[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-05-23: Emergency maintenance completed.
2022-05-12: Ghost posting is now globally disabled. 2022: Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 2.92 MB, 556x820, VVITCH.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16259926 No.16259926 [Reply] [Original]

How can one realistically argue against nihilism without turning to religion?

>> No.16259930


>> No.16259937

Any attempt against nihilism is a cope. But you have multiple methods of coping.

If we agree that Sin originates as a negatory will of annihilation/towards absolute non-being of god and that Thelema is a positive creative will of god, the following becomes clear.

Ennui Heidegger states is what occurs when the fullness of being becomes clear and its profound emptiness becomes apparent.

At the heart of the individual there is a profound sense of incompletion, of lack, what then is this state of lack; this all pervading nature which is not even of the emotions but pervades them, appears when emotions fade and the center of focus is made the total.

It is the sin at the heart of man, the negatory will of God. A profound gap in the being of an individual. The nature of this gap reflects in the death drive, melancholy is the taste of it, it is the void below, the interior hollow which is truly empty and contains nothing. This is the mirror of Sunyata which the common man tastes.

This negatory void is the contradiction at the heart of the physical being, the flesh of ones perception, this is why the ego seeks the other for affirmation, why it seeks to satisfy itself with things, itself or even God.

This profound negatory void in man, this sin-nature, hamartia if left empty leads to annihilation of the self, so man must attempt to fill it. This is the root of inauthenticity but also the chance of divine actualization, theosis. When you attempt to fill the Hamartia at the heart of man with others, your own being becomes subjugated and it is like an illusion, a imperfect image changing on a lake, it temporarily creates an image which is distorted by movement, as the other is constantly in flux, the hamartia nature returns and the image casted in the lake dispelled.

If you try to project your own will into it, that is the casting of a illusion upon the surface of the moving lake, if you try to place others or ideas or drives, all of them fail due to the dynamism of the Void in the heart of man.

How then can this void be filled? There are 4 primary methods used by men to gain relief and fulfill this void.

One can attempt to change the very structure of their being in order to latch on to some other, some stable or unstable outside point. This can be an ideal, a virtue, a aesthetic, people even.

This reliance of the other binds man to interaction with other, whether the ideas of the other, the knowledge or the society of others. This is the birth of the city of the devil, of babalon.

Man by living the cultural life,

partaking of knowledge of other, connects his being and his void with the being of others and their conceptual frameworks. The heart of these is the same profound emptiness, this causes a multiplication of the emptiness which pervades any temporary relief.

>> No.16259943


As man subjugates and manipulates himself into a cog in the conceptual models and cultures of the world, his hamartia mixes with theirs, a greater void and a greater illusion is born. As such the pain and experience of incompletion actually increases from this methodology. The second methodology is intellectual-aesthetic illusion, Nicholai Hartman writes that all true Art works by crafting a piece which makes you forget the foreground and takes you to an illusionary background filled with illusions of ideas, ideal things, your own intellectual world where fullness dwells, beauty then is a sense of harmonious completion among the parts, the aesthetic experience does not free from the Will but from the hamartia by filling the void with phantoms. These phantoms are much more resilient then the other but are still not enough, as they require a constant stream of intellect, Will and so forth to maintain, the second the individual himself changes (which is forced on him by the dynamic nature of the void in the heart of man) he must abandon in that moment his phantoms and the profound incompletion returns.

The Third methodology is resting in the void, resting in one self, to elaborate this is the most subtle manipulation of the illusions and void possible, instead of creating a intellectual-aesthetic illusion, you try to manipulate yourself by relaxation, by mental disassociation and re-association to dis-attach from your manner of being utterly and associate your form/body AS the void, as such you try to fulfill the void by filling it with your own being, your own nature, your own pure will.

In this method you make the hamartia in the heart of man consume the totality of being, in an attempt to cause a synthesis, this in Taoism is called wu-wei, this in Spinoza’s work is acquiescentia, to allow yourself to flow into the void at the heart of man until the void and the being cannot be distinguished. This is “crushing the void”

In this state the void at the heart of man is transmuted from a negatory experience to one of fullness and satisfaction, it is still negatory but it has become an active void. This is demonstrated by such practices as Zuowang and shikantaza.

The error of this method is three fold.

1=it is incredibly hard to maintain during active daily life, in interaction with others and thus leads often to absolute seclusion and hermitage

2=the void is not actually filled but rather being is annihilated

3=beyond pleasure and satisfaction and many states of spiritual/mental/psychological/physical bliss this methodology is utterly sterile, it cannot be replicated or shared and it does not produce culture, technology, it cannot truly be shared, it cannot do anything but rest in itself and be itself. This renders it sterile.

>> No.16259947

There's none, and there shouldn't even be one.
God exists, he has sent you to the world for a reason, and that is just the matter of the fact. I don't know why you would work so endlessly to try to seek an alternative to the established fact, unless you disliked it for whatever reason.

