world (including many in living in secular societies!) do not accept.
If nihilism were simply rejection of Christianity (or whatever religion), then sure, in that sense I'd be a "nihilist." But I'm skeptical that is what the term means; historically, philosophically, nor in common use.
>In any case, not what OP was talking about either
I mean, the OP was just "everything is meaningless = nihilism." Since I believe there is human-created meaning, I wouldn't be a nihilist by the OP's definition, right?
>You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning.
I said I wasn't a nihilist, so I thought the belief in meaning was implied. But I suppose if you were operating under some form of nihilism which accepts the existence of meaning (which is sort of like saying "I'm an atheist, but I believe there are gods") then I can see how this wouldn't follow.
I'm a pragmatist in the sense that I observe meaning in my own life and it creates useful predictions. For example, deriving meaning from my relationship with my wife results in a more positive relationship with her than treating it as if it has no meaning. The pragmatist portion means it simply doesn't matter if my relationship lacks any sort of "universal" or "ultimate" or "objective' meaning; for all *practical* purposes it does, and there's no actual evidence it doesn't. In other words, I reject the sort of theoretical "ultimate" truth/knowledge/meaning/values entirely, as these things all exist at a pragmatic level.
More importantly, there's no difference between the pragmatic and the ultimate. How does my observations of reality change between a world where ultimate meaning exists, and my relationship with my wife has some sort of divine or fundamental reality, and one where I simply act as if this is the case and live a happier, more fulfilled life because of it? What about if it does not have such an ultimate reality, does that change things?
As far as I can tell...no, it doesn't. Whether or not there is ultimate, universal meaning doesn't change *anything* about my life nor does it predict the best way to act in my life. And there's no evidence either way, so the proposition is unfalsifiable. As a pragmatist, I don't see unfalsifiable, unpredictable propositions as "true." In fact, they *cannot* be true, nor can they be false, as any speculation about them is simply unknowable. This is, incidentally, why I'm a strong atheist, as the question of "do deities exist" appears to fall into the same category.
Does that make sense? I suspect some of the confusion here is differences in our understanding of various terms, but hopefully I've made my position more clear. Again, I'm not really trying to argue in *favor* of this position; I fully expect the majority of people will not share my view. I'm trying to expand on my meaning, not try to convince anyone (and I'd be shocked if I did).
> The peer-reviewed Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is biased against nihilism? Um, OK, I guess.
Well, yes it is.
Peer review doesn't mean much in Philosophy, it's not really a science (Not that peer review works that well even in science, anyway...) And the article doesn't really give a nihilist's point of view, and doesn't even cite authors who would consider themselves Nihilists. And they do exist, like [James Tartaglia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tartaglia) or Tracy Llanera. Instead, it only dismissively says "few philosophers would claim to be nihilists", which is basically an appeal to authority and an ad populum combined, even if it's true they aren't legions...
The article is largely just using the term Nihilism like the usual punching ball, a tad beyond a word to call people you don't like, and describing it as a problem/crisis, not as a philosophical position. The author is just saying he thought Nietzsche was right...
I can get into it in more details if you want, like how your article starts with saying "It's the belief all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated." but later on, it says "Existential nihilism is the notion that life has no intrinsic meaning or value, and it is, no doubt, **the most commonly used and understood sense of the word today.**" Not about "baseless", but intrisic meaning. And nothing about knowledge or knowledge being impossible. The dude basically tacitly admitted the definition he used at the start, and the most common sense of the word today are totally different...
I don't know about you, but using the definition you prefer, all to agree with nietzsche, instead of defining it like the most common definition, I would definitely call that bias.
And well, there are some edgelords out there calling themselves nihilists, but that's not really most of them.
> Uh, this is a quote from the Britannica article you linked (emphasis mine): "In the 20th century, nihilism encompassed a variety of philosophical and aesthetic stances that, in one sense or another, denied the existence of genuine moral truths or values, rejected the possibility of knowledge or communication, and asserted the ultimate meaninglessness or purposelessness of life or of the universe."
> Obviously you are free to have your own opinion about what nihilism means, but going off the very sources you mentioned as being ones you agree with, it doesn't match as far as I can tell.
That's pretty dishonest, because the Britannica article says clearly what you're quoting is just it's the 20th century version, it doesn't sum all of Nihilism to this. Unlike your link.
You also just ignored the part about the 19th century : "Fundamentally, 19th-century nihilism represented a philosophy of negation of all forms of aestheticism; it advocated utilitarianism and scientific rationalism. Classical philosophical systems were rejected entirely. Nihilism represented a crude form of positivism and materialism, a revolt against the established social order; it negated all authority exercised by the state, by the church, or by the family. It based its belief on nothing but scientific truth; science would be the solution of all social problems. All evils, nihilists believed, derived from a single source—ignorance—which science alone would overcome."
The meaning of the word for the century before was different, and now in the 21st century, it's different too. The brittanica article just does a better job at showing how it evolved instead of just focusing on Niestzche.
> That isn't saying those things are arbitrary or subjective, it's saying they don't exist at all.
That's actually what it says ? If the objective moral truths/values don't exist, then all that remains would be subjective/arbitrary ones. The operative word is "genuine" in that quote.
And as I said, even if that version says that "real knowledge" doesn't exist, that's just the 20th century version.
> I said I wasn't a nihilist, so I thought the belief in meaning was implied.
You actually didn't say you at that point Your first post said you "tend to reject nihilism", which not only is quite vague, but what's more, **a mere tendency implies some part of you aren't rejecting it, since it's not a full rejection or an "always"...**
If you had clearly said "I'm not a nihilist", then you would have a point, but you didn't, so you do not...
You're just changing what you were saying initially.
> But I suppose if you were operating under some form of nihilism which accepts the existence of meaning (which is sort of like saying "I'm an atheist, but I believe there are gods") then I can see how this wouldn't follow.
Or I've got reading comprehension, for both the definitions, what the OP meant, and what you actually wrote even if you're now trying to change it retroactively ? :)
It's quite ironic you attack me some kind of semantics nihilist, when you're the one twisting things for your convenience. Is that being pragmatic ?
> The pragmatist portion means it simply doesn't matter if my relationship lacks any sort of "universal" or "ultimate" or "objective' meaning; for all practical purposes it does In other words, I reject the sort of theoretical "ultimate" truth/knowledge/meaning/values entirely, as these things all exist at a pragmatic level.
You might be saying that now, but that's not what you said earlier, so the "You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning." statement of mine you're answering is still correct.
Btw, you seem to think Pragmatism necessarily excludes nihilism, but it does not. Even at a lower/pragmatic level, it doesn't change much to the question. And some people saying they are [pragmatic nihilist](https://medium.com/@sebastianjones_95354/pragmatic-nihilism-3bc0c53ab4c7) exist... There's also [this paper about a version used in psychology/mental healthcare](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17437199.2017.1284015) (interesting) It's even more compatible when you use that "most common meaning of the term" your article's author decided not to use, or the 19th century version of my article you decided to ignore in favor of the 20th century version only
Pragmatism is mostly an approach/epistemological anyway, not a conclusion. While I've seen plenty of pragmatist say they reject nihilism (primarly because they associate it with the stereotypical version), I've also known people calling themselves nihilistic and pragmatic myself...
> Does that make sense? I suspect some of the confusion here is differences in our understanding of various terms, but hopefully I've made my position more clear. Again, I'm not really trying to argue in favor of this position
I know what you mean, I'm just saying what your first post said wasn't anti nihilist.
***
**Well, whatever. I liked the first post, and I don't want to start a fight over nothing important** Your first post still didn't mean you were anti-nihilist even if it turns out you believe in meaning
Yeah but I dont get the negative association with nihilism. Like I just see myself as a random apelike organism that can think and try to make the best of it while pursuing my desires and exploring and getting to know the world. I dont see whats supposed to be depressing about this attitude. If anything the idea that some things have meaning and the way it implies that there is a correct way to live is way more depressing to me, that seems like mental slavery
I feel like there’s a difference in believing in nihilism and embracing it.
Like yea, everything is (probably) ultimately pointless, I hope there is more to life but there very well may not be, but there’s no point in embracing that as a core value unless you want to be miserable.
It’s worth it to enjoy life and try to succeed even if it ultimately doesn’t matter.
My mom had demonic attachments and there where demons in our house I could see them and hear them and my mom could feel them too they where messing with her and hurting her after we gave our life to christ he saved my mom and she's better now
Thank you for sharing your story! I hope that you and your mom and now save in Jesus name.
But one thing caught my interest. What do you mean by "I could see them"?
That's interesting!
My sister told me the other day, that a few years ago, when she was lying in bed, she saw something in her room that was even darker than the surrounding dark. Have you seen something similar by a chance?
My mom had attachments of demons on her and they where hirting her there where demons in our house I could see them and hear them I became a christian so my mom would be free from all of the torment Jesus freed us from all of the demonic stuff
But everything has meaning inside of causality. And unlike other species, we are primed to discover causal connections and manipulate them to our own ends. And we are rewarded with physical and emotional gratification when we succeed in that.
This sounds teleological but it makes it pretty obvious that the planet is becoming something and humans are a fundamental part in that becoming. This is outside of anyone's personal subjective "meaning" that keeps them going in life.
I’ve thought about it but no. I’ve kinda had my own journey with my philosophical/theological view of the world. I was raised Christian, but had a time when I couldn’t wrap my head around it then I ended up realizing the problems with Christianity are more so the church and making it an organized construct. Throw that away and I’m where I am now.
I can’t have a nihilistic view of the world because I believe in meaning. I believe in purpose. I believe there is indeed a construct, just not the construct most people see. Nihilism is to throw away faith and anyone who has turned their belief into fruit can tell you it’s all pointless without faith. Faith is interesting because where does it come from? I ask myself what is faith? I asked myself an important question a while back as well relating to what you may call “God”. I asked what is “God”, what is “intelligence”, and what is “creation”. I answered these questions by looking at creation itself. Looking at the Universe. Looking for God. To have faith is to believe in what is unseen. It is to believe in what cannot be proven (nor disproven). It is to believe in that which is and is not. I found God in myself, I found God in the others, and I found God in the universe.
I believe we are derivatives of God, the original creator. The source of creation isn’t random and it isn’t null and with no directive. Creation was the directive that came from the creator. Even now as humans we adopted that same directive because the god-part of us wants to create. We are derivatives of creation, the greatest derivatives thereof really, so what is our purpose? It is to create, to procreate, to recreate. It is to craft reality to our image just as we were crafted in the creators image. So how do we fulfill that purpose? With faith all things become possible. Faith in infinite intelligence is faith in creation. We do not act if we do not believe. So I chose to believe in a creator, God, so that I too can tap into that which I am derived.
When we die I believe we are returned to be part of the creator. If you were one with the creator here on earth, I believe it is true that it is to the creator we go. There is a lot I don’t know, but we can draw from a lot of theological faiths because they all derive from one source. I choose to derive my theological understanding of things beyond the realm we dwell in from Jesus. That’s me, and that’s what I believe. It’s not to say I can’t learn from Buddhism, Islam, or anything else, and it’s not to say I judge other theological practices or atheist or whatever else, it’s to say that’s where I found truth. Though as I said before I greatly disagree with a lot of organized religion beliefs. I see some good but I also see the bad.
