How can a nihilist be happy?

parmalee

09-15-10, 09:28 AM

To be clear, I am not sure what is at stake here (for me).
But I do feel a kind of hypnosis/paralysis around people who profess to be nihilists (even if I just read their texts).
I am not sure what does me in more: the nihilism itself, or the confidence with which they promote it.
oddly, i find more "authentic" nihilistic tendencies in those who emphatically assert that they are not nihilists; whereas those who openly endorse nihilism (oxymoronic as that is) tend to be blind to their own hypocrisy and inconsistency.

To me, even a what seems like a relatively small dose of nihilism seems debilitating. Just reading a text with nihilistic statements brings me down.

Why could this be?
i can partially sympathize with you here: i'm somewhat... unsettled by the way, say, nietzsche "embraces" the nihilistic inclinations of his own cultural milieu or deleuze (and even chomsky perhaps, albeit in a very different fashion and for very different reasons) "embraces" that of advanced (consumerist) capitalism; although such can be regarded as a sort of alternative to revolution or insurrection. for me perhaps, it might simply be a matter of temperament--to assert that i have a volatile personality would be an understatement.

and yet, i find myself comforted by the nihilistic qualities of certain apophatic tracts--be they buddhistic, (quasi)judaic (i.e. levinas or jabes), or even catholic--or post structuralist writings or manifestations of dada. of course, this may also very well have much to do with my temperament--my capacity to create is stronger than my capacity to critique. as deleuze remarked, the "goal" is to bring into existence and not to judge. :p

and here is the irony in nihilistic thinking/action: the negation of meaning or value is tantamount to desisting from judgment (for judgment entails valuation), and in this abeyance of judgment, value and meaning emerge. for most, i do not think this is readily apparent; rather it demands a dramatic shift in perspective--and this is accomplished through a radical and disciplined apophasis.

in more concrete terms, the dark night of the soul is cathartic. well, maybe that's not very "concrete," but...

edit: i realize i didn't address your query, "why could this be?," but i'm not really sure how to. on a somewhat related not, upon reflection i can distinguish two very distinct types of depressive states (for me)--and given my neurological problems, i experience extremes of "mood" (with both positive and negative psychosis) far too frequently. the first type is characterized by all the usual symptoms of depression; afterward i feel genuinely relieved and even "grateful," in a sense. the second type is characterized more by persistent and unabating suicidal ideation. i could never act upon this because i am literally paralyzed (catatonic) by all consuming, obsessive thinking. afterward, i do not feel relieved at all; rather, i'm thoroughly drained, pissed of, resentful ... so, what is to account for this difference?

Doreen

09-15-10, 10:09 AM

Doreen

09-15-10, 10:16 AM

oddly, i find more "authentic" nihilistic tendencies in those who emphatically assert that they are not nihilists; some people are barely holding it together. whatever paperclips and duct tape they can desperately apply to their broken glasses, they grab after with great force. And who can blame them. You can see this as a kind of confession.:p

whereas those who openly endorse nihilism (oxymoronic as that is) tend to be blind to their own hypocrisy and inconsistency.Yes. But then it is also a dynamic act - professions of nihilism. It is a relationship, with others, with themselves, with the universe. Or a tool.

i can partially sympathize with you here: i'm somewhat... unsettled by the way, say, nietzsche "embraces" the nihilistic inclinations of his own cultural milieu or deleuze (and even chomsky perhaps, albeit in a very different fashion and for very different reasons) "embraces" that of advanced (consumerist) capitalism; although such can be regarded as a sort of alternative to revolution or insurrection. for me perhaps, it might simply be a matter of temperament--to assert that i have a volatile personality would be an understatement. I think decisions made on points like this often boil down to 'there seem to be two options, and given the two....' I do not think enough time is given to actually see/feel if there are other options, even to allow for the yearning for them. If this space, interlude is nto allowed - because somehow it seems like one must choose and now - certain third ways do not come into the world - or minds of certain people.

and yet, i find myself comforted by the nihilistic qualities of certain apophatic tracts--be they buddhistic, (quasi)judaic (i.e. levinas or jabes), or even catholic--or post structuralist writings or manifestations of dada. of course, this may also very well have much to do with my temperament--my capacity to create is stronger than my capacity to critique. as deleuze remarked, the "goal" is to bring into existence and not to judge. :pNice. And horrible that someone who said this could be driven to suicide.

parmalee

09-15-10, 11:03 AM

some people are barely holding it together. whatever paperclips and duct tape they can desperately apply to their broken glasses, they grab after with great force. And who can blame them. You can see this as a kind of confession.:p
for me there is a perpetual battle between my nihilistic inclinations on one hand, and my tendencies towards hyper-religiosity--or excessive attribution of meaning to the point of absurdity--on the other. one of my favorite directors, jess franco (http://irishgothichorrorjournal.homestead.com/john.html), openly concedes that most of his films are simply awful and that he has never made a decent film; and yet, he is perhaps the most prolific film director of all time--at present, he has produced over 180 films.