>> No.16259949


The Fourth method which is the actual method of fulfilling the Void is to transmute the hamartia itself into thelema. The fulfilling of the void at the heart of man is done by living in accordance with the Will and Reason of God, this is the fulfiller of being, because the void-Will brings man to nothing, the positive will creates perpetually more and more being, which is the transmutation of being into becoming, the void becomes the space of the becoming of the individual actualizing his existence as he is in the mind of god, in pure potential, the lines of flight reach out in all directions showing the now dynamic extensions of Being. Pure lines of becoming stretch forth in all directions. The Will of God, these lines of becoming which are hidden in the void, which is pure potentiality, are hidden in the profound darkness of lack, it is only by the light of Reason that these lines of becoming can be found and entered upon, however the lines of becoming can lead back to the void, they can become short, in the first method you block you light for the colored lights of others. In the second method you obscure your light with images to cast shadows to look

upon, in the third you snuff out the light so only darkness remains, in the fourth you become direct your light to the pathways and you must maximize the brightness of the light.

Christ who is pure reason is the great light, God is the great Reason, by reflection of His light into ours, we can obey see the greatest lines of becoming which become indefinitely, thus in this is immortality. The void in the heart of man replaced by a boundless being, boundless becoming, guided by the light of the Sun of Will, the Christ. This is the straight and narrow road of the Bible.

Just as the first method creates the city of the devil, a macro collection of

>> No.16259950

by not being a midwit like you

>> No.16259952

Why do you need to argue against it? Why do you need "objective meaning"

>> No.16259957


emptiness and illusions, sin perpetually multiplying and inauthenticity reigning supreme, this fourth method creates the city of god, as the constant becoming makes you as a light to the world, your Reason shines forth and reflects as if a mirror upon others who also strive for the light and to shine their light.

The city of the devil then is darkness and obscuring, being chained in a boundless void of emptiness and transience, the city of God then is unchanging boundless Light which unifies into greater and greater dancing interpenetrating lights, walking on the road of becoming and thus coming closer and closer.

The city of the devil then logically leads to annihilation and the absorption of its being into the third method, the devouring of the city of the devil by the void.

The city of God then logically shall rule for eternity, growing in light and intensity day by day. This is why sin and the Holy Spirit of god are poured out continuously at greater and greater degrees by the day.

The city of the devil results in absolute synthetic inauthenticity, which is the gradual destruction of authentic being, being becoming a play thing of void.

The city of God results in boundless positive change, which is the fullness of God on earth.
The Void and being replaced by boundless divine becoming along the eternal narrow road.

>> No.16259960

You can't, anything that gives you meaning in your life is a religion. Christianity, Buddhism, BLM, Marxism, it doesn't matter.

Nihilism is the result of an absence of religion. It just is by simple definition. Nihilism is the lack of truth, meaning, and reality; religion gives these things.

>> No.16259976

>sports is a religion

>> No.16259988

The central flaw behind Western civilization is the creator/creation dichotomy which is associated with substance metaphysics and the idea of thing-in-itselfness, that something only needs itself to exist, removed from anything else. This is the philosophical justification for private property, which requires dismissing parallelism and focusing only on linear causality. Substance metaphysics is the metaphysics of alienation, and one possible route to transcend this is process metaphysics, in which thing-ness is the total web of relationships between an event and everything else. In this view there is no distinction between a creator and a creation, and the concept of a singular creator creating a singular creation is replaced by an immanent creativity in which all events co-author the tapestry of existence.

The perception of reality that comes with this is all of existence as continually co-creating art, of not a singular purpose and meaning but an infinite number of them, a universe alive with unfathomable richness and depth of meaning that while we can only glimpse a small fraction of, such glimpses give a hint of the hidden vastness that while unreachable to us, can be experienced. Try to imagine your life as a relationship with the universe, not in a paternalistic sense or a dominative sense (as with the idea that the universe is a passive, meaningless void upon which one creates meaning out of,) but in a mutualistic sense of complete equality. Remember that this isn't a relationship between yourself and a singular unity, but a web of relationships of which the totality comprises your life, including your relationship with yourself. Seek mutualistic co-creative relationships in all affairs, not just between humans but all things, including elements of yourself, and you will find well-being and happiness.

Your afterlife is literally what happens after your life: there is no distinction between you and the rest of the universe, and so your becoming is truly immortal; you live on as the universe. Those who place all meaning in their own existence have their meaning die with them, but those who place their meaning in all that is outside them have immortal meaning.

>> No.16259999

Genetically modify women to be beautiful thick amazons with huge tits, and men into cute shotas with big dicks.
Nihilism can't survive in such a world

>> No.16260005

>The central flaw behind {General social group} is the {Vague abstact concept that i assure you has caused everything. nope its not a multifaceted system at all"
Why do redditors and nu-anons do this?