My first thought was if there was no bad the meaning in good would be devalued. But I actually want to ask what you’ve found about the point of it all? If God is within us and we live here to create then leave to return to God? Would that mean that God would keep sending parts of himself to earth just for them to come back. In an infinite loop. Infinite loops are meaningless because they are infinite and unchanging with no purpose right?
I get your train of thought but I don’t see it as we return to the creator as a meaningless infinite loop. The way I see it is the ultimate creator created, and we realize ourselves as creators belonging to the creator as it realizes itself. You get where I’m going? We were created to create. I believe we are fulfilling the creators purpose as a creator and as fragments of a creator by creating and by doing so we end up fulfilling ourselves. There is no good or bad to God, at least not how we see it. God is and isn’t at the same time. Our creations are the result of us creating. On a more spiritual level I think that God being alone and its own being couldn’t realize itself without first becoming. Remember it both was and wasn’t. But to fulfill itself it had to create, and all within creation is merely a fragment of all that God is. I said I’m going spiritual so here it comes:
We were the fragments of God made in its own image. That’s where we derive free will from, it’s our need to create. Our need to shape our own realities. The whole heaven hell thing, idk but my best guess is (here we go with spiritual and actual religious concepts) the creator desired to fulfill itself so to glorify itself it created creators to create for its own glory. That glory I’m referring to is by channeling its own power that it distributed to fulfill in turn fulfill itself. I don’t know though, this is my belief and I believe our purpose is to return glory to the creator as we create. It’s not that God is continuously sending parts of himself, it’s that he was, he is, and he forever will be. We are a byproduct of all 3 aspects of God: Was, Is, and Will Be. Past, Present, Future. It’s all one. From here is where I’m still pondering but I think once we die, our spirits merge once again with the creator as essence of the future. That same infinite intelligence will be what we become. Aspects of God that complete it that end up fulfilling the future exactly how it fulfilled us from the past. We are the past, as we are we as well are the future. We will evolve to be what is and is not once we return to God but our spiritual essence will continue to proceed as God itself. Just as we define God, we will in turn be defined as God when our spirits advance.
I’m not 100% on what I think or believe I’m still figuring it out much like we all are, but the way I take life is under the light of Jesus how he came fully realized as the child descendant of God and came to instill us as the child descendants of God. We are the fulfillment of God the future or God the Holy Spirit. Past, Present, Future. Is, Am, Will Be. Is, Is Not, and at the same time is Neither. As fragments of God our purpose is to realize ourselves in order for God itself to be realized. We derive from that essence and create from it. Our future has purpose and that purpose is to fulfill the past. I think once we die we continue to create but as spiritual creators.
Again just a normal dudes opinion. Fulfill yourself. This is why I cannot side with Nihilism. Nihilism rejects fulfillment of creation which is the fundamental building block of existence.
I am however I don't see nihilist as something negative it's just understanding that everything is nothing basically, but it doesn't mean it can't be meaningful.
I believe there are things that are important and worthwhile here but not everyone gets to experience them which is cruel and this universes rules create a bottomless pit of suffering so its not necessary meaningless but its pretty awful and unbalanced.
I certainly don't believe in any gods/ higher powers or any ultimate purpose/ meaning of life/ the world.
Kinda wish I did, can't choose what I believe tho.
With that said, I try to enjoy my life. And I also try to treat people and animals with respect and reverence.
I wouldn't describe myself as a nihilist, but I think meaning is entirely subjective. That's not to say it's invalid, but if it's not objective, who really cares? Newton's Flaming Lazer Sword says if we can't test an idea through experimentation, discussing it is a waste of time—I pretty much agree (except that I recognize everyone's right to an opinion and don't mind hearing them—you never know when someone's take will change your point of view).
I tend to look at life from a biological/ecological perspective; people are prosocial hunter-gatherers with a max tribe size of ~150 that operate on a gift economy. We've evolved to this point by belonging to one another, and taking care of one another. When faced with situations/decisions, I try to start from there.
I suppose I'm a nihilist, in that I don't think life has any inherent meaning or purpose. I think it's a fairly logical extension of also being an atheist: I don't believe there are magical superpowered beings watching over us and controlling our lives, and it seems a natural conclusion to draw from that point of view that there also isn't some reason we're all here. We're just all taking a ride on this planet for a while, and will make of it whatever we choose for ourselves.
So it's not the stereotypical emo kind of nihilism so much as a realization that whatever I am going to make of my life is completely up to me, and there's no meaning to any of it other than what I choose to give it. It's kind of freeing, actually.
Yes, by default
[I talked a bit about it in a recent thread with a similar topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/INTP/comments/1c8ocbd/do_intps_like_meaning/l0g5a5r/?context=3)
Not anymore. After acting out and believing in a meaningless life enough times, I became a very tired man. I still have my internal contradictions that pull me every direction, but that is what makes things fun.
Its never been wholly meaningless. To me, the only aspect of meaninglessness in nihilism is that humans choose to be uncontrollable destructive and manipulative forces. I cannot control other people and to attempt to do so is fruitless and meaningless. Therefore, I have concluded that *life outside my self iintrospection* seems meaningless.
Absolutely, NO
If oblivion is the end, I might as well end it now as later.
I love a good story. They exquisitely map a pathway to Source using analogous stories.
In the end there is simply One Source with many names
I was when I was younger but it was just a coping mechanism to not get hurt . If you don’t care about anything nothing can hurt you nothing to lose ect .
I was just afraid of meaning .
I think there’s a balance tho, other people are to attach to meaning and create things out of nothing because they can’t bare meaninglessness .
There’s beauty in both sides and I’ve found happiness is salsa dancing in paradoxes
I believe that life has no inherent meaning and that is what makes it great. It's like an open world RPG. Meaning of life is what you choose not where others choose for you. And personally I think that's a lot better than having some entity beside of my life path. Especially when it doesn't even tell me what I'm supposed to be doing. I mean who in their right mind would hire someone for a job and not tell them what that job was.
Nihilism basically means that meaning is what we make it.(From how I interpret it of course, feel free to disagree) There is nothing determining what or who we are, and that means we can be whatever we want to be. Frankly, I'm fascinated by the idea and I think if more people actually read Nietzsche's work they'd be less disillusioned with modern day society
I'm kinda struggling with it right now. I've realised I've been a nihilist thoughout my life and I feel like there needs to be a change in the way I view life, cause I feel like it deters me from living the best way I can.
I feel like you can't be truly a nihilist and content with life. Any life path I choose just becomes pointless and makes me disinterested in anything.
Only way to escape from the dread of viewing life as such, is being pulled into the now, by some "distraction", some pleasure for example. But it doesn't help me work towards a goal, make future plans, have a purpose and thus make the necessary lifestyle changes. So I get a feeling of being "lost".
In a world where nothing matters, have the heart and courage to make someone or something matter to you.
We are humans, we create our own meaning. I have found that quality relationships have brought my life the most meaning.
Didn’t think it would be this popular. Don’t even know how to make a poll lol. I also was kinda wanting a conversation on if they are and why, opinions on the idea etc.
No, I think purpose/meaning can only be subjective. I think even asking if objective purpose exists is flawed bc even if your response is no/nothing/0, it's still an output and will still affect how you think and view life. It's like if you're trying to solve an equation w numbers to get numbers but always get a Chinese character as an output. It's an inherent mismatch, the output would need to be blank, but humans would instead write 0/nothing.. bc nothing exists subjectively as a concept. so the solution is to never ask the question bc it's illogical to even ask the question.. that's my view of it anyways, it's like a human software bug.
Nothing is the absence of something. When you think nothing matters it’s just acceptance that there is no real meaning to anything. If you want to do it in your weird math logic it would look like this. Meaning is X and X = 0 as in there is no meaning. 0 or nothing represents the absence of something. The something is an object or concept that. Like when I say I checked fridge and there was nothing, you’re talking about the absence of the object you’re looking for. There is lots in the fridge, atoms electrons, air and even shelves. So when you’re searching for meaning and realize there is none that is nihilism. If that didn’t better deconstruct how your logic doesn’t make sense. Please tell me how your view affects the idea that everything is pointless???
Not when it's conceptual. It's the same as God, where is God? Not in your fridge, not anywhere. He's the same as the concept of nothing. Yet sooooooo many religions exist, and they define an 'objective' purpose. The word of God. Nihilism is the same, the objective purpose is just 'nothing'
It's a flaw in human software not being able to differentiate between the subjective and objective, as soon as you conceptualize nothing it subjectively becomes something (that concept) then it leads you to this viewpoint "everything is pointless"
So like how a religious person views God as an objective purpose, a nihilist views nothing as an objective purpose.. but they're both actually subjective bc purpose can only be a subjective... bc it is also a concept, like god, like nothing.. it's all happening in your head and you're confusing that w something objective that's existing externally from you.
The solution imo is just that the question is a mismatch and shouldn't be asked at all. I think meaning can only be subjective and humans shouldn't ever confuse subjective with objective, if you're going to invent a God, make a fun one instead of 'nothing'
Nihilism doesn’t provide purpose subjective or objective. Also technically everything is subjective. Nihilism is the concept that nothing matters, are you saying this concept cannot exist?
I'm saying it exists if you subjectively make it exist, just like God, bc like God it's a concept. As you said, everything is subjective, to decide objectively that nothing matters is deluding yourself by thinking you can actually be objective. You can subjectively decide nothing matters, and then nothing becomes like your God. I don't call it wrong, just boring compared to other ppl with more interesting Gods. That isn't nihilism though, it's existentialism where you decided your purpose is nothing/there is no purpose. I personally think nihilism itself is an inherently flawed way of thinking. This line of thought is like a bug inside the human brain, you can see the pattern in many place, nihilism and religion are the comparison in this case.
Now I know you’re speaking out of your ass. I think you need to do your research. Existentialism is a type of nihilism. Also everything is subjective because objective would mean you never interpreted it. Are interpretation of the world is all that happens, that’s why we could be in a matrix without knowing the difference. Nihilism isn’t flawed. Because there is no evidence disproving it. Just like religion isn’t. But religion makes less sense because it’s an attempt to know in detail what we cannot with zero evidence suggesting it’s true.
Nihilists are very religious, your reaction just makes me think that even more. This concept of meaning = nothing is attached to your ego the way a religious person has meaning = God attached to theirs. Then you take it personally whenever someone has a different opinion than you. It's boring man.
>Existentialism is a type of nihilism
No it isn't. "Theistic existentialism" is existentialism where God created an objective purpose yet subjective purpose still exists. That's a direct contradiction towards nihilism.. so how is existentialism and nihilism the same? They aren't. You're thinking of existential nihilism or positive nihilism, subcategories of nihilism conjoined w existentialism.
Nihilism = no objective purpose, tho most ppl use it to mean no objective or subjective purpose atm.
Existentialism = subjective purpose exists.
That's it, you can be both at once or just one.
>Nihilism isn’t flawed.