Yes. But then it is also a dynamic act - professions of nihilism. It is a relationship, with others, with themselves, with the universe. Or a tool.
and one must take into account whether the professor's nihilism is epistemological or ontological in nature.

I think decisions made on points like this often boil down to 'there seem to be two options, and given the two....' I do not think enough time is given to actually see/feel if there are other options, even to allow for the yearning for them. If this space, interlude is nto allowed - because somehow it seems like one must choose and now - certain third ways do not come into the world - or minds of certain people.
it's difficult to say whether this be a product of necessity, of economy, or even of style; and yet--discounting the latter most option--i find it ultimately unsatisfactory. still, i "allow" it as all too human and am hardly one to judge--don't know if this analogy works, but i'll give it a shot anyways: one of the multitude of reasons i cite for not driving an automobile is that i simply do not like to stop. as a bicyclist, i treat stop signs and lights as "yields," and given that i sometimes must yield, i nevertheless "move in place."

Nice. And horrible that someone who said this could be driven to suicide.
funny. i hadn't even thought about that when i wrote the bit about suicidal ideation. but when considering nihilistic attributes--from apophasis to dadaism--and suicide broadly, i.e., "suicide," there's quite a correlation: from arthur rimbaud to nico* to mark rothko.

* nico carried about a copy of "beyond good and evil" for many years, dedicated songs to folks as "varied" as richard nixon and andreas baader, and devoted the latter part of her life to annihilating whatever "beautiful" qualities others were to find in her.

spidergoat

09-15-10, 11:07 AM

Why would anyone adopt a philosophical outlook they don't like?

Ripley

09-15-10, 11:29 AM

Nihilism isn't a condition, nor is it a fixed temperament that one adheres to religiously. And I'm sure Nietzsche never proposed it as a constant but rather as a derived but transient quality that leads to either renewal of self—the new dawn—or atrophy of self.

glaucon

09-15-10, 12:17 PM

There are people who, by their philosophical outlook, are nihilists.
Some of these people are cheerful and happy, functioning individuals.

Being a nihilist and being happy/functioning seems apriori mutually exclusive to me.

What is it that makes those nihilists happy/functioning?
How can those people maintain a nihilistic outlook, yet still be happy and functioning?

Are they not thoroughly nihilistic?
Does a person's philosophical outlook have no bearing on how happy or how functioning the person will be?

Signal,

Of particular concern here is your omission of definition. This makes it difficult to respond appropriately.

From what you've written, it seems to me that you're interpreting nihilism in a significantly different sense than that which is ordinarily used.

Ordinary usage of "nihilism" means a state of belief characterized by a refusal to positively assert anything definitively.

Given that, parmalee's comment:

likewise, even praxis/theory (or temperament and philosophical "outlook") cannot be neatly parsed; but neither are they one and the same.

is right on the mark.

There's nothing excluding the nihilist from being happy.
What's more, this of course leaves open the murky waters of supplying a definition for "happy", and other such aesthetic terms...

wynn

09-16-10, 01:18 AM

Ordinary usage of "nihilism" means a state of belief characterized by a refusal to positively assert anything definitively.

And such a definition of nihilism fits with my line of reasoning about nihilism and happiness.

There's nothing excluding the nihilist from being happy.

You will have to explain this a bit more, please.
Because it points at what I am trying to get at.

Note that I have also said functioning (in everyday life, like going to work).

What's more, this of course leaves open the murky waters of supplying a definition for "happy", and other such aesthetic terms...

I agree that there is some lack of definitions here in this thread, but I see this lack as part of the topic, as I am trying to find what it is that makes a nihilistic outlook, happiness and everyday functioning fit together; and also why they fit togther for some people and not for others.

wynn

09-16-10, 01:34 AM

Why would anyone adopt a philosophical outlook they don't like?