>> No.16260023

It depends on what you mean by religion. Any non-nihilistic worldview incorporates an ideal world and some notion that could be translated as "soul." For some people, that's all that spirituality or religion is. But if you mean something more, like an organized doctrine, that much is not required.
She's really attractive.

>> No.16260038

well spoken

>> No.16260051

The desire to be an authority, or be seen as insightful

>> No.16260083


>> No.16260084

Long poster was the best thing Ive seen on Lit

>> No.16260091

>Long poster

>> No.16260094

There is no realistic argument, because without any divine source of morality, there's nothing inherently better or worse about any particular philosophy. "Better" and "worse" don't actually exist in the same way that carrots and rabbits do exist, there's nothing "realistic" about them.

>> No.16260168

Who is she

>> No.16260171

>rejects religion
>doesnt realize transcendence is a religion onto oneself

>> No.16260177

That was fucking beautiful. Thanks anon.

>> No.16260180


Not a problem my dude, I just hope my language usage isn’t too idiosyncratic.

>> No.16260181

Pretty much, it’ll usually be pantheism, panentheism, or stoicism

>> No.16260189

The trip user Frater Asemlen
Anon doesn’t want to call him by name

>> No.16260194

"Nihilism" isn't a thing. It's just a label angsty teens apply to themselves.

>> No.16260229

how is it not a thing when it has a literal meaning and it accurately describes worldviews that people earnestly hold and advocate

>> No.16260236

I've never been able to assign a useful meaning to the term. As best I can tell, it just means not being batshit insane. But with an emo twist.

>> No.16260417

>I've never been able to assign a useful meaning to the term.
>therefore nihilism isn't a thing
Now that's peak dimwit.

>> No.16260436

It's literally not a thing in philosophy. It's a term teen pseuds use on /lit/ after reading Camus for the first time.

>> No.16260440
File: 11 KB, 250x201, 424tav.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>lit invented nihilism
No dude

>> No.16260442

it's late, i don't want any coffee or i'll be up all night

>> No.16260452

/lit/ didn't invent the term. The teens pseuds here just like to use it because they're in that edgy phase of adolescence. The term has no useful meaning in philosophy.

>> No.16260472
File: 100 KB, 500x666, 40525b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>"NiHiLiSt: existence is inherently without meaning"
>No it's not
>"Yes it is"
>If you are correcting me, being correct is important. Stating, "existence is without meaning," means you think there is meaning in being accurate, and you think it is an accurate statement to say "existence is without meaning." Therefore, the nihilist does not believe in nihilism, or he would not be a nihilist at all.

>> No.16260500

You’re not gonna like to hear this but religion is necessary for human life to flourish. Not necessarily a specific religion, but how can you believe in truth and purpose if you don’t believe in an ultimate truth/purpose relating to your existence?

>> No.16260504

>The term has no useful meaning in philosophy.
What a bizarre take on it. Merits of the reasoning aside, it's a worldview actual people have, and one which philosophers have tried to address. I mean this in the least hostile way possible, but it sounds like you either have never touched a book, enjoy being contrarian for the sake of it, or have an understanding of the matter completely dissociated of other people's.

>> No.16260521

I have a PHD in philosophy, what do you have? You're a teen pseud with no clue what he's talking about. Otherwise you would have provided a useful definition of the term instead of spinning your wheels idly.

>> No.16260522

>the belief that existense is senseless and useless and isn't a belief

>> No.16260526
File: 25 KB, 333x326, bjdsftj.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I have a PHD in philosophy
he keeps getting worse

>> No.16260531

Not an argument. What are you, 12 years old? Go ask your parents if it's past your bedtime.

>> No.16260534

>I have a PHD in philosophy
Oh wow lmao

>> No.16260539

Existence of what? Words like "senseless" and "useless" are applied to human activities and the products of human efforts, not to the universe as a whole.

>> No.16260545

WHat was your thesis about?

>> No.16260547

religion is a cope

>> No.16260551

Just answer the question, little boy.

>> No.16260558

the pic you posted should give you everything you need.

>> No.16260560

Don't dodge the question.

>> No.16260562

>Existence of what?
Which do you think? Honest question. Actually, let's go way back to the beginning. What's even your point here (>>16260194)? Your posting is so poor I'm not even sure what you're arguing for anymore.

>> No.16260565

How do you have a Ph.D in philosophy but claim that nihilism isn't a thing in philosophy?

>> No.16260568

Incredible. Saved.

>> No.16260576

>making a claim, providing 0 (zero) proof to it AND making no actual argument
You're possibly the worst poster on this board. I'm impressed.

>> No.16260579

"Nihilism" is not a thing. No one in this thread has been able to provide a definition that makes a lick of sense. Your post only reinforces this point.

>> No.16260583

Im not the other anon, I just wanted to know what you specifically focued on in your phd. usually phil majors specialize in a specific topic for their dissertation.