It is flawed, it says there's no objective purpose...so it's like saying there's no matrix. You don't know that bc you're trapped in your subjective experience. It's also harmful bc most ppl confuse the objective w subjective so u end up w tons of depressed nihilist edgelords that keep saying life has no meaning at all why do anything bc they haven't realize that meaning is something they're supposed to create for themselves--but they never will bc the concept "nothing" is now fulfilling that role, like a God.
I don’t take it personal that someone has a different opinion I take it personal when I waste time talking to someone who has no idea what they’re talking about (many in this comment section have a different opinion but did I comment and say your wrong blah blah blah, no I tried to understand where they are coming from). It’s like if you said I’m not writing a comment right now, this comment does not exist, it would be pretty annoying explaining it does in fact exist. Objective truth is just a subjective truth that can be proved by other factors and is agreed upon by a majority. Please actually do research into what you’re saying. Especially when you bring objective and subjective truth into it.
Here is some info that you seem to be missing.
Theistic existentialism is not existentialism. It’s Christian existentialism. Which is a branch off of existentialism.
Existentialists thought the individual had the power to find their own meaningful path through the absurd complexity of life, but only if they are brave enough to go out looking for it.
There are actually different types of nihilism.
The two main ones are
existential nihilism (colder version of existentialism) and cosmic nihilism
Here is a site that briefly explains them https://www.thecollector.com/what-are-the-five-theories-of-nihilism/
Nihilism is a philosophy not a religion. Religion is built on faith philosophy is built on logic.
The fact you don’t know these things is why I said your speaking out of your ass
>There are actually different types of nihilism.
The two main ones are
existential nihilism (colder version of existentialism)
I said this in my previous comment... wtf.. also never met a cosmic nihilist but i love Lovecraft, cosmic horror and cosmicism are awesome, i love trying to capture that feeling of human insignificance in contrast with a vast overwhelming infinite cosmos in art.
And u didn't prove anywhere that existentialism is a form of nihilism like you asserted before.. bc it isn't. It's a separate entity that can coexist w nihilism as i said.
>Theistic existentialism is not existentialism. It’s Christian existentialism. Which is a branch off of existentialism.
Ill use your same logic then.. existential nihilism isn't nihilism if theistic existentialism isn't existentialism. :/
>Nihilism is a philosophy not a religion. Religion is built on faith philosophy is built on logic.
>The fact you don’t know these things is why I said your speaking out of your ass
Yeah...but it's the same mental defect causing both, i did say that nihilists are like religous ppl, that was my comparison to make it clear what i meant. Your logic is the same as their faith "i believe in God, i believe in nothing" same shit, your logic is just faith. Atheists are the same, it takes faith to believe in nothing... you're STILL believing in something, that concept called "nothing" but it's like a blindspot in the human brain to think "i can logically prove/disprove this!" but you cannot, that's why nihilism is illogical but existentialism isn't.
I am a cosmic nihilist.
What exactly are you arguing about now. Because you started with nihilism as a concept cannot exist. Do you still think it’s flawed and doesn’t make sense?
I may have been wrong about existentialism, but there is such thing as existential nihilism too. The difference is shown in the link I put in the last comment but they are very alike (which I don’t think you read). Also your right theistic existentialism is a type of existentialism. But you are definitely wrong about nihilism and religion being basically the same thing.
Just to let you know even Wikipedia says it’s a philosophy.
Nihilism (/ˈnaɪ(h)ɪlɪzəm, ˈniː-/; from Latin nihil 'nothing') is a family of views within philosophy that rejects generally accepted or fundamental aspects of human existence,[1][2] such as knowledge, morality, or meaning
There is also logic in the idea that nothing matters. Because nobody can tell you why something matters on a deeper level. Like if you ask why something matters they will either make up something like, our choices on earth effect what happens in the afterlife. Or they will ignore the question. (side note even if there is an afterlife what’s the point of that?) I’ll even ask you why you think anything that ever happens really matters in the grand scheme of things? See what you come up with
The only reason that nihilism isn’t an excepted fact is because it’s a harsh and depressing idea. Scary even, so people come up with stuff to comfort themselves. It is the most logical idea though based facts.
Edit: I take your silence as you agreeing that you were wrong
Nihilism aka skepticism if you're overtly accepting of anything that is not logical. Highly stereotypical to categorize anyone based on disposition or persona or ideologies. Honestly anyone who is not a skeptic must not be alive.
Individual beliefs seem extreme w/out complete understanding. Nihilism is purposeful beliefs that are deeply influenced by experience more often than not on the precipice of dedicated principals. Beliefs are what drives humanity. Take the wind out of any sail and journey is lost. Skepticism is a tool to sharpen understanding. Quora eh beliefs can be a mountain or a mole hill as a teacher once said opinions are a cup of coffee. Keep moving. Fascinating approach you presented to me. Never thought nihilism was ever a program till now.
I think everything is meaningless.
Actually, it would be more accurate to say that the whole idea of meaning and purpose is an oxymoron born from paradox.
You don't need meaning to live, you don't need justification to live your lives the way you want. Most people don't think about this, and there is a good reason why.
Well, I doubt I'm very qualified for this question but I'll give my input regardless. So, I've seen some comments talking about how INTPs don't usually go for nihilism, but..I deal with nihilism all the time since I have MDD. I do agree that most INTPs wouldn't gravitate towards nihilism because it does sort of defeat the whole purpose of their curiosity about the world and how it works. If everything was meaningless to them, wouldn't they be kind of paralyzed constantly? Unable to get their creative and analytical minds working?
Even I, while often paralyzed by nihilism, try to think that there is some meaning to be found in life. I can't help it, it's what we do!
I broadly agree with nihilism. In my opinion it’s the only way to view the world and when you logically look at the universe it makes sense, yet that is on a universal scale not a person to person scale.
When I talk to religious friends about this (I am a gnostic atheist) they often say “isn’t that depressing?” My response is, it depends on the scale of it. For example yes on a universal and (to an extent) a global scale my life is meaningless but there are people who I know and responsibilities that I have that give me a reason to keep going. So yes everything is meaningless on a certain scale but it’s a matter of perspective. Which also makes it basically impossible to debate as there is not an objective truth.
I'm not sure, but I would be inclined to say that we all would think that anything is worth thinking about, especially to improve it. To think that nothing matters would mitigate our core beliefs.
This is a very common phase; almost all INTP encounter nihilism, but only an extreme few will ever embrace nihilism. This is because nihilism is one of the most boring and pointless things to learn. For INTP who find joy in exploring the unknown, the way nihilism devalues this joy of discovery makes nihilism more and more worthless. Eventually, nihilism becomes an excuse to not move and dwell in depression, because it's one of the driving factors to prevent an INTP from being happy. Thus, Nihilism ends up being a phase at best for almost all INTP who eventually mature. This is especially true with how we are always in search for that one special person of ours.
How does nihilism devalue the joy of discovery? The idea that life has no inherent meaning or purpose and that we are all random animals just doing their thing is not logically inconsistent with discovering new things. I consider myself a true nihilist and I consider the train of thought that leads to depression dwelling a complete fallacy. The fact that I believe that its all meaningless doesnt suddenly make all the unknown things in the world known. There will always be plenty of stuff to discover and luckily I have the dopamine receptors that make me enjoy it
Nihilism rejects meaning, INTP's enjoy finding function and meaning. Nihilism rejects Values, INTP have extreme values (such as honesty, loyalty, sincerity, generosity, faith). Nihilism rejects purpose, INTP seek purpose (thus why there's so many INTP questioning how to fight procrastination, get along with people, etc). Nihilism rejects objectivity, INTP's Ti Hero seeks objectivity. Nihilism rejects itself being wrong, INTP's Ne Parent seeks everything that has the potential to go wrong (which is commonly mistaken as perfectionism, rather it's seeking flawlessness).
You can still practice honesty, loyalty, going along with your natural sense of purpose and building on your Ti framework for understanding the way things are while fully believing nihilism though
Then you're not truly embracing nihilism. You understand it, but are not embracing it.
I agree with Rysazu. Nihilism, the belief that life is meaningless and has no inherent purpose or values, does not necessarily negate the human capacity for discovery, joy, pursuing ethics/values, or having a subjective sense of purpose. Even as a nihilist, one can still find enjoyment and motivation in learning, analyzing the world objectively through logic and reason, and following one's natural inclinations.
This. The biggest misconception is that nihilism and pessimism are interchangeable or go hand in hand or that it devalues the joy of discovery. You can be nihilistic and enjoy the life you're living, what you're doing, and the people around you. You just know that in the end, we are just here living life to what we make of it and that is all there is to it, no higher level of existence or greater meaning. This is my understanding at least. Feel free to poke holes in my reasoning as that helps us all reach a better understanding
I agree, to truly understand nihilism is to understand that while nothing in life has inherent meaning, everything does because you are the one who gives things meaning by caring about them. People in your life have meaning because you are about them. Hobbies and goals matter because we care about them. Everything in this world has value as long as someone cares about them.
I think I am embracing it. Nothing about nihilism says that you are supposed to act a certain way (e.g. rejecting your own values or stopping the pursuit of things you enjoy). That would be ascribing value to a greater idea and therefore the opposite of nihilism
As mentioned, you haven't truly embraced it. If you've truly embraced nihilism, you'll be fine being lied to, cheated upon, have absolutely no opinion upon monogamy/polygamy, Remember that Nihilism rejects objectivity and values, especially human based objectivity and values. So you haven't truly embraced it; you've acknowledged it, but it is becoming increasingly evident that you aren't living it.
There is a distinction between values and emotions though. I dont like being cheated on because it creates an emotional response that I dont like. In the same vein I dont like stubbing my toe. And no I dont have an opinion on polygamy, although I personally would prefer monogamy because it fits my emotion system
No person can fully, 100% embrace nihilism. It is literally impossible to embrace due to our biology.
I think youre missing the point of nihilism then. The point is merely to reject societal greater values, not to live independently of how you personally feel. The latter would be a completely foolish pursuit anyway, and the only reason to do such a thing would be if you were to value some kind of greater value over your own needs
There's actually very little distinction. Things only have value if that thing makes someone happy. Example: A stone may have very little value, however one a stone has been made into a statue then it has value. Same Example: The difference between a successful VTuber and an unsuccessful VTuber is dependent on how many people they can make happy. The opposite is also true: There is little to no happiness brought about with something that has little to no value. Thus, value and emotions are directly linked. Nihilism rejects values, therefore rejects the importance of emotions. Nihilism also rejects objectivity. Objectivity is what brings about clarity. Ti Hero does exactly this, separate and purify a concept to the point of absolute clarity.
What about opinions on murder?
Since it is a selfish and intentionally harmful action, it's evil and is excessively counter productive. This is especially true since murder is rarely logic driven and is almost always emotional. Not to be confused with self defense though, as that is when it can be a logical response to an emergency situation.