Because there is pressure that they should.

For example, some poeple become atheists because of the incessant pressure from atheists accusing those with some religious or spiritual inclination to be "irrational", "crazy", "merely subjective", "sentimental".
People generally do not wish to be thought of as "irrational" etc., so they act in such a manner that they avoid getting that label (wherby it seems to matter very little what "irrational" etc. actually mean).

wynn

09-16-10, 01:39 AM

I think this is another content/expressive act confusion, on their part, and then like a virus over to you.

They like saying these things because of what it does.

So, basically, they lie, and I fall for it.

wynn

09-16-10, 02:24 AM

oddly, i find more "authentic" nihilistic tendencies in those who emphatically assert that they are not nihilists;

Can someone who doesn't assert to be a nihilist, still be considered a nihilist?

whereas those who openly endorse nihilism (oxymoronic as that is) tend to be blind to their own hypocrisy and inconsistency.

Well, yes - which is what I find so bizarre about self-professed nihilists.

and here is the irony in nihilistic thinking/action: the negation of meaning or value is tantamount to desisting from judgment (for judgment entails valuation), and in this abeyance of judgment, value and meaning emerge.

Yes ...
How do they live with that?

francois

09-16-10, 05:27 AM

Ordinary usage of "nihilism" means a state of belief characterized by a refusal to positively assert anything definitively.

That's the troubling thing. There are many different ideas of what nihilism is.

In most senses, I'm not a nihilist, because for one thing, I do not reject all moral theories. But on the other hand, I'm pretty sure there is no objective purpose to existence. I used to think nothing is inherently valuable, but I've been coming to think that consciousness, and specifically pain and pleasure, give our lives real value.

I know I feel pain and pleasure and I think it's logical to assume that so do others. Pain and pleasure are real. When you are pricked with a needle, the brain turns that spike train into something real. I don't know how it does it, but it doesn't matter, because I am feeling it, and because there's probably nothing special about me, it's likely that you are too.

How do I cope with being a "sort of" nihilist? Well, it took a lot of time. But the main way I cope with it and achieved happiness is by taking good care of my body. Exercise a lot, eat well, maintain relationships, sleep eight hours per day. Happiness is a state of mind, which you can self-induce by knowing how the brain works and by applying that knowledge in a disciplined way.

Once you take care of the body, you're almost automatically happy. I know that nothing really matters, so I don't let things really bother me. I am in control (kind of) of how I react to things. That's not to say I don't have ups and downs, but deep inside, I've developed a peace, that's kind of always just there. I still participate in life, but from a more detached observing way. It's kind of nice.

The Marquis

09-16-10, 07:19 AM

Why would anyone adopt a philosophical outlook they don't like?
Oooh. An interesting thread.

Spider, a man doesn't "adopt" a philosophy and retain any semblance of honesty. One, rather, comes to accept it.
As somebody else mentioned, as well - there are many different definitions or forms of nihilism. For some, it invokes feelings of despair and meaninglessness; for others, not quite so much.
There is a school of thought which assumes that without faith in one god or another, one is a automatically conferred the qualities of a nihilist, perhaps without any real knowledge of the fact.

I think this is something I'll need to deal with sober. Hopefully the thread won't be completely dead by the time I achieve that.

Captain Kremmen

09-16-10, 08:27 AM

Nihilists

some people are barely holding it together. whatever paperclips and duct tape they can desperately apply to their broken glasses, they grab after with great force. And who can blame them. You can see this as a kind of confession.:p

Unusually bad post Doreen. It's poorly thought out rubbish
I think if you re-read it, and the posts that led to it, you will agree.

Possibly you are just trying to wind people up.
I do that a lot, and people expect it.
If I had written it, it would be fine, but people expect you to say exactly what you mean.

spidergoat

09-16-10, 08:35 AM

Oooh. An interesting thread.

Spider, a man doesn't "adopt" a philosophy and retain any semblance of honesty. One, rather, comes to accept it.
As somebody else mentioned, as well - there are many different definitions or forms of nihilism. For some, it invokes feelings of despair and meaninglessness; for others, not quite so much.
There is a school of thought which assumes that without faith in one god or another, one is a automatically conferred the qualities of a nihilist, perhaps without any real knowledge of the fact.

I think this is something I'll need to deal with sober. Hopefully the thread won't be completely dead by the time I achieve that.