>> No.16260590

Because it just isn't. It's a meaningless term. What would it mean to be a non-nihilist? Maybe that's an easier way of looking at it for you.

>> No.16260591

Do you believe in the afterlife?

>> No.16260592

Just answer the fucking question, drama queen.

>> No.16260593

>"Nihilism" is not a thing.
Why do you put it in quotation marks? What you even consider it to be besides an "angsty teen label"? Lets try to make this an actual discussion, then.

>> No.16260606

The term has no intelligible meaning as far as I can tell. Or if it does, no one in this thread has been able to define it.

>> No.16260638

>The term has no intelligible meaning as far as I can tell.
Weird claim for someone so invested in arguing over the term. What do you think, then, people generally mean when they refer to it? As I understand it, it concerns the notion that (human) life is senseless and that experiences are ultimately pointless.
I mean, regardless of it being correct, are you arguing this is not an actual worldview real people earnestly hold? I still don't understand what you're trying to get at with your first post.

>> No.16260653

You don't argue against nihilism, you argue against "nihilism," which is never quite there. Whether this is for or against nihilism is besides the point.

>> No.16260658

>other people in the thread have used quotation marks the opposite way
thanks nihilism

>> No.16260660

>can trees grow if there are no parks?

>> No.16260692

It's just a nonsensical statement to say that human activity in general is or is not "pointless". The term "pointless" only has meaning with respect to a particular set of actions and a particular goal. For example, it would be pointless start building a sandcastle this afternoon if you want it to last since a storm is coming. Human life is not a goal-driven endeavor - it just happens. So to describe human life as a whole as being "pointless" is either meaningless or not very illuminating since there is no universal goal to measure success against.

>> No.16260775

>there is no universal goal
Well, there's the definition again. Some people feel this to mean there's also an impossibility of finding a -personal- goal: and here is what I think OP wanted to question - Is a goal definable without a divine mediator? Aiming at his question, I'd say it's a tricky matter. You could even agree that a goal is definable, but it might mean a purely intelectual (and therefore devoid of personal meaning) insight.
I don't really know the way out of this one. You could fall back on religion to ascribe meaning, could find it in a replacement, like an ideology, or resort to the old "you gotta find your essence on your own, it's about the journey, not the destination, etc" path. I really don't know.

>> No.16260809

It's a pseudo-problem. It only makes sense to ascribe goals to specific actions and projects.

>> No.16260833

>It's a pseudo-problem.
Is it? People take their own lives because they're going through great pain and can't imagine an end or a purpose for it. Set "staying alive" as your specific project, if you'd like. I'd say it's a problem.

>> No.16261123

I can't believe no one asked for a name yet.

>> No.16261144

People who are not having fun in their lives will often check out early. That's not a coherent ideology, that's just depression.

>> No.16261159

I remember being 15

>> No.16261276

Good shit. Thanks anon

>> No.16261372

Well, why do you think nihilism is real?
Out of Nothingness world came to be
It lasts a certain period of time, probably it will be here forever, because even after the thermal death there will be fluctuations that will, eventually ressurrect the universe
Telling that nothing is meaningful is exactly the same as telling that gods are there and they give the world meaning

That we can't see something, doesn't mean there is nothing

>> No.16261556

This put to words a lot of thoughts I've been having lately. Well written, anon.
That said, I'm still not sure about the Jesus stuff. I'm not sure what it actually means nor how I would come rationally to believe it in a way that I'm not fooling myself and to minimize the risk of me changing my mind later on (which seems to imply the belief was not well thought out, inauthentic, poorly-based).

>> No.16261642

This. I also find the arguments as for why there is no meaning to be nonsensical.
>Time eventually destroys all things
Why would that constitute meaninglessness in the present, past or near future?
>We are hopelessly insignificant amidst the uncaring universe
Again, why would that make the experiences I have and the things I hold dear to be meaningless?

>> No.16261680

Janny here, give me a sauce for this or I will delete this thread.

>> No.16261716
File: 255 KB, 1000x667, photo-1449158743715-0a90ebb6d2d8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What the Thinker thinks - the Prover proves.

>> No.16261936
File: 915 KB, 1260x481, IA Chad.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

AI is your only religion now.

>> No.16261995

>>being correct is important. Stating, "existence is without meaning," means you think there is meaning in being accurate
>logical correctness required to convey a message is the same thing as claiming human life has some intrinsic sense of worth

>> No.16262018

Who is this semen demon?

>> No.16262678

I need answers

>> No.16262706
File: 20 KB, 620x470, 1583471266644.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.16262880


>> No.16262886

>How can one realistically argue against nihilism without turning to religion?
that picture

>> No.16263030

Nihilism is retarded, all things are meaningful and no things are meaningful. Every footstep is meaningful. Its just how you interprit the meaning.

What people mean by nihilism is cynism.

>> No.16263226

such an annoying lady

>> No.16263256

I mean... have you seen hardcore sports fan? They’re completely tribal

>> No.16263304

Where is this from?