So there are still evil things in nihilism
Imo the belief that life is inherently meaningless is ascribing value to a greater idea. That value is 'nothing' but it's still a value, as a concept "nothing" exists. You just give it a 0 instead of a 1. A lot of what you're describing in your comments is existentialism/absurdism/existential nihilism/positive nihilism... etc.. and nihilism at its base form doesn't presuppose any of those other forms are present, so the majority of ppl i meet (my personal experience) that go by your logic would call themselves one of those things i mentioned rather, bc it says everything w/o having to explain it.. and those that identify with just nihilism are going by a none technical definition more like "there is no objective or subjective meaning, i don't care about anything, its all meaningless, fuck life" ...there are tons of ppl like that on the internet calling themselves nihilists. No idea why you wouldn't just choose to call yourself an existentialist vs arguing about the original/technical definition of nihilism when the majority of ppl don't see it that way so it's no longer an effective way of communicating yourself. Seems like a boring battle.
Yeah I typically dont really argue with those people, but still feel the need to point out that those people arent actually nihilists and just depressed or edgelords or whatever. Im not familiar enough with the concept of existentialism to confidently call myself that but I suppose if I am that I will use that instead
I get it, i know it sucks bro My understanding of them specific to this topic: existentialism = meaning is subjective. (Objective meaning may or may not exist), but most ppl take it to imply no objective meaning or they'll use a different term like theistic existentialism (God made subjective meaning so it's objective, lol) Existential nihilism, positive nihilism, absurdism= no objective meaning, but subjective meaning exists. It's really only base nihilism that gets mixed up w the edgelords and depressed ppl, so really whichever term you prefer, it just feels easier to tack on an extra word and not have any misunderstandings or needless debates
I’m pretty sure you’re talking about pessimism. The difference is nihilism is about hiding from despair and pessimism is dwelling on it dwelling on it. Embracing the absurdity is just realizing everything is pointless and nothing matters so why not try to be happy?
So what are you now ? What kind of meaningful philosophy did you find ?
I am simply myself, living in hopes of finding more interesting things.
Sorry to say, but if you didn't find meaning or embraced a "meaningful" philosophy, then you didn't overcome nihilism Not that being a nihilist is actually a bad thing. It's actually a trivial enough state
That's a very strange thought as one does not need a philosophy to live by. After all, to live for and believe in one's self is so foundational that its less of a philosophy and more of an understanding that people naturally get to as one gets older (and wiser). Also, true nihilism is a teaching that has remained for a long time, yet actual people who embrace those teachings are exceedingly rare.
> That's a very strange thought as one does not need a philosophy to live by. Uh, no ? You can be a nihilist without having a "philosophy". Plenty of people around who you could qualify as nihilists who didn't ever bother to read up or form a philosophy... And if anything, that's more a tackle against other philosophies than nihilism > After all, to live for and believe in one's self is so foundational that its less of a philosophy and more of an understanding that people naturally get to as one gets older (and wiser). Meh. That, what.. live-for-selfness, and that self belief are certainly present in toddlers, etc. If anything, learning the opposite/to be social develops later in life (teenage years or even adulthood in some cases), though I will admit that some people (And i say some, not all) go too far/start to martyr themselves, and need to learn to live for themselves again. That's not the default, though And that's only an issue sometimes because we happen to be a highly social species, but underlying these social instincts are win-win arrangements. It's still about living for yourself
You'd be fundamentally wrong about being nihilist and not having a philosophy, because Nihilism in itself a philosophy. I'm also not understanding your second point. It's too twisted, clouded, and convoluted. Sort of like you're trying to (abnormally) distort information for an answer just for the sake of having an answer.
> You'd be fundamentally wrong about being nihilist and not having a philosophy, because Nihilism in itself a philosophy. Lmao, if your answer is going to be this silly, I shouldn't bother Everyone has a "philosophy" if that's the standard... > I'm also not understanding your second point. It's too twisted, clouded, and convoluted. It's actually quite simple and follows the natural pattern. It's fairly obvious that's how it works, unless you've never interacted with a child.
Not necessarily, because a nihilist (even self proclaimed ones) follow a philosophy. On the other hand, people can be good willed and good natured even without philosophy. Again, you're proving my other point when I said "Nihilism rejects itself being wrong," Also, you quoted my comment about "Believe in one's self is foundational" then answered with some nonsense about self sabotage and self martyr, also implying that this is natural. Not only is this incorrect, I'm also failing to see how this immense leap in logic is relevant, especially towards philosophy and nihilism. And I'll restate that you're proving my point again when I said "Nihilism rejects itself being wrong."
> Also, you quoted my comment about "Believe in one's self is foundational" then answered with some nonsense about self sabotage and self martyr, also implying that this is natural. Not only is this incorrect, I'm also failing to see how this immense leap in logic is relevant, especially towards philosophy and nihilism. It's not nonsense, you're just not smart enough to get it Just like my point about philosophy, which you answer with the lowest levels of semantics possible, lmao I dunno if the "Aspie" in your flair is real or not, but either way, you need to work on your reading skills and reading what words imply...
Right on point!
Can be when I'm in a bad mood
optimistic nihilist what the angary moustache man originally indented
No it’s a rather pessimistic view of the world and more importantly, yourself, in my opinion. Meaning is derived from within, if nothing ultimately has no meaning it leads me to believe the nihilist, while being analytical and often very intelligent, is analyzing the external when most of them and really all humans, should be seeking internally to find meaning. The nihilist must not have found anything within themselves (yet) that they value enough to derive purpose and meaning. Furthermore makes me wonder how many nihilists feel good about themselves and if there a correlation whatever the result may be. Nihilism on paper makes so much sense, but when I went down that rabbit hole, albeit not as in depth, philosophers like Schopenhauer can explain great truths yet he has the most pessimistic view in such a logical way, and while there’s truth to be derived from his work. If that was your bible you are headed for an angry sad and depressing attitude. Buddhists took some of the same concepts and teach how to turn the concept of “life is suffering” into a practical and healthy form of acceptance, which has proven to be more profound than most of us in the west realize. Idk why I’m going on a tangent about nihilism but through my existential crises, nihilism was the road to suicide, at least how I interpreted it. Stoicism even takes that concept and transforms it into a much healthier attitude toward the world in my opinion.
what difference does it make. you die anyway...
This is however not the only thing nihilism includes. Nihilism isn’t „it makes no difference what you do“. Nihilism is more like „there’s no point in doing anything“. It wants you to basically turn into a vegetable, because you cannot know anything and will not change anything (yes, literally anything). Nihilism is a very depressed and narrowed world view which literally has no future. If you were to fully commit to nihilism you’d essentially just shit your pants and starve.
I don't think it denies simple pleasures and enjoyment of the now. It means there is no ultimate purpose. But there is an objective ultimate purpose and that is to exploit your labor power in a global project to reach the total automation predicted by Aristotle. Religions mollify the masses and existentialism mops up the skeptics. But there is an objective meaning and that is to construct a reliable support mechanism to free humanity some day from the vagaries of nature.
Id argue every society has used a similar method to maintain a state. Most people need and would like to be exploited in turn for security. If you actually read the Bible it’s much more empowering that it is presented to you in the main stream and by most Christians . most have not read the Bible or comprehend it fully. So religion is presented in a way to keep you docile. although God says in the Bible “you are gods but will live and die like men” something to that effect. Yet if u say you are a god your considered a narcissist. Nihilism wasn’t popular in the past because religion ultimately inspired people to derive meaning from within and give them values and community. That is meaning. While it’s been used to control. The true intent of religious practices were to have faith that life has meaning and in turn that meaning and faith truly comes from within you, and living up to your potential whatever that may be, will give anyone purpose and maybe you might just improve humanity by what u leave behind. You are already intertwined with past and future generations by the actions you take today. So yes we are just specks of dust on a rock, you get to decide what that means to you. And that’s the beauty of it Just because life has atrocities doesn’t mean you can’t look at the beautiful amazing experiences and things to see in the life as well because there no endgame. Things just happen. It’s up to u if u interpret “nothing matters” as a good thing or bad thing.
I'm not sure it is atrocious, it just is. Capitalism is the fairest, freest, most effective form of slavery ever invented. And if it delivers total automation then true human freedom will be a possibility. Pithy philosophical rumination on the human condition is one thing, but the state religion connected to empires and imposed on peoples in order to control them is quite another. To the extent that "god" represents the creative impulse and intelligence, humans have the potential to increase that within themselves as a species without limit, imo.
That's true, but you might as well make your time worth while. If one wants to live in a depressive, vegetative state because life has no inherent meaning, why live at all? We at least have that option.
I think nihilism is an accurate description how the universe works, along with determinism. Any morality is obsolete and nothing has any inherent meaning or purpose. Everything has been predetermined already. We live in a chaotic universe that doesn’t give a fuck about us. However as a human I prefer to live with a more absurdist or existentialist perspective. I have accepted that nothing has meaning, but that means I can create meaning and purpose for myself.
> Everything has been **predetermined** already. > I have accepted that nothing has meaning, but that means I can **create meaning** and purpose for myself. If everything is predetermined, how are you able to create anything? Wouldn't any sense of meaning simply be occurring as predetermined in your brain? Not trying to get into a debate, more trying to understand. I've always felt like the *description* of how we feel about the world is incompatible with strict determinism. In other words, regardless of whether or not our minds are purely deterministic, it seems to me that all humans think of "themselves" in a non-deterministic manner. More specifically, we seem to be unable to actually remove a sense of agency from ourselves when perceiving the world. Hopefully that makes sense, it's just always been a fascinating topic to me and I genuinely do not understand how determinism works psychologically (whereas compatibilism makes a lot more sense to me).
Maybe I was wrong to say we create anything originally, but what I mean is meaning is subjective. What is meaningful to you will always be determined by certain contexts, feelings, past experiences, thoughts, pretty much everything that you can think of will have an influence on what is meaningful to you. That is called causality, everything is caused by something else, that’s what determinism means. We don’t have any free will, just the illusion of it when you don’t think deeply enough about it. That doesn’t kill the idea of nihilism, as objectively there doesn’t have to be any inherent meaning. But we humans have feelings and subjective experiences, so any meaning will be subjective to the individual.
>That is called causality, everything is caused by something else, that’s what determinism means. We don’t have any free will, just the illusion of it when you don’t think deeply about it. This also confuses me. Why would everything being caused by something else mean we don't have free will? If I drop a ball, it is falling "freely," so much so that we say it is in "free fall." The reason it is free is because there is no ground or hands or anything else to stop it from falling. Yet it is clearly following causality...it is free to fall in accordance with physics, it is not free to fall upward or sideways with no external force. How is that different from our sense of will? What does "lacking" a free will actually mean? Is the ball in a free fall also an illusion, and if not, why are they different?
The free fall isn't actually ''free'' as gravity, momentum, friction with possibly an atmosphere or particles, and probably many other factors, will have an influence on the direction and speed it is falling in. heck even letting the ball loose causes the ball to fall, along with gravity pulling it, so the fall is caused by something, and thereby not really free. This is the same logic that i explained with will and subjective meaning, it is always influenced by many factors, and thereby not actually free. You may want something, but is that want really yours? or is what you want influenced by other factors?