I disagree, no one adopts a particular worldview unless they really want to. I suspect nihilism comes with a great sense of freedom.

Doreen

09-16-10, 09:14 AM

So, basically, they lie, and I fall for it.I think that would be on the cynical end of the spectrum of interpretations and one I have sometimes. I am suggesting that you (and I) are taking their assertions as content focused assertions about reality, when in fact they may be saying things expressively and also because of what saying these things does for them. I had a friend who was not a nihilist, but she did say often 'this is my favority thing'. When five minutes before it had been something else. I did not take her literally. This is a very simple, not complicated example, whereas the nihilist is doing something more complicated. In addition to the not literalness there is this added dynamic. What they gain from saying what they are saying AS IF it was literal and the likely fact that they believe themselves, at least sometimes, that they are making literal content based assertions about reality.

I am guessing that both you and I can sympathize with what they may be trying to DO by saying some of these things - and the feelings surrounding them - if not at the same time deciding to seriously consider taking up their assertions as new beliefs.

Doreen

09-16-10, 09:25 AM

for me there is a perpetual battle between my nihilistic inclinations on one hand, and my tendencies towards hyper-religiosity--or excessive attribution of meaning to the point of absurdity--on the other. one of my favorite directors, jess franco (http://irishgothichorrorjournal.homestead.com/john.html), openly concedes that most of his films are simply awful and that he has never made a decent film; and yet, he is perhaps the most prolific film director of all time--at present, he has produced over 180 films.Yes, I have some of this split also.

and one must take into account whether the professor's nihilism is epistemological or ontological in nature.Yes, or as I have been putting it, what he is doing when he asserts this. What is the assertions function. I think some people are more comfortable saying things that represent where they are in a given moment, rather than repeating their official position in all instants. They do not necessarily even come up with an official position. So the complexity of their experiences and impressions is reflected by what appears to be hypocrity or sloppiness over time.

it's difficult to say whether this be a product of necessity, of economy, or even of style; and yet--discounting the latter most option--i find it ultimately unsatisfactory. still, i "allow" it as all too human and am hardly one to judge--don't know if this analogy works, but i'll give it a shot anyways: one of the multitude of reasons i cite for not driving an automobile is that i simply do not like to stop. as a bicyclist, i treat stop signs and lights as "yields," and given that i sometimes must yield, i nevertheless "move in place."absolutely...it is all too human. And always leaving open for a third option or more options may not be a good guiding principle either. I do know I can get irritated with people who have decided there are two choices, where I think there are more and I see them contributing to the very problems they seem to be trying to fix. But, again, human this is.

funny. i hadn't even thought about that when i wrote the bit about suicidal ideation. but when considering nihilistic attributes--from apophasis to dadaism--and suicide broadly, i.e., "suicide," there's quite a correlation: from arthur rimbaud to nico* to mark rothko.I found Deleuze very inspiring, but he did not provide, for me, a base to work from. It often felt like he ended up focussing to much on the ideas on the page without grounding them in himself. IOW there was something inhuman about what he was suggesting. I doubt he would have taken that as a criticism either. I am not sure humans can do without a certain warm core to a philosophy, even if this seems sentimental, metaphysical, religious, sappy, weak or whatever the philosopher in question may find reprehensible.

* nico carried about a copy of "beyond good and evil" for many years, dedicated songs to folks as "varied" as richard nixon and andreas baader, and devoted the latter part of her life to annihilating whatever "beautiful" qualities others were to find in her.And however trite that sounds sad to me. Like a kind of partly harsh aesthetics becoming a mode of life, with a similar I have as my concern about a warm core expressed above.

Doreen

09-16-10, 09:27 AM

Nihilists

Unusually bad post Doreen. It's poorly thought out rubbish
I think if you re-read it, and the posts that led to it, you will agree.

Possibly you are just trying to wind people up.
I do that a lot, and people expect it.
If I had written it, it would be fine, but people expect you to say exactly what you mean.I guess I will focus on the implicit compliment in this post and move on.

Doreen

09-16-10, 09:37 AM

Signal,

Of particular concern here is your omission of definition. This makes it difficult to respond appropriately.

From what you've written, it seems to me that you're interpreting nihilism in a significantly different sense than that which is ordinarily used.