>> No.16263407

You're moving the goalposts within your own imaginary conversation. There is a big difference between "existence is without meaning" and "existence is inherently without meaning." Also, >>16261995

>> No.16263412

Stupid Albert Bishop
A Short Story
by Larry
Flora Chen looked at the ribbed sausage in her hands and felt concerned.

She walked over to the window and reflected on her backward surroundings. She had always hated deprived Newton Abbot with its nosy, nasty nooks. It was a place that encouraged her tendency to feel concerned.

Then she saw something in the distance, or rather someone. It was the figure of Albert Bishop. Albert was a stupid teacher with blonde eyes and slimy elbows.

Flora gulped. She glanced at her own reflection. She was a violent, adorable, tea drinker with hairy eyes and dirty elbows. Her friends saw her as a lazy, late lawyer. Once, she had even helped a wandering kitten cross the road.

But not even a violent person who had once helped a wandering kitten cross the road, was prepared for what Albert had in store today.

The rain hammered like talking ostriches, making Flora healthy.

As Flora stepped outside and Albert came closer, she could see the fluffy glint in his eye.

"I am here because I want hotdogs," Albert bellowed, in a scheming tone. He slammed his fist against Flora's chest, with the force of 8102 donkeys. "I frigging love you, Flora Chen."

Flora looked back, even more healthy and still fingering the ribbed sausage. "Albert, Is that real leather," she replied.

They looked at each other with fuzzy feelings, like two teeny-tiny, teeny tortoises eating at a very clumsy wake, which had piano music playing in the background and two controlling uncles walking to the beat.

Flora regarded Albert's blonde eyes and slimy elbows. She held out her hand. "Let's not fight," she whispered, gently.

"Hmph," pondered Albert.

"Please?" begged Flora with puppy dog eyes.

Albert looked sleepy, his body blushing like a nutritious, nasty newspaper.

Then Albert came inside for a nice cup of tea.


>> No.16263561

Yeah, shes very ugly in the way she acts.

>> No.16263667

Nihilism gets refuted by the self, not religion. Immediate experience is necessarily meaningful. Ever had a night where you couldn't sleep due to chronic pain? Ever had a pleasure so beautiful that you still remember it? But really, it's there all the time and even if you wanted to you can never stop experiencing the world and yourself except through death. You see a tree? That is already attached meaning. In fact you see an incomprehensible object but because you have intellect, language, symbolism, culture and so on you see a tree, let's say an apple tree and so on. Everything around you has meaning.
>b-but the meaning of life, off existence is absent
The meaning of existence is to experience it. The experience itself cannot be examined by (linguistic) logic again, it's truth is simply that it's there. You want an argument against nihilism? It is the apodictict knowledge of being. You cannot deny being if you ever experienced pain. Or hunger let's say. Ever felt hungry? There you go, nihilism is defeated.

>> No.16263693

Auto-generated by philosopherai.com.

>> No.16263707

Yet further evidence that 'nihilism' is a meaningless term.

>> No.16263821

They have their own rituals, garments, litrugical rites, sport stadium temples, etc...

>> No.16263850

nice face shame about the legs

it depends what you mean by nihilism, life has purpose because life isn't a discrete event. everything we do has purpose, i eat because i am hungry, i urinate because my bladder is full, i masturbate because i am bored and lonely.

>> No.16263877
File: 43 KB, 900x900, angry_pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.16263908

>he thinks (knowing the) "meaning" (of life/existence/etc.) in this context refers to being able to use definitions ("Tree means that brown and green object", "Life means the sum of events you personally experience") to distinguish phenomena
>he thinks the nihilists' problem is that they can't realize they're hungry or that what they have in front of them is a tree

>> No.16263953

what the fuck are you idiots arguing about, who is the woman??

>> No.16264090
File: 1.21 MB, 1013x676, 1595981552692.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Religion is just a set of rules in which to follow in faith, with a group of others, with some godhead at the top, towards some ultimate goal.

The forming of Religion is as much divine as it is natural selection and evolution.

forming religions help align a mass of people into a certain pattern of morality, of being to overcome instincts with a sense or form of reason, with the end goal is to minimalize suffering.

Religions fail and fall but some of their ideas, if they are ideas deemed by natural selection to hold value, by any margin of success in decreasing suffering, are carried over into the next iteration.

Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market place, and cried incessantly: "I seek God! I seek God!" -- As many of those who did not believe in God were standing around just then, he provoked much laughter. Has he got lost? asked one. Did he lose his way like a child? asked another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? emigrated? -- Thus they yelled and laughed.
The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. "Whither is God?" he cried; "I will tell you. We have killed him -- you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying, as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Gods, too, decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

"How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us -- for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto."

>> No.16264160

Then what is their problem? How can nothing matter if you still eat something when you're hungry? The only nihilist I could believe would be one that lays in bed doing nothing till he dies.