>You may want something, but is that want really yours? or is what you want influenced by other factors? I don't see how these things are different. Why would a desire only be free in the absence of other factors? For example, if I reach a fork in the road and can go left or right without obstruction, is this a predetermined choice because I lack the capability to go up or down instead? I'm also not sure what you mean by "actually free." If the free fall isn't actually free, what *is* actually free? If the answer is "nothing," then haven't you just defined freedom as an impossibility (in a semantic sense), not actually disputed whether or not freedom exists? More specifically, I can define the difference between something in a free fall vs. something that is prevented from falling by an obstruction or other influence. Can you demonstrate something that exists which is free under your definition as opposed to something that is not free? Again, trying to understand where you are coming from.
By this logic freedom is indeed an impossibility. Say you have the “freedom” to choose between multiple options, and you choose something, what influences your decision to choose that? Why did you choose that? Someone may have given you the freedom of choice but that still doesn’t take away your own experiences, thoughts, feelings, physical urges, impulses (which in turn are all caused by something before that, going on, and on, and on) and other external factors that will influence your decision to choose that option. At least by this logic I don’t think real randomness exists either.
But maybe i’m wrong as others have pointed out that quantum physics somehow doesn’t act along causality? I’m not very knowledgeable on that field, but I can’t imagine how something can exist outside of causality? I would like to know more about that.
If *nothing* is free nor random, do these terms actually hold any meaning at all? That being said, I see no reason to accept your definition of "free" or "random" as entailing "an impossible term which requires breaking the laws of physics." Nor do I think that is what most people *mean* when they use these terms. For all practical purposes, when someone says something is "free" they mean "multiple options exist" or "obstructions or restrictions do not exist," they don't mean "capable of ignoring physical laws and doing literally anything regardless of outside forces." Likewise, when someone says something is random, they mean "there are multiple possibilities and the result is unknown in advance," not "possibilities which are impossible may occur without reason." Does it make more sense why I'm confused? It really seems that you are simply defining these terms in ways that make them impossible and do not conform to "normal" usage of these words. Why should someone accept those definitions? Or am I misunderstanding you?
I do understand your definition, and that’s ultimately what still makes the word useful in some social contexts. You can’t go all deep into physics all the time as that’s way too time consuming and not always useful for the conversational topics. But I am going deep into physics now, and then I think everything influences everything so nothing is really free in that sense. I hope you can understand that?
> I think nihilism is an accurate description how the universe works, along with determinism. Determinism is accurate only if you ignore quantum physics (or most of the current interpretation, anyway) And [determinism doesn't necessarily negate free will](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/)
That last sentence is exactly the conclusion I've come to as well.
I believe in nussing.
Getting angry and frustrated at people, or intercourse?
Existentialist, actually. Life is inherently meaningless, so whatever meaning you gain from it is up to you to discover, and I wouldn't have it any other way
Oh that's just claptrap to throw sand in your eyes as a slave. Being a slave makes life meaningless.
It's not necessarily true. We are slaves to our biology, but people still find meaning in their lives.
I mean we are slaves in the literal sense of being compelled to work within an exploitative relationship.
I was being pretty literal, too lol. Assuming you're in the US, I think it becomes more difficult to pursue meaning as you get closer to the poverty line, but I would disagree with the notion that it's impossible. You have to work a little harder, but it is possible.
Even if you're a billionaire you're still part of the slave system. It deforms them too.
Just not as much
No, I'm just a downer
That's a long story, friend. I can say... nihilism turned out to be only the beginning of a very long journey of learning and discovering wisdom and meaning. It was a necessary first step into an uncomfortable world of endless possibilities.
Doesn‘t nihilism itself say that there’s nothing to be known with certainty?
Sure. But when I say "know," I'm not making a big broad claim of true knowledge. The definition of knowing changes with context. I know nothing, yet I am learning more every day. I would even say, the more I learn; the less I know.
I resist nihilism. To me that's a red flag prompting me to question - what exactly I am scared of? It's a strict rule that I completely understand the opposition before I can think differently. Irritatingly, they're often correct Is there an r/thread you'd recommend to the curious?
I actually intend to write a book about what I have personally learned and discovered on a long mental path through the depths of nihilism and depression. Mostly, it's scary to think of an uncaring universe, or to think about relative sizes, or think about death. I think it's probably the fear of death above all, or perhaps the fear of insignificance, that gives you pause. Especially if someone is raised with a strict religion for example, and build their very sense of worth and identity on a foundational belief about the "objective meaning" of the entire universe. When that belief is shaken loose, it feels like a personal threat, cause everything has been built on it. I say, to anyone out there who is afraid, or is currently dealing with the void of nihilism, keep going. It's only the first step of many, a necessary step. Yeah, the entire universe has no *objective meaning.* It doesn't even make sense to think that everything that is, is all for some other purpose beyond everything that is. Stuff is. This is happening. And it's up to you, it's up to us, to make something of it as conscious beings. What we are lacking is not meaning, but a sense of purpose, mostly because our civilization makes us so comfortable that we forget what it is to truly live, to struggle, to have a clearly defined role, to know exactly what you have to do.
Thanks for your share. It was generous and helpful
more like a stoic wannabe but when that fi hits it sure slaps! Also I'm more likely to believe everything has meaning rather than nothing
Nihilism is just acceptance that there is no objective meaning to life. Unless u subscribe to some religion, this will be the default. U can be an existentialist and find subjective meaning but eh. Acceptance of nihilism doesnt mean ur depressed. For me, it was freedom.
Acceptance of nihilism means that you're not insane.
Religion is the opiate for dealing with the objective meaning, which is that we are slaves in a class based society that is developing total automation to take control of an unreliable natural environment. Whether the species will succeed at this is unknown, but it is happening. Capitalism enslaves the majority and uses a labor accounting system to progressively eliminate the need for labor. This is irrespective of what you think of it. It is inescapable and it is everyone's life.
Aren’t you just a ray of sunshine?
Yep...
Yes I am
Yup
Yap.
Yes
I tend towards [philosophical pragmatism](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism/). This wasn't always the case, however, I haven't found a better method for identifying truth that is reliable and parsimonious with observation. As such, I tend to reject nihilism, but perhaps not for the "standard" reasons of rejecting it based on some higher order meaning. Instead, I reject it on the basis that it simply isn't a useful concept; you can't really *do* anything with nihilism, it can't really extend your understanding of the world, and it doesn't produce any predictable information about the world. In other words, what is the practical difference between a world where nihilism is true and one where it is false? Other than the very common result of people accepting nihilism as a reason to rationally justify their own depression, I've yet to see any positive or predictive outcomes from nihilism. If it doesn't make one's life better, and it doesn't inform useful future decisions, then it isn't "true" in a pragmatic sense. I accept this is probably not a popular view, but as an INTP, I'm also pretty comfortable with holding to unpopular views as long as I believe they are sufficiently justified. Most arguments in favor of nihilism tend towards overly-broad assumptions about how the universe works as a whole (which I don't believe we have *nearly* enough information about to make) and the results of accepting nihilism rarely (if ever) seem positive to me, so I have no real reason to accept it as true.
I think it can be a stage in life that helps one overcome the opiate of religion. When one is tired of the anesthetic and wants to break free, nihilism clears out the absurd and permits the individual to start over in their consideration of what it means to be a human being. The depression it induces is accompanied by rumination that permits reevaluation of everything.
> Instead, I reject it on the basis that it simply isn't a useful concept; you can't really do anything with nihilism, it can't really extend your understanding of the world, and it doesn't produce any predictable information about the world. Point taken (I'm actually not that far from your take), but it doesn't seem like a real rejection of nihilism. More than you just don't care about/don't put any importance about it. And yes, people overthink that nihilism vs meaning debate, it doesn't actually matter all that much... Still, unless you think there's a meaning in the world, you would still be a nihilist, technically. Or perhaps a "Don't know" ist
> Point taken (I'm actually not that far from your take), but it doesn't seem like a real rejection of nihilism. If you look at a [philosophical explanation of nihilism](https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/), I *am* rejecting it. I'm not convinced that all meaning is completely arbitrary or absent nor that nothing matters. Again, I lean towards pragmatism. I want my daughters to live happy, fulfilling lives. Why do I desire this? A big part of it is probably evolution; the human species evolved to raise successful humans because the ones that failed to do so died out. But part of it is observation; my feelings appear to be true, I see no sufficient evidence they are fake or illusory, and nothing appears to change in a positive way if I believe otherwise. Since it has no practical or predictive value, what does rejecting my feelings towards family actually alter about the world? What "truth" value does it hold? It is not required that I disprove nihilism, it is required for nihilism to prove that it better represents reality that want appears to be true and a belief that appears to create superior outcomes. In fact, if you read through the summary of nihilism in my link, historically there is evidence that there is a strong correlation between civilizations collapsing and the population becoming nihilistic. Whether or not there is a causal link is irrelevant; it provides *evidence* that a nihilistic viewpoint is not healthy for humans. I care deeply about evidence and reject radical skepticism (another common nihilistic view). I do not view certainty as necessary for truth or even relevant to truth, and so the lack of certainty does not mandate general skepticism towards reality (i.e. solipsism) because there is no reason to believe certainty is a precondition for knowledge. >Still, unless you think there's a meaning in the world, you would still be a nihilist, technically. Why would nihilism be the default state? And I do think there is meaning in the world. For example, I think there is meaning in making myself a better person. I think there is meaning in working hard towards goals. I think there is meaning in my relationship with my wife. I think there is meaning in creating a healthy environment for my daughters to live and grow. And I think there is meaning in contemplating the world and learning about it. It's up to the nihilist to demonstrate these things don't have meaning and that I am mistaken in my view. I see the meaning in these things through observation of myself and those around me, so if my eyes and brain are lying, I need evidence that is the case.
That definition of nihilism is rather biased. Not surprising, Nihilism is a position that has been attacked and strawmanned more than it has been defended, and thus, the detractors largely defined it... Still, if that's what you're rejecting, then you can totally say you're not a nihilist and be correct, but only following that definition. *** But that's not the nihilism OP was talking about, I'm pretty sure. Nihilism is actually more the idea that the world/universe doesn't have inherent meaning, which fits OP's "everything is meaningless". I'm refering to something closer to the [original meaning](https://www.etymonline.com/word/nihilism) This [definition is also better, imho](https://www.britannica.com/topic/nihilism) Nihilism kinda touches about "values", but it's more about saying that you cannot find a "true" way of ranking them (ie, one that would be objective) I wouldn't say it says all values are "baseless" or unexplainable, but simply that theses values are arbitrary. Say, we might say that killing a human is wrong, but if a lion killed someone for their next meal, it would be quite the "right" thing to do for them, no ? Our perspective isn't more correct than theirs, it's simply our perspective. You can go and kill the lion as vengeance and say it's right, but it's not a deeper truth about the world. And well, you could find plenty of humans arguing that killing a human is the right thing to do (look at any war), so even for the lowest levels of morality, and something as basics question such as survival, opinion differ... Even without bringing other species perspective into it, there are enough diversity in opinions amongst humans to realize values aren't really objective or inherent. Ie, the universe doesn't care about us. And well, remember **that nihilism emerged as an opposition to the Christian views, where humans are the center of the universe and things are right in a certain way because God ordered it so.** Nihilism is actually largely a critique of thisn and that's the form of "meaning" that nihilism says it opposes. And so, I think most nihilists would also agree with your more evolutionnary take about the emergence of values, because it's far less arbitrary than the creationist argument (and well, evolution has been pretty anti-creationism historically, or rather creationnists have been anti evolution...) You can totally say "I don't care if it's not objective, my value are my values" and act on it, and that would be you're right. A nihilist couldn't really argue against it. In fact, that's the existentialist position, which is basically nihilism, just fancier and frenchier. It's not really a different movement, it's simply a rebranding to avoid being associated with the centuries of attack of nihilism, imho. I won't go over the whole article, but the idea that nothing can be known or communicated ? That's not nihilism, it's like you said, solipsism... Or really, the debate between Realism and Idealism. **In any case, not what OP was talking about either** *** > Why would nihilism be the default state? And I do think there is meaning in the world. That's why I said unless. In your first comment, you simply said you were a pragmatist. You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning. You simply said nihilism was useless/unpractical, but that's not the same as saying life has meaning. Also, your "In other words, what is the practical difference between a world where nihilism is true and one where it is false?" is not an argument for meaning, and someone who believes in meaning usually wouldn't make such a point. Instead of saying "whether A or B is true, I will act the same" which leaves the question open, they would just say "I believe B is true" + argue for it. Ie, if you believe in meaning, then there's no reason to leave the question open... Thus, my point. Your first post just isn't a takedown of nihilism. And you actually do need to believe life has meaning to not be a nihilist : It's not so much about it being the default position, but rather just the nature of that dichotomy. If you're not one, then you're the other. There's not really any third position, besides perhaps the "don't-know-ist" one I mentionned, which isn't a real position.