Ordinary usage of "nihilism" means a state of belief characterized by a refusal to positively assert anything definitively.
I was taking the sense of nihilism to be something like Wiki's

Nihilism (pronounced /ˈnaɪ.əlɪzəm/ or /ˈniː.əlɪzəm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is the philosophical doctrine suggesting the negation of one or more meaningful aspects of life. Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism which argues that life[1] is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Moral nihilists assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological, metaphysical or ontological forms, meaning respectively that, in some aspect, knowledge is not possible or that contrary to our belief, some aspect of reality does not exist as such.
Which is more than simply not making positive assertions, but actually attacking positive assertions and making negative ones.

But I have to agree with Signal's sense that your version also should lead to emotional issues.

Your version, the epistemological nihilism (assuming it is not simply a behavioral trait, but on some level based on a philosophical position) it seems to me is automatically indefensible - but that is another issue - though perhaps also unassailable.

I would assert that once one cannot accept any meaning or motivation or value, action becomes emptied. I do not think homo sapiens can thrive and be happy in such a state.

Unless they are psychopaths. Though a gut feeling says that even these will have some minimal assertions of meaning, even if they only turn back, like they do in various solipsists, only on themselves.

Doreen

09-16-10, 09:38 AM

Why would anyone adopt a philosophical outlook they don't like?Well, someone growing up in a war zone may decide humans are evil and yet wish they could believe something else.

Sarkus

09-16-10, 10:53 AM

Ordinary usage of "nihilism" means a state of belief characterized by a refusal to positively assert anything definitively. Surely such a nihilist can not positively assert to being a nihilist. ;)

Personally I thought there are many types of nihilism, depending on what you are talking about: moral nihilism, epistemological nihilism etc, and each type is a take on the subject matter (morals, epistemology etc) rather than being a philosophy in and of itself.

If someone considers themself merely a "nihilist", is there truly a single philosophical position under consideration?

So surely some clarification of what is meant in the OP is called for?

But I also don't necessarily see how being a nihilist means you can't be happy? You may think something has no objective/intrinsic value, but it can still make you smile, surely?

spidergoat

09-16-10, 11:44 AM

Well, someone growing up in a war zone may decide humans are evil and yet wish they could believe something else.

Is that really a philosophical position? Humans are evil.

The Marquis

09-18-10, 10:25 AM

I was taking the sense of nihilism to be something like Wiki's...
That Wiki article posits quite a few definitions of nihilism.
You seized upon the one which probably most gels with your own thought processes. First cab off the rank.

The saddest thing about the internet is that it breaks down knowledge into a format agreeable with the greatest common denominator. If anyone wishes to find an opinion coinciding with their own, it isn't terribly difficult to do.

Googling anything invariably leads one to a Wiki article. It's s little like walking into an exam with a Cliff's Notes under your arm. Knowledge second to catchphrases.

Read, and then think. Read more, think more.
And I don't mean quoting or paraphrasing whatever you find on the net.

Still drunk.

The Marquis

09-18-10, 10:30 AM

If someone considers themself merely a "nihilist", is there truly a single philosophical position under consideration?
Yes, there is. There is no god. There cannot be. That is the beginning.

But I also don't necessarily see how being a nihilist means you can't be happy? You may think something has no objective/intrinsic value, but it can still make you smile, surely?
If a thing makes you smile, it has value; at least to yourself.
A Nihilistic point of view ensures that any values arrived at are personal, aesthetic. The next step is to determine whether or not the personal perspective is actually yours.

The Marquis

09-18-10, 10:43 AM

I disagree, no one adopts a particular worldview unless they really want to.
Hence the prevalence of intellectual cowardice.
Religion is the ony real answer. The adoption of a belief.
Don't say "no one". Say "few".

I suspect nihilism comes with a great sense of freedom.
Ahhh, yes. It most certainly does. Along with fear, uncertainty and the constant desire to believe in anything else.

I have long said that the desire to have others understand the complete ramifications of being a nihilist is tantamount to wishing cancer upon them.
It is not something one truly wishes to understand unless they are prepared to accept the consequences.

Look both ways before you cross the road.

Ripley

09-18-10, 12:05 PM

Yes, there is. There is no god. There cannot be. That is the beginning.

Still drunk.That is the inbetweener.

Sarkus

09-18-10, 12:45 PM

Yes, there is. There is no god. There cannot be. That is the beginning.That's a branch of atheism. While I think this may lead to or be derived from nihilism, how does nihilism differ from mere atheism? And is nihilism really a position about god? Can one believe in a deistic god, for example, and still be a nihilist?