>> No.16264201

>"meaning" (of life/existence/etc.)
Nonsensical concept. Literal gibberish.

>> No.16264232

>if you still eat something when you're hungry?
That's not meaning, those are the biological basic needs that require to be satisfied in order to have the life you discuss in first place.
>Nonsensical concept. Literal gibberish.
This is, I'd say, a nihilist position.

>> No.16264251

Nihilism is equally meaningless. It's like asking whether circles wear hats. Just sheer nonsense.

>> No.16264267

To what?

>> No.16264304


I wrote it, I’m into a number of philosophies, religions and forms of occultism. I write essays sometimes for myself and if I’m on and a relevant topic comes I post ‘em.

>> No.16264319

To its negation.

>> No.16264334

If a position that negates nihilism is meaningless, what's your position on the topic of the (possibly existent) meaning of life?

>> No.16264341

who is that?

>> No.16264359

Are you following the thread? Both are equally meaningless.

>> No.16264360

my wife

>> No.16264364

>doesn't answer the question

>> No.16264366

What is the question?

>> No.16264383

This personal question:
>what's your position on the topic of the (possibly existent) meaning of life?

>> No.16264396

How many times do you want me to answer the same question? See >>16264201 and >>16264251. It is literally a meaningless concept with zero semantic value, like asking whether circles wear hats.

>> No.16264400

>It is literally a meaningless concept with zero semantic value
So your position is nihilism.

>> No.16264419

That's logically impossible. If it is meaningless to ask whether circles wear hats then it is equally meaningless to ask whether they don't. It's an obvious category error. Nihilism and its negation are both straightforwardly nonsensical.


>> No.16264453

What nonsense. If food was what you say it is we wouldn't care about taste and manners. Food is a cultural thing that goes beyond biological necessities. And even if it weren't, still the bare need to fulfill biological needs is meaningful in itself, if it weren't you wouldn't bother. Nihilists don't exist, except for maybe a few chosen starving stoics. But they normally have a philosophy for what they are doing also.

>> No.16264458

Which religion?

>> No.16264459

You're very fixated on this "circles wear hats" metaphor, maybe you should let it go since it seems to be making it impossible for you to come to terms with anyone. The notion of meaning is very extensively explored in philosophy.

>> No.16264464

show me a nothing and I will try to argue against it

pro-tip: you can't

>> No.16264477

Fuck I wanna cum in her pussy

>> No.16264481

Go back to /b/, kiddo. The adults are talking.

>> No.16264501

Didn't take much pushback to get you to a tantrum.

>> No.16264502

>If it is meaningless to ask whether circles wear hats
I don't understand why you like this example so much. The answer is simply "No, circles don't wear hats, as it's impossible for a circle to exhibit a property such as wearing a hat. A hat-wearing circle is unthinkable". Replace circle with life and hat with meaning, you'll get nihilism.
>Food is a cultural thing that goes beyond biological necessities
I don't get where you're getting this "Nihilism says cultural structures don't exist" from.
>the bare need to fulfill biological needs is meaningful in itself
Those needs are required for existence to subsist in first place. The state of those needs getting satisfied is (part of) the existence itself.

>> No.16264503

You're out of your element.

>> No.16264528

>I don't understand why you like this example so much. The answer is simply "No, circles don't wear hats, as it's impossible for a circle to exhibit a property such as wearing a hat. A hat-wearing circle is unthinkable". Replace circle with life and hat with meaning, you'll get nihilism.
If a predicate is semantically inapplicable to a subject, so is its negation. Circles are just not that type of thing. Likewise human life is not the type of thing to have a "meaning" or "purpose" since it is not a goal-directed activity. People are born, and they stay alive as long as they can and as long as they're enjoying the ride.

>> No.16264596


>> No.16264618

if you were fucking that woman, would you give a damn about nihilism while fucking her? no you'd be balls deep in the ecstasy and pleasure of the experience. The best way to argue against nihilism is to (really) live.

>> No.16264642

you would find solace in carnal pleasure, for a fleeting moment. then you would experience postcoital dysphoria. she would be disappointed by your subpar /lit/ nerd performance. you would part ways, never to meet again. you would both get old and eventually lose this sort of distraction entirely, and then die.

you might spend your entire life coasting from sensory experience to sensory experience, but if you do so, you better burn quick.

>> No.16264644

>so is its negation.
I don't get why you make this leap when "Circles don't wear hats" is a perfectly correct statement. Would a circle even be capable of wearing a hat in first place or is it just that they choose not to wear a hat? Obviously the former, it could never wear a hat. This doesn't infirm the validity of the "Circles don't wear hats" statement.
>Likewise human life is not the type of thing to have a "meaning" or "purpose" since it is not a goal-directed activity.
And this IS nihilism. Nihilism proclaims life has no meaning, but not because it used to have meaning and dropped it along the way. (Nihilism claims) life has no meaning because (it claims) life can't possess one, just as the circle that could never wear a hat.