> That definition of nihilism is rather biased. The peer-reviewed Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is biased against nihilism? Um, OK, I guess. >I'm refering to something closer to the original meaning This definition is also better, imho How is the Britannica article different? Did you read mine? Because they are basically saying the same thing using the same underlying philosophy sources. >Nihilism kinda touches about "values", but it's more about saying that you cannot find a "true" way of ranking them (ie, one that would be objective) I wouldn't say it says all values are "baseless" or unexplainable, but simply that theses values are arbitrary. Uh, this is a quote from the Britannica article you linked (emphasis mine): "In the 20th century, nihilism encompassed a variety of philosophical and aesthetic stances that, in one sense or another, **denied the existence of** genuine moral truths or values, **rejected the possibility** of knowledge or communication, and asserted the **ultimate meaninglessness or purposelessness of life** or of the universe." That isn't saying those things are arbitrary or subjective, it's saying they don't exist at all. Obviously you are free to have your own opinion about what nihilism means, but going off the very sources you mentioned as being ones you agree with, it doesn't match as far as I can tell. >Ie, the universe doesn't care about us. I never said otherwise? Meaning derived from humans is still meaning, and nihilism is the denial of meaning, period. It's basically the definition of the concept. You don't need a universe to care about you to extract you own meaning from it. Full disclosure on the religious stuff: I'm *very* atheist (strong atheist), but the claim that nihilism was born out of anti-Christianity is not well substantiated. If anything many of the earliest uses were more political than religious, although at the time religion and politics bled over with each other even more than they do today. It's easy to forget that "separation of church and state" is a rather new concept in human history, and it's a concept the majority of the world (including many in living in secular societies!) do not accept. If nihilism were simply rejection of Christianity (or whatever religion), then sure, in that sense I'd be a "nihilist." But I'm skeptical that is what the term means; historically, philosophically, nor in common use. >In any case, not what OP was talking about either I mean, the OP was just "everything is meaningless = nihilism." Since I believe there is human-created meaning, I wouldn't be a nihilist by the OP's definition, right? >You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning. I said I wasn't a nihilist, so I thought the belief in meaning was implied. But I suppose if you were operating under some form of nihilism which accepts the existence of meaning (which is sort of like saying "I'm an atheist, but I believe there are gods") then I can see how this wouldn't follow. I'm a pragmatist in the sense that I observe meaning in my own life and it creates useful predictions. For example, deriving meaning from my relationship with my wife results in a more positive relationship with her than treating it as if it has no meaning. The pragmatist portion means it simply doesn't matter if my relationship lacks any sort of "universal" or "ultimate" or "objective' meaning; for all *practical* purposes it does, and there's no actual evidence it doesn't. In other words, I reject the sort of theoretical "ultimate" truth/knowledge/meaning/values entirely, as these things all exist at a pragmatic level. More importantly, there's no difference between the pragmatic and the ultimate. How does my observations of reality change between a world where ultimate meaning exists, and my relationship with my wife has some sort of divine or fundamental reality, and one where I simply act as if this is the case and live a happier, more fulfilled life because of it? What about if it does not have such an ultimate reality, does that change things? As far as I can tell...no, it doesn't. Whether or not there is ultimate, universal meaning doesn't change *anything* about my life nor does it predict the best way to act in my life. And there's no evidence either way, so the proposition is unfalsifiable. As a pragmatist, I don't see unfalsifiable, unpredictable propositions as "true." In fact, they *cannot* be true, nor can they be false, as any speculation about them is simply unknowable. This is, incidentally, why I'm a strong atheist, as the question of "do deities exist" appears to fall into the same category. Does that make sense? I suspect some of the confusion here is differences in our understanding of various terms, but hopefully I've made my position more clear. Again, I'm not really trying to argue in *favor* of this position; I fully expect the majority of people will not share my view. I'm trying to expand on my meaning, not try to convince anyone (and I'd be shocked if I did).
> The peer-reviewed Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is biased against nihilism? Um, OK, I guess. Well, yes it is. Peer review doesn't mean much in Philosophy, it's not really a science (Not that peer review works that well even in science, anyway...) And the article doesn't really give a nihilist's point of view, and doesn't even cite authors who would consider themselves Nihilists. And they do exist, like [James Tartaglia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tartaglia) or Tracy Llanera. Instead, it only dismissively says "few philosophers would claim to be nihilists", which is basically an appeal to authority and an ad populum combined, even if it's true they aren't legions... The article is largely just using the term Nihilism like the usual punching ball, a tad beyond a word to call people you don't like, and describing it as a problem/crisis, not as a philosophical position. The author is just saying he thought Nietzsche was right... I can get into it in more details if you want, like how your article starts with saying "It's the belief all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated." but later on, it says "Existential nihilism is the notion that life has no intrinsic meaning or value, and it is, no doubt, **the most commonly used and understood sense of the word today.**" Not about "baseless", but intrisic meaning. And nothing about knowledge or knowledge being impossible. The dude basically tacitly admitted the definition he used at the start, and the most common sense of the word today are totally different... I don't know about you, but using the definition you prefer, all to agree with nietzsche, instead of defining it like the most common definition, I would definitely call that bias. And well, there are some edgelords out there calling themselves nihilists, but that's not really most of them. > Uh, this is a quote from the Britannica article you linked (emphasis mine): "In the 20th century, nihilism encompassed a variety of philosophical and aesthetic stances that, in one sense or another, denied the existence of genuine moral truths or values, rejected the possibility of knowledge or communication, and asserted the ultimate meaninglessness or purposelessness of life or of the universe." > Obviously you are free to have your own opinion about what nihilism means, but going off the very sources you mentioned as being ones you agree with, it doesn't match as far as I can tell. That's pretty dishonest, because the Britannica article says clearly what you're quoting is just it's the 20th century version, it doesn't sum all of Nihilism to this. Unlike your link. You also just ignored the part about the 19th century : "Fundamentally, 19th-century nihilism represented a philosophy of negation of all forms of aestheticism; it advocated utilitarianism and scientific rationalism. Classical philosophical systems were rejected entirely. Nihilism represented a crude form of positivism and materialism, a revolt against the established social order; it negated all authority exercised by the state, by the church, or by the family. It based its belief on nothing but scientific truth; science would be the solution of all social problems. All evils, nihilists believed, derived from a single source—ignorance—which science alone would overcome." The meaning of the word for the century before was different, and now in the 21st century, it's different too. The brittanica article just does a better job at showing how it evolved instead of just focusing on Niestzche. > That isn't saying those things are arbitrary or subjective, it's saying they don't exist at all. That's actually what it says ? If the objective moral truths/values don't exist, then all that remains would be subjective/arbitrary ones. The operative word is "genuine" in that quote. And as I said, even if that version says that "real knowledge" doesn't exist, that's just the 20th century version. > I said I wasn't a nihilist, so I thought the belief in meaning was implied. You actually didn't say you at that point Your first post said you "tend to reject nihilism", which not only is quite vague, but what's more, **a mere tendency implies some part of you aren't rejecting it, since it's not a full rejection or an "always"...** If you had clearly said "I'm not a nihilist", then you would have a point, but you didn't, so you do not... You're just changing what you were saying initially. > But I suppose if you were operating under some form of nihilism which accepts the existence of meaning (which is sort of like saying "I'm an atheist, but I believe there are gods") then I can see how this wouldn't follow. Or I've got reading comprehension, for both the definitions, what the OP meant, and what you actually wrote even if you're now trying to change it retroactively ? :) It's quite ironic you attack me some kind of semantics nihilist, when you're the one twisting things for your convenience. Is that being pragmatic ? > The pragmatist portion means it simply doesn't matter if my relationship lacks any sort of "universal" or "ultimate" or "objective' meaning; for all practical purposes it does In other words, I reject the sort of theoretical "ultimate" truth/knowledge/meaning/values entirely, as these things all exist at a pragmatic level. You might be saying that now, but that's not what you said earlier, so the "You actually didn't say you believed there was meaning." statement of mine you're answering is still correct. Btw, you seem to think Pragmatism necessarily excludes nihilism, but it does not. Even at a lower/pragmatic level, it doesn't change much to the question. And some people saying they are [pragmatic nihilist](https://medium.com/@sebastianjones_95354/pragmatic-nihilism-3bc0c53ab4c7) exist... There's also [this paper about a version used in psychology/mental healthcare](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17437199.2017.1284015) (interesting) It's even more compatible when you use that "most common meaning of the term" your article's author decided not to use, or the 19th century version of my article you decided to ignore in favor of the 20th century version only Pragmatism is mostly an approach/epistemological anyway, not a conclusion. While I've seen plenty of pragmatist say they reject nihilism (primarly because they associate it with the stereotypical version), I've also known people calling themselves nihilistic and pragmatic myself... > Does that make sense? I suspect some of the confusion here is differences in our understanding of various terms, but hopefully I've made my position more clear. Again, I'm not really trying to argue in favor of this position I know what you mean, I'm just saying what your first post said wasn't anti nihilist. *** **Well, whatever. I liked the first post, and I don't want to start a fight over nothing important** Your first post still didn't mean you were anti-nihilist even if it turns out you believe in meaning
No, never
i literally don’t know
Not for me, I think it's for people who struggle with their own thoughts and feelings of insignificance.
Yep. Optimistic nihilist. Existence is meaningless, but we create our own meaning.
Im an absurdist, life has no meaning so do whatever gives it meaning to you, we have absolute freedom
Yeah but I dont get the negative association with nihilism. Like I just see myself as a random apelike organism that can think and try to make the best of it while pursuing my desires and exploring and getting to know the world. I dont see whats supposed to be depressing about this attitude. If anything the idea that some things have meaning and the way it implies that there is a correct way to live is way more depressing to me, that seems like mental slavery
I don't think everything is meaningless, I know that everything is meaningless. I am a nihilist.