If a thing makes you smile, it has value; at least to yourself.
A Nihilistic point of view ensures that any values arrived at are personal, aesthetic. The next step is to determine whether or not the personal perspective is actually yours.Which doesn't really make things clearer... are you saying that a nihilist CAN be happy - or that they can't?

And you imply that a personal perspective might not be one's own? Care to expand on that?

hrebic

09-18-10, 01:29 PM

With apologies to Dostoevsky, If God is dead, than anything is permitted. Including being happy.

Ripley

09-18-10, 01:42 PM

That's a branch of atheism. While I think this may lead to or be derived from nihilism, how does nihilism differ from mere atheism? And is nihilism really a position about god?The Marquis clearly stated something about a beginning. In other words, the wheels are set in motion, a direction away from icon authority figures is mapped, and one begins one's trek into the strange land. God just happens to be the alpha of authority figures.

Can one believe in a deistic god, for example, and still be a nihilist?That's like saying, can one go outside while keeping indoors. Lol.

glaucon

09-18-10, 03:38 PM

I was taking the sense of nihilism to be something like Wiki's
Which is more than simply not making positive assertions, but actually attacking positive assertions and making negative ones.

Egads Doreen. I'm shocked. Wikipedia?? For shame.

Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy:

Nihilism: a theory promoting the state of believing in nothing, or of having no allegiances and no purposes.

****************************

Philosophy Pages Dictionary:

nihilism:

Complete rejection of the existence of human knowledge and values or denial of the possibility of making any useful distinctions among things.

****************************

IEP:

Nihilism: is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence.

****************************

But I have to agree with Signal's sense that your version also should lead to emotional issues.

Your version, the epistemological nihilism (assuming it is not simply a behavioral trait, but on some level based on a philosophical position) it seems to me is automatically indefensible - but that is another issue - though perhaps also unassailable.

Not at all, though, as you say, that's another issue.

For now (and this may clear up some of the apparent confusion with respect to my view of nihilism..) let me just say that I would argue that nihilism is synonymous with existentialism.
IOW: there is a profound difference between asserting that there are no values (inherently), and that there can be no values.

I would assert that once one cannot accept any meaning or motivation or value, action becomes emptied. I do not think homo sapiens can thrive and be happy in such a state.

Again, the nihilist position does not necessarily deny value (see above), or meaning.

glaucon

09-18-10, 03:38 PM

Surely such a nihilist can not positively assert to being a nihilist. ;)

lol

Nice.

(And actually pertinent. I think it's this interpretation that has 'sullied' the term, and moved it into its common, vulgar connotations).

Personally I thought there are many types of nihilism, depending on what you are talking about: moral nihilism, epistemological nihilism etc, and each type is a take on the subject matter (morals, epistemology etc) rather than being a philosophy in and of itself.

Agreed.

If someone considers themself merely a "nihilist", is there truly a single philosophical position under consideration?

Perhaps, at best, simply a rejection of essentialism.

So surely some clarification of what is meant in the OP is called for?

Indeed.

But I also don't necessarily see how being a nihilist means you can't be happy? You may think something has no objective/intrinsic value, but it can still make you smile, surely?

I couldn't agree more.

:-)

glaucon

09-18-10, 03:38 PM

That's a branch of atheism. While I think this may lead to or be derived from nihilism, how does nihilism differ from mere atheism? And is nihilism really a position about god? Can one believe in a deistic god, for example, and still be a nihilist?

All good questions.
Although I would think that nihilism could play a role in the question of theism, in and of itself it's not necessarily apt. Of course, if one believes that all value is derived from a theist position, then, of course, there will be relevance....

(but let's decide to play nice and minimize the god question herein...)

Sarkus

09-18-10, 06:26 PM

The Marquis clearly stated something about a beginning. In other words, the wheels are set in motion, a direction away from icon authority figures is mapped, and one begins one's trek into the strange land. God just happens to be the alpha of authority figures.God is not necessarily the alpha of authority figures... some would say that the self is the alpha.
I can see how moving from theism to atheism might be due to a thought process that might tend one towards nihilism (or aspects thereof), and that overlap exists etc, but I'm not sure nihilism requires one to assert such a strong atheistic position.