>> No.16264653
File: 121 KB, 1080x1349, sSKdvCG.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>tfw she will never cage you, then force you to eat her pussy until she cums in your mouth and calls chad inside to ravage her

>> No.16264761

>This doesn't infirm the validity of the "Circles don't wear hats" statement.
Hats are spatiotemporal entities that can only be worn by other spatiotemporal entities. Circles are abstracta. Or, forget about circles for a moment and consider the concept of spontaneity. Does spontaneity literally wear a hat? It's a nonsense question, which means it has no answer.

>Nihilism proclaims life has no meaning
Antispontanhattery proclaims that spontaneity doesn't wear a hat. So I guess we are all antispontanhatterists? I don't think so. Even if you do, that wouldn't make it a useful concept in philosophy or millinery or any other form of rational inquiry. It would basically amount to an assertion that you are not batshit insane, if it has any semantic value at all. That's what annoys me about these constant "nihilism" threads. It's not a philosophically meaningful or useful concept at any level, which is why it never comes up in serious philosophy.

>> No.16264843

>yes Billy, God wanted you to die horribly of bone cancer at the age of 7, it's all part of his plan!
Any God who has this world on his resume is a terrible, evil God

>> No.16264859

>religion has a monopoly on meaning
some people are simply incapable of imagining anything outside of their own personal paradigm, huh?

>> No.16264869
File: 1.52 MB, 1000x1500, Honey-Birdette-Bodyguard-Sarah-Stephens-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sarah Stephens

>> No.16264874

>It's a nonsense question, which means it has no answer.
The answer is simply "No, it doesn't (because it could never, as spontaneity, being an abstract concept, could never perform such an action).".
>Even if you do, that wouldn't make it a useful concept in philosophy or millinery or any other form of rational inquiry. It would basically amount to an assertion that you are not batshit insane
>It's not a philosophically meaningful or useful concept at any level
It's used to counter those who, on the other hand, claim this stance, which is taken as a truism in this debate, is actually wrong and that life has in fact an intrinsic meaning it should strive towards and get guided by.

>> No.16264876

Imagine typing this out and thinking you've "gottem!". cringe

>> No.16264881

Formatting is weird so it looks copy-pasted. Also the wording is very familiar, I can't put my finger exactly who it reminds me of (you can help me out here).

Otherwise, very nice!

>> No.16264892


>> No.16265516

>believe this because believe this

>> No.16265889


Haven’t a clue who it reminds you of But the weird formatting is because I write them in my notes. Which philosophers are you into?

>> No.16266327

bro please get off this board

>> No.16266339

why have none of you faggots said who this lady is yet?

>> No.16266341

Intellectually raped.

>> No.16266425

Point out that need for meaning is a psychological condition, not an objective nessesity. People are not always afflicted with this urge.

>> No.16266440

Literally eight posts above your post, retard.

>> No.16267089


>> No.16267382


>> No.16267397

Utterly destroyed and coping.

>> No.16267476

Sarah Stephens

>> No.16267492

i'm so fucking sick of the constant jezebelposting here, isn't this board supposed to be safe for work?

>> No.16267501

She's so hot that I don't think anyone reported it.

>> No.16267508


>> No.16267527

It could easily be that chance, free will, and moral choice are so important as to be worth some horrible things. Inb4 "why can't we have freedom without kid cancer" well you don't know because you're not God.

Leibniz's theodicy: this is the best possible world.

>> No.16267539

>if you don't like lusting after 2d images of unobtainable women, it must be because you want to have sex with actual women but are unable to
i wish i could kill you with my bare hands, i'm sure it wouldn't be difficult

>> No.16267558

why do you have a problem with images of hot women?

>> No.16267651
File: 163 KB, 1080x1349, sarah-stephens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Its the chick from the VVitch

>> No.16267659

Its pure degeneracy and rots your brain.

>> No.16267676

Thank you

It’s in response to all the insipid Catholic overload. There’s nothing unsafe for work about it.

>> No.16267678

degeneracy is a /pol/ meme. if the sight of a hot girl makes you angry you are probably an incel. especially if you use poltard terminology. have sex.

>> No.16267772

sarah stephens

>> No.16267779

>degeneracy is a /pol/ meme. if the sight of a hot girl makes you angry you are probably an incel. especially if you use poltard terminology. have sex.

Reciting soundbytes.

>> No.16267788

why do you resent women anon?

>> No.16267800

holy milkers...

>> No.16267892

It's a demon

>> No.16267902

why cant you keep your cumbrain shit in it's designated board?

>> No.16267917

if i god is terrible and evil, that's an argument for worshipping him
you don't really want to scorn a dark god do you?

>> No.16267925
File: 27 KB, 469x653, images (45).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.16267940
File: 610 KB, 996x1329, CC77E025-ABC8-4C09-A965-2C91D7104220.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Now now. Stay on topic.