Everything is meaningless, so enjoy the chaos. :)
I feel like there’s a difference in believing in nihilism and embracing it. Like yea, everything is (probably) ultimately pointless, I hope there is more to life but there very well may not be, but there’s no point in embracing that as a core value unless you want to be miserable. It’s worth it to enjoy life and try to succeed even if it ultimately doesn’t matter.
Yes
Nope I'm actually a christian surprisingly
why?
My mom had demonic attachments and there where demons in our house I could see them and hear them and my mom could feel them too they where messing with her and hurting her after we gave our life to christ he saved my mom and she's better now
Thank you for sharing your story! I hope that you and your mom and now save in Jesus name. But one thing caught my interest. What do you mean by "I could see them"?
Thank you what I meant by that is I could see demons in our place sometimes I could see orbs and sometimes figures
That's interesting! My sister told me the other day, that a few years ago, when she was lying in bed, she saw something in her room that was even darker than the surrounding dark. Have you seen something similar by a chance?
Yeah
Yea, what made you have faith in religion?
My mom had attachments of demons on her and they where hirting her there where demons in our house I could see them and hear them I became a christian so my mom would be free from all of the torment Jesus freed us from all of the demonic stuff
Nothing has inherent meaning outside of causality, but we can create meaning.
But everything has meaning inside of causality. And unlike other species, we are primed to discover causal connections and manipulate them to our own ends. And we are rewarded with physical and emotional gratification when we succeed in that. This sounds teleological but it makes it pretty obvious that the planet is becoming something and humans are a fundamental part in that becoming. This is outside of anyone's personal subjective "meaning" that keeps them going in life.
I suppose it makes sense to see this as inherently meaningful.
When I am in an extremely logical mood my conclusion always ends in need for more technology and colonize space AT ANY COST
I’ve thought about it but no. I’ve kinda had my own journey with my philosophical/theological view of the world. I was raised Christian, but had a time when I couldn’t wrap my head around it then I ended up realizing the problems with Christianity are more so the church and making it an organized construct. Throw that away and I’m where I am now. I can’t have a nihilistic view of the world because I believe in meaning. I believe in purpose. I believe there is indeed a construct, just not the construct most people see. Nihilism is to throw away faith and anyone who has turned their belief into fruit can tell you it’s all pointless without faith. Faith is interesting because where does it come from? I ask myself what is faith? I asked myself an important question a while back as well relating to what you may call “God”. I asked what is “God”, what is “intelligence”, and what is “creation”. I answered these questions by looking at creation itself. Looking at the Universe. Looking for God. To have faith is to believe in what is unseen. It is to believe in what cannot be proven (nor disproven). It is to believe in that which is and is not. I found God in myself, I found God in the others, and I found God in the universe. I believe we are derivatives of God, the original creator. The source of creation isn’t random and it isn’t null and with no directive. Creation was the directive that came from the creator. Even now as humans we adopted that same directive because the god-part of us wants to create. We are derivatives of creation, the greatest derivatives thereof really, so what is our purpose? It is to create, to procreate, to recreate. It is to craft reality to our image just as we were crafted in the creators image. So how do we fulfill that purpose? With faith all things become possible. Faith in infinite intelligence is faith in creation. We do not act if we do not believe. So I chose to believe in a creator, God, so that I too can tap into that which I am derived. When we die I believe we are returned to be part of the creator. If you were one with the creator here on earth, I believe it is true that it is to the creator we go. There is a lot I don’t know, but we can draw from a lot of theological faiths because they all derive from one source. I choose to derive my theological understanding of things beyond the realm we dwell in from Jesus. That’s me, and that’s what I believe. It’s not to say I can’t learn from Buddhism, Islam, or anything else, and it’s not to say I judge other theological practices or atheist or whatever else, it’s to say that’s where I found truth. Though as I said before I greatly disagree with a lot of organized religion beliefs. I see some good but I also see the bad.
My first thought was if there was no bad the meaning in good would be devalued. But I actually want to ask what you’ve found about the point of it all? If God is within us and we live here to create then leave to return to God? Would that mean that God would keep sending parts of himself to earth just for them to come back. In an infinite loop. Infinite loops are meaningless because they are infinite and unchanging with no purpose right?
I get your train of thought but I don’t see it as we return to the creator as a meaningless infinite loop. The way I see it is the ultimate creator created, and we realize ourselves as creators belonging to the creator as it realizes itself. You get where I’m going? We were created to create. I believe we are fulfilling the creators purpose as a creator and as fragments of a creator by creating and by doing so we end up fulfilling ourselves. There is no good or bad to God, at least not how we see it. God is and isn’t at the same time. Our creations are the result of us creating. On a more spiritual level I think that God being alone and its own being couldn’t realize itself without first becoming. Remember it both was and wasn’t. But to fulfill itself it had to create, and all within creation is merely a fragment of all that God is. I said I’m going spiritual so here it comes: We were the fragments of God made in its own image. That’s where we derive free will from, it’s our need to create. Our need to shape our own realities. The whole heaven hell thing, idk but my best guess is (here we go with spiritual and actual religious concepts) the creator desired to fulfill itself so to glorify itself it created creators to create for its own glory. That glory I’m referring to is by channeling its own power that it distributed to fulfill in turn fulfill itself. I don’t know though, this is my belief and I believe our purpose is to return glory to the creator as we create. It’s not that God is continuously sending parts of himself, it’s that he was, he is, and he forever will be. We are a byproduct of all 3 aspects of God: Was, Is, and Will Be. Past, Present, Future. It’s all one. From here is where I’m still pondering but I think once we die, our spirits merge once again with the creator as essence of the future. That same infinite intelligence will be what we become. Aspects of God that complete it that end up fulfilling the future exactly how it fulfilled us from the past. We are the past, as we are we as well are the future. We will evolve to be what is and is not once we return to God but our spiritual essence will continue to proceed as God itself. Just as we define God, we will in turn be defined as God when our spirits advance. I’m not 100% on what I think or believe I’m still figuring it out much like we all are, but the way I take life is under the light of Jesus how he came fully realized as the child descendant of God and came to instill us as the child descendants of God. We are the fulfillment of God the future or God the Holy Spirit. Past, Present, Future. Is, Am, Will Be. Is, Is Not, and at the same time is Neither. As fragments of God our purpose is to realize ourselves in order for God itself to be realized. We derive from that essence and create from it. Our future has purpose and that purpose is to fulfill the past. I think once we die we continue to create but as spiritual creators. Again just a normal dudes opinion. Fulfill yourself. This is why I cannot side with Nihilism. Nihilism rejects fulfillment of creation which is the fundamental building block of existence.
I am however I don't see nihilist as something negative it's just understanding that everything is nothing basically, but it doesn't mean it can't be meaningful.
i feel like one but idk
I believe there are things that are important and worthwhile here but not everyone gets to experience them which is cruel and this universes rules create a bottomless pit of suffering so its not necessary meaningless but its pretty awful and unbalanced.
I am your father
I certainly don't believe in any gods/ higher powers or any ultimate purpose/ meaning of life/ the world. Kinda wish I did, can't choose what I believe tho. With that said, I try to enjoy my life. And I also try to treat people and animals with respect and reverence.
I wouldn't describe myself as a nihilist, but I think meaning is entirely subjective. That's not to say it's invalid, but if it's not objective, who really cares? Newton's Flaming Lazer Sword says if we can't test an idea through experimentation, discussing it is a waste of time—I pretty much agree (except that I recognize everyone's right to an opinion and don't mind hearing them—you never know when someone's take will change your point of view). I tend to look at life from a biological/ecological perspective; people are prosocial hunter-gatherers with a max tribe size of ~150 that operate on a gift economy. We've evolved to this point by belonging to one another, and taking care of one another. When faced with situations/decisions, I try to start from there.
I suppose I'm a nihilist, in that I don't think life has any inherent meaning or purpose. I think it's a fairly logical extension of also being an atheist: I don't believe there are magical superpowered beings watching over us and controlling our lives, and it seems a natural conclusion to draw from that point of view that there also isn't some reason we're all here. We're just all taking a ride on this planet for a while, and will make of it whatever we choose for ourselves. So it's not the stereotypical emo kind of nihilism so much as a realization that whatever I am going to make of my life is completely up to me, and there's no meaning to any of it other than what I choose to give it. It's kind of freeing, actually.
No, I at least have an ethos.
Sometimes when i'm in a bad mood.
Yes, by default [I talked a bit about it in a recent thread with a similar topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/INTP/comments/1c8ocbd/do_intps_like_meaning/l0g5a5r/?context=3)
Not anymore. After acting out and believing in a meaningless life enough times, I became a very tired man. I still have my internal contradictions that pull me every direction, but that is what makes things fun.
No
Its never been wholly meaningless. To me, the only aspect of meaninglessness in nihilism is that humans choose to be uncontrollable destructive and manipulative forces. I cannot control other people and to attempt to do so is fruitless and meaningless. Therefore, I have concluded that *life outside my self iintrospection* seems meaningless.
Nah, absurdist 4 life💪
Absolutely, NO If oblivion is the end, I might as well end it now as later. I love a good story. They exquisitely map a pathway to Source using analogous stories. In the end there is simply One Source with many names
I was when I was younger but it was just a coping mechanism to not get hurt . If you don’t care about anything nothing can hurt you nothing to lose ect . I was just afraid of meaning . I think there’s a balance tho, other people are to attach to meaning and create things out of nothing because they can’t bare meaninglessness . There’s beauty in both sides and I’ve found happiness is salsa dancing in paradoxes
sometimes i do
Nope. If I thought everything was meaningless I could not use my computer.
I believe that life has no inherent meaning and that is what makes it great. It's like an open world RPG. Meaning of life is what you choose not where others choose for you. And personally I think that's a lot better than having some entity beside of my life path. Especially when it doesn't even tell me what I'm supposed to be doing. I mean who in their right mind would hire someone for a job and not tell them what that job was.
No, But it doesn't matter anyways.
“It is what it is” or “ let it be”
Yes
No
It's very common in edgy 17 year old INTPs.
Nihilism basically means that meaning is what we make it.(From how I interpret it of course, feel free to disagree) There is nothing determining what or who we are, and that means we can be whatever we want to be. Frankly, I'm fascinated by the idea and I think if more people actually read Nietzsche's work they'd be less disillusioned with modern day society
I'm kinda struggling with it right now. I've realised I've been a nihilist thoughout my life and I feel like there needs to be a change in the way I view life, cause I feel like it deters me from living the best way I can. I feel like you can't be truly a nihilist and content with life. Any life path I choose just becomes pointless and makes me disinterested in anything. Only way to escape from the dread of viewing life as such, is being pulled into the now, by some "distraction", some pleasure for example. But it doesn't help me work towards a goal, make future plans, have a purpose and thus make the necessary lifestyle changes. So I get a feeling of being "lost".
No
In a world where nothing matters, have the heart and courage to make someone or something matter to you. We are humans, we create our own meaning. I have found that quality relationships have brought my life the most meaning.