That's like saying, can one go outside while keeping indoors. Lol.It might be... but if you don't have the courtesy to explain why... :shrug:
Personally I don't agree with your analogy. I would see it like asking if one can go outside even if someone has built you a house. There is no contradiction.
But if you feel there is... please explain it: what is it about deism, for example, that contradicts a nihilistic philosophy?

glaucon

09-18-10, 07:44 PM

God is not necessarily the alpha of authority figures... some would say that the self is the alpha.
I can see how moving from theism to atheism might be due to a thought process that might tend one towards nihilism (or aspects thereof), and that overlap exists etc, but I'm not sure nihilism requires one to assert such a strong atheistic position.

Well said Sarkus.

I was hoping someone might say this.

It might be... but if you don't have the courtesy to explain why... :shrug:
Personally I don't agree with your analogy. I would see it like asking if one can go outside even if someone has built you a house. There is no contradiction.
But if you feel there is... please explain it: what is it about deism, for example, that contradicts a nihilistic philosophy?

Questions I was wondering about myself Sarkus.

Again, exactly why is it that in this thread we have to expand into the realm of theism?
The OP is concerned with the nihilist position explicitly within the aesthetic context. Why do we need to move beyond this scope??

IamJoseph

09-18-10, 08:49 PM

What is it that makes those nihilists happy/functioning?

Usually, they are under an assumption of pursuing justice, but often this is resultant from a displacement factor of anxst from another, unlreated experience, such as a loss or violation. When one cannot obtain justice in one area, they associate other areas as aligned with their grief and cannot separate one issue from another.

IamJoseph

09-18-10, 09:01 PM

All good questions.
Although I would think that nihilism could play a role in the question of theism, in and of itself it's not necessarily apt. Of course, if one believes that all value is derived from a theist position, then, of course, there will be relevance....

(but let's decide to play nice and minimize the god question herein...)

The term theism has lost all meaning and application and we are witnessing the last gasp end finale of theism today. All of them are self contradictory and mutually exclusive premises, to the extent none can align with a generic term of theism anymore.

Usually, what is referred to as theism today have no laws and are wholly based on self preferred and self assumed doctrines posing as belief systems. When examined more closely, their only premise is a localised set of wish lists, mostly adapted from another previous system, but now hidden behind a ficticious or unrelated figurehead. Theism is not based on laws or logic, but is akin to a political party today: ask what is the theism of christianity or Islam, and all you will get is a preferred name - nothing else transcends this factor, and it cannot be applied generically outside of that preferred name! Its like asking a democrat what is good politics.

parmalee

09-18-10, 09:04 PM

Yes, I have some of this split also.
see below.

Yes, or as I have been putting it, what he is doing when he asserts this. What is the assertions function. I think some people are more comfortable saying things that represent where they are in a given moment, rather than repeating their official position in all instants. They do not necessarily even come up with an official position. So the complexity of their experiences and impressions is reflected by what appears to be hypocrity or sloppiness over time.
the attitude towards this seeming "hypocrisy" is important, and that is where i think nihilism plays a critical role in preserving one's sanity. most -isms, insofar as authenticity, clarity, and integrity are ideals to strive for, carry an implicit rejection of ambiguity and uncertainty--one ought not deviate from the "official position," and one ought not distort such in the implementation of theory in praxis. but the nihilist will just chuckle or shrug when, say, someone points out the paradoxical nature of their "position," as sarkus does when he writes:

Surely such a nihilist can not positively assert to being a nihilist.

I found Deleuze very inspiring, but he did not provide, for me, a base to work from. It often felt like he ended up focussing to much on the ideas on the page without grounding them in himself. IOW there was something inhuman about what he was suggesting. I doubt he would have taken that as a criticism either. I am not sure humans can do without a certain warm core to a philosophy, even if this seems sentimental, metaphysical, religious, sappy, weak or whatever the philosopher in question may find reprehensible.
deleuze would certainly embrace the inhuman, and though he didn't live to see this, he would probably "struggle" with the label of post-humanist. though i think there is an implicit irony in all work described as post-humanist, and deleuze--while undoubtably aware of this irony--carries on as though altogether oblivious to it.

one person who furthers the post-humanist trend, while also pursuing the irony, is donna haraway. now, there's a few reasons i mention haraway, but the most pertinent one is that she best exemplifies a certain trend amongst post-humanists which should raise some eyebrows: the love of dogs. and dogs specifically, not wolves (or even cats) (though most like them too, i'm sure). and that's the most i'm going to offer by way of spelling out what it is that i am trying to say, though perhaps i'll sketch it out a bit more later.