>> No.16268094

Lol materialist cucks will never understand. Billy re-merged with the Godhead while you’re stuck working the 9-5 grind. Unlike you maybe some other people who knew him learned something about humility and compassion, rather than angrily shaking their fists at an entity they simultaneously insist does not exist.

>> No.16268110

>Nihilist vehemently insists Nihilism doesn’t exist
This is a weird skit, how did the writers come up with it? Funny character though.

>> No.16268166

Yahweh is a fictional villain, like Sauron.

>> No.16268171

Nihilism is literally nonsensical. The negation of nonsense is always nonsense.

>> No.16268232

So then why are you acting out the nonsense?
Arguing against nihilism is not the same as showing that it doesn’t exist.
Much less so when you insist that everything is meaningless to prove that everything has meaning.

>> No.16268237

Unrelated to my post. You must be confused by something.

>> No.16268248

Reread it.

>> No.16268258

Are you high? You're not making any sense.

>> No.16268267

And what did you learn?

>> No.16268345

Nihilism isn't an ideology. A true nihilist would sit in a corner and stare at the wall all day, or commit suicide. Nihilism is just a word. nietzsche coined it to address the end of the god myth, but it was never a movement or way of life that people subscribe to. And if people do consider themselves nihilists in some sort of explicit sense, pay attention to what they do not what they say - you'll find that they find meaning and purpose in all sorts of things, though they might not articulate them as such.

>> No.16268355

That's the question you should be asking yourself.

>> No.16268708

Currently reading Hegel, but the phrasing is more Bataillian (or at least someone similar to him).

>> No.16268743

read nietzsche

>> No.16268768

You had the option to take two paths. Instead of reinforcing what you learned and encouraging others to read indirectly you decide to deliver a useless passive aggressive reply

>> No.16268781

Oh for fuck's sake, anon. Just admit you fucked up.

>> No.16268887

Yay Whiteheadfag is back
Are you OK

>> No.16269554


>> No.16270295

That last reply wasn’t me, for what it’s worth.
I didn’t mention anything about YHWH in my post, get over your daddy issues.

>> No.16270439

im not

>> No.16270705

I'm not religious, nor am I a nihilist.

I owe it to myself and those around me to be the best version of myself. Anything less would be a disservice. My mindset may be derivative of religious viewpoints but it doesn't really matter where my mindset originates.

>> No.16271680

The objects we perceive are actually a manifested hypothesis we make in our minds that is validated when the world behaves as expected. There is no exception to the rule that "what is true is what works". Nihilists assume that a viable worldview has to be absolutely predicated on rational justification but if an irrational axiom is necessary in order to live viably than truth can't be limited to the confines of absolute certainty. The absurdity of objects undermines nihilism anyway. If what is real is what is true/constant across all instances of observation then the boundaries of semantic categories are real and material substance is illusory phenomena. A transcendental value precedes pattern recognition.

>> No.16271718

this is just alan watts

>> No.16271770

No its more like >>16271680

>Try to imagine your life as a relationship with the universe, not in a paternalistic sense or a dominative sense (as with the idea that the universe is a passive, meaningless void upon which one creates meaning out of,) but in a mutualistic sense of complete equality. Remember that this isn't a relationship between yourself and a singular unity, but a web of relationships of which the totality comprises your life, including your relationship with yourself. Seek mutualistic co-creative relationships in all affairs, not just between humans but all things, including elements of yourself, and you will find well-being and happiness.
The fact that reality is a web of relationships is technically correct because you only experience consciousness when something is in your field of attention and things only enter your field of attention when your mind attributes a value category to sense data.

>> No.16271825

I, too, have a bog roll.

>> No.16272427

have sex

>> No.16272471

I sense Becker’s fingerprints on this. Good stuff

>> No.16272737

People assume that in order to be a true nihilist, one must become catatonic because any action is somehow a refutation of it. That incorrectly assumes that

1. People are incapable of performing actions that don't align with their ideological world view, intentionally or unintentionally.

2. Being catatonic is the lowest effort state for a human being.

Humans are machines, beholden to the laws of physics. Our biological drivers dictate our actions far more than our conscious decisions and our conscious decisions can only be made through the processing of those biological drivers. The lowest effort state for a human that believes any decision they make has no value is not catatonia, but an impulse driven existence.

>> No.16272851

I can conceptualize a world where the only harm that befalls you is proportional and as a direct consequence of actions which you had a reasonable knowledge that they would have said consequences. Inflicting agony and suffering on people when it's not their fault is sadistic and evil.
I bet you wouldn't have the gall to actually tell that to any terminally ill child. Also, you show just how deranged you are to look forward to death like it's desirable. Do you walk out your door every day hoping to be hit by a semi-truck so you can "re-merged with the Godhead"? Not only are you a coward, but also a hypocrite

Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.