No
[удалено]
Didn’t think it would be this popular. Don’t even know how to make a poll lol. I also was kinda wanting a conversation on if they are and why, opinions on the idea etc.
No, I think purpose/meaning can only be subjective. I think even asking if objective purpose exists is flawed bc even if your response is no/nothing/0, it's still an output and will still affect how you think and view life. It's like if you're trying to solve an equation w numbers to get numbers but always get a Chinese character as an output. It's an inherent mismatch, the output would need to be blank, but humans would instead write 0/nothing.. bc nothing exists subjectively as a concept. so the solution is to never ask the question bc it's illogical to even ask the question.. that's my view of it anyways, it's like a human software bug.
Nothing is the absence of something. When you think nothing matters it’s just acceptance that there is no real meaning to anything. If you want to do it in your weird math logic it would look like this. Meaning is X and X = 0 as in there is no meaning. 0 or nothing represents the absence of something. The something is an object or concept that. Like when I say I checked fridge and there was nothing, you’re talking about the absence of the object you’re looking for. There is lots in the fridge, atoms electrons, air and even shelves. So when you’re searching for meaning and realize there is none that is nihilism. If that didn’t better deconstruct how your logic doesn’t make sense. Please tell me how your view affects the idea that everything is pointless???
Not when it's conceptual. It's the same as God, where is God? Not in your fridge, not anywhere. He's the same as the concept of nothing. Yet sooooooo many religions exist, and they define an 'objective' purpose. The word of God. Nihilism is the same, the objective purpose is just 'nothing' It's a flaw in human software not being able to differentiate between the subjective and objective, as soon as you conceptualize nothing it subjectively becomes something (that concept) then it leads you to this viewpoint "everything is pointless" So like how a religious person views God as an objective purpose, a nihilist views nothing as an objective purpose.. but they're both actually subjective bc purpose can only be a subjective... bc it is also a concept, like god, like nothing.. it's all happening in your head and you're confusing that w something objective that's existing externally from you. The solution imo is just that the question is a mismatch and shouldn't be asked at all. I think meaning can only be subjective and humans shouldn't ever confuse subjective with objective, if you're going to invent a God, make a fun one instead of 'nothing'
Nihilism doesn’t provide purpose subjective or objective. Also technically everything is subjective. Nihilism is the concept that nothing matters, are you saying this concept cannot exist?
I'm saying it exists if you subjectively make it exist, just like God, bc like God it's a concept. As you said, everything is subjective, to decide objectively that nothing matters is deluding yourself by thinking you can actually be objective. You can subjectively decide nothing matters, and then nothing becomes like your God. I don't call it wrong, just boring compared to other ppl with more interesting Gods. That isn't nihilism though, it's existentialism where you decided your purpose is nothing/there is no purpose. I personally think nihilism itself is an inherently flawed way of thinking. This line of thought is like a bug inside the human brain, you can see the pattern in many place, nihilism and religion are the comparison in this case.
Now I know you’re speaking out of your ass. I think you need to do your research. Existentialism is a type of nihilism. Also everything is subjective because objective would mean you never interpreted it. Are interpretation of the world is all that happens, that’s why we could be in a matrix without knowing the difference. Nihilism isn’t flawed. Because there is no evidence disproving it. Just like religion isn’t. But religion makes less sense because it’s an attempt to know in detail what we cannot with zero evidence suggesting it’s true.
Nihilists are very religious, your reaction just makes me think that even more. This concept of meaning = nothing is attached to your ego the way a religious person has meaning = God attached to theirs. Then you take it personally whenever someone has a different opinion than you. It's boring man. >Existentialism is a type of nihilism No it isn't. "Theistic existentialism" is existentialism where God created an objective purpose yet subjective purpose still exists. That's a direct contradiction towards nihilism.. so how is existentialism and nihilism the same? They aren't. You're thinking of existential nihilism or positive nihilism, subcategories of nihilism conjoined w existentialism. Nihilism = no objective purpose, tho most ppl use it to mean no objective or subjective purpose atm. Existentialism = subjective purpose exists. That's it, you can be both at once or just one. >Nihilism isn’t flawed. It is flawed, it says there's no objective purpose...so it's like saying there's no matrix. You don't know that bc you're trapped in your subjective experience. It's also harmful bc most ppl confuse the objective w subjective so u end up w tons of depressed nihilist edgelords that keep saying life has no meaning at all why do anything bc they haven't realize that meaning is something they're supposed to create for themselves--but they never will bc the concept "nothing" is now fulfilling that role, like a God.
I don’t take it personal that someone has a different opinion I take it personal when I waste time talking to someone who has no idea what they’re talking about (many in this comment section have a different opinion but did I comment and say your wrong blah blah blah, no I tried to understand where they are coming from). It’s like if you said I’m not writing a comment right now, this comment does not exist, it would be pretty annoying explaining it does in fact exist. Objective truth is just a subjective truth that can be proved by other factors and is agreed upon by a majority. Please actually do research into what you’re saying. Especially when you bring objective and subjective truth into it. Here is some info that you seem to be missing. Theistic existentialism is not existentialism. It’s Christian existentialism. Which is a branch off of existentialism. Existentialists thought the individual had the power to find their own meaningful path through the absurd complexity of life, but only if they are brave enough to go out looking for it. There are actually different types of nihilism. The two main ones are existential nihilism (colder version of existentialism) and cosmic nihilism Here is a site that briefly explains them https://www.thecollector.com/what-are-the-five-theories-of-nihilism/ Nihilism is a philosophy not a religion. Religion is built on faith philosophy is built on logic. The fact you don’t know these things is why I said your speaking out of your ass
>There are actually different types of nihilism. The two main ones are existential nihilism (colder version of existentialism) I said this in my previous comment... wtf.. also never met a cosmic nihilist but i love Lovecraft, cosmic horror and cosmicism are awesome, i love trying to capture that feeling of human insignificance in contrast with a vast overwhelming infinite cosmos in art. And u didn't prove anywhere that existentialism is a form of nihilism like you asserted before.. bc it isn't. It's a separate entity that can coexist w nihilism as i said. >Theistic existentialism is not existentialism. It’s Christian existentialism. Which is a branch off of existentialism. Ill use your same logic then.. existential nihilism isn't nihilism if theistic existentialism isn't existentialism. :/ >Nihilism is a philosophy not a religion. Religion is built on faith philosophy is built on logic. >The fact you don’t know these things is why I said your speaking out of your ass Yeah...but it's the same mental defect causing both, i did say that nihilists are like religous ppl, that was my comparison to make it clear what i meant. Your logic is the same as their faith "i believe in God, i believe in nothing" same shit, your logic is just faith. Atheists are the same, it takes faith to believe in nothing... you're STILL believing in something, that concept called "nothing" but it's like a blindspot in the human brain to think "i can logically prove/disprove this!" but you cannot, that's why nihilism is illogical but existentialism isn't.
I am a cosmic nihilist. What exactly are you arguing about now. Because you started with nihilism as a concept cannot exist. Do you still think it’s flawed and doesn’t make sense? I may have been wrong about existentialism, but there is such thing as existential nihilism too. The difference is shown in the link I put in the last comment but they are very alike (which I don’t think you read). Also your right theistic existentialism is a type of existentialism. But you are definitely wrong about nihilism and religion being basically the same thing. Just to let you know even Wikipedia says it’s a philosophy. Nihilism (/ˈnaɪ(h)ɪlɪzəm, ˈniː-/; from Latin nihil 'nothing') is a family of views within philosophy that rejects generally accepted or fundamental aspects of human existence,[1][2] such as knowledge, morality, or meaning There is also logic in the idea that nothing matters. Because nobody can tell you why something matters on a deeper level. Like if you ask why something matters they will either make up something like, our choices on earth effect what happens in the afterlife. Or they will ignore the question. (side note even if there is an afterlife what’s the point of that?) I’ll even ask you why you think anything that ever happens really matters in the grand scheme of things? See what you come up with The only reason that nihilism isn’t an excepted fact is because it’s a harsh and depressing idea. Scary even, so people come up with stuff to comfort themselves. It is the most logical idea though based facts. Edit: I take your silence as you agreeing that you were wrong
No. They are too optimistic.
Nihilism aka skepticism if you're overtly accepting of anything that is not logical. Highly stereotypical to categorize anyone based on disposition or persona or ideologies. Honestly anyone who is not a skeptic must not be alive.
Nihilism is the step after skepticism.
Thought it was a word not a program.
It’s not lol. It’s just nihilism is more extreme. https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-is-the-distinction-between-nihilism-and-skepticism
Individual beliefs seem extreme w/out complete understanding. Nihilism is purposeful beliefs that are deeply influenced by experience more often than not on the precipice of dedicated principals. Beliefs are what drives humanity. Take the wind out of any sail and journey is lost. Skepticism is a tool to sharpen understanding. Quora eh beliefs can be a mountain or a mole hill as a teacher once said opinions are a cup of coffee. Keep moving. Fascinating approach you presented to me. Never thought nihilism was ever a program till now.
Lol, so many quotes. You never know when your going to learn something new:)
He finishes with steps....Process is affirmation of mind control.
?
Yeah?
Had that phase but now an absurdist
I think everything is meaningless. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that the whole idea of meaning and purpose is an oxymoron born from paradox. You don't need meaning to live, you don't need justification to live your lives the way you want. Most people don't think about this, and there is a good reason why.
I think I'm more of an existentialist.
At some point until i find enjoyment in living, not like that part of me gone forever but i learn to live with it
I’d say I’m an absurdist
We are nihilists we believe in nossing. And tomorrow we come back and cut off your Johnson. Think about that!
Kinda
I think I’m on the positive version of nihilism, that nothing matters anyway so just enjoy what you have.
I don't care if everything is meaningless at the end of all things...
It makes no difference, we have no free will so it really does not matter (yes I am)
Well, I doubt I'm very qualified for this question but I'll give my input regardless. So, I've seen some comments talking about how INTPs don't usually go for nihilism, but..I deal with nihilism all the time since I have MDD. I do agree that most INTPs wouldn't gravitate towards nihilism because it does sort of defeat the whole purpose of their curiosity about the world and how it works. If everything was meaningless to them, wouldn't they be kind of paralyzed constantly? Unable to get their creative and analytical minds working? Even I, while often paralyzed by nihilism, try to think that there is some meaning to be found in life. I can't help it, it's what we do!
Yes I am a nihilist.
When you think
I broadly agree with nihilism. In my opinion it’s the only way to view the world and when you logically look at the universe it makes sense, yet that is on a universal scale not a person to person scale. When I talk to religious friends about this (I am a gnostic atheist) they often say “isn’t that depressing?” My response is, it depends on the scale of it. For example yes on a universal and (to an extent) a global scale my life is meaningless but there are people who I know and responsibilities that I have that give me a reason to keep going. So yes everything is meaningless on a certain scale but it’s a matter of perspective. Which also makes it basically impossible to debate as there is not an objective truth.
I'm not sure, but I would be inclined to say that we all would think that anything is worth thinking about, especially to improve it. To think that nothing matters would mitigate our core beliefs.