though i'll add, one peripheral post-humanist even went so far as to falsely attribute a quote about dogs by feuerbach to nietzsche (though the mistake was somewhat understandable). it's funny how those of us with very strong non-essentialist tendency also have a tendency to commit quintessentially (pun intended) essentialist actions/thoughts.

haraway picks up where heidegger left off (in "questions concerning technology") by exploring our ambivalent relationship towards technological "progress" (see cyborg manifesto). while rightly identifying the (self) destructive nature of our essentialist tendencies, she also recognizes that these tendencies are simply irresistible and all but impossible to avoid. with regards to dogs (guess i will "sketch it out" a bit), she rightly rejects the naive and myopic "naturalism" of, say, the peta sorts (or "primitivists"), and simply embraces the simple fact that our "destinies" are intertwined, regardless of how we "got here," or continue to perpetuate such. and who is the "more," uh, human?

for me, there is no better affront to the foolish optimism and essentialism of those who bolster renaissance ideals (the "enlightened" ones and the "humanists") and believe their "paradigm" to be an improvement upon previous ones, than to quietly play along and allow things to unravel as they may. this may smack of complacency, but i think it ultimately less pernicious than certain reactionary posturing, which are really but alternative expressions of humanist ideals--assertion of will? (and i realize that i am again echoing deleuzean notions deterritorialization/reterritorialization).

so perhaps i am not so unsettled by the way in which some (myself?) embrace the nihilistic impulse of our own milieu, but then i am far more inclined (than some) to express what i represent right now, with little care or regard for how this reflects upon my ultimate mission. and, as i believe glaucon notes above (or below), the nihilist simply asserts that there are (intrinsically) no values; this is no way determines that there can be no values. and even if i am unsettled, what if it? contrary to what spidergoat remarks, we do not always adopt that which we "like."

And however trite that sounds sad to me. Like a kind of partly harsh aesthetics becoming a mode of life, with a similar I have as my concern about a warm core expressed above.
although, one must consider what she was reacting to. nico often remarked that she was simply "playing a role," and this is no less true of the period in her life when she was dying her hair with henna, and afterward dying it black. most missed the point altogether; but for many, with marble index, desertshore (with props to joyce), and the end, she re-defined beauty, and this can bear important consequences for not only the dog, but even for the lowly cockroach or the thieving junkie.

parmalee

09-18-10, 09:11 PM

The saddest thing about the internet is that it breaks down knowledge into a format agreeable with the greatest common denominator. If anyone wishes to find an opinion coinciding with their own, it isn't terribly difficult to do.
indeed. and critically, in the absence of proof-readers, fact-checkers, and any meaningful notion of "accountability." depending upon whether one is a glass-half-full/glass-half-empty type, anything and everything can mean anything and everything at all, or nothing. with the internet at one's disposal, can anyone really assert that there are no black swans?

parmalee

09-18-10, 09:18 PM

For now (and this may clear up some of the apparent confusion with respect to my view of nihilism..) let me just say that I would argue that nihilism is synonymous with existentialism.
i don't know. though i'll agree with this:

Perhaps, at best, simply a rejection of essentialism.
does a rejection of essentialism necessarily imply existentialism? IOW must one who asserts no intrinsic meaning/value necessarily posit that existence precedes essence?

The Marquis

09-18-10, 09:56 PM

That's a branch of atheism.
While I think this may lead to or be derived from nihilism, how does nihilism differ from mere atheism?
Atheism is a specific focus. A branch of mathematics, if you like; an idea unto itself, but a necessary part of the whole.
It does not differ from nihilism, it is a part or a subset of it.

Which doesn't really make things clearer... are you saying that a nihilist CAN be happy - or that they can't?
Of course happiness is possible. Does one consider a philosphical position every hour of every day? Is it not possible to smile at the play of children without reflecting upon the meaninglessness of it?
While ennui may be present at times, it does not necessarily become the whole of ones existence - any more than happiness does. A man reacts in his own way to what he believes.

And you imply that a personal perspective might not be one's own? Care to expand on that?
I consider a man to be the the sum of that which has influenced him; this is a simplified perspective, of course. Most are quite happy to state theirs beliefs or a argue a position. Few are inclined to ask themselves why they believe; even fewer to consider it honestly.

The Marquis

09-18-10, 10:04 PM

That is the inbetweener.
Meaning?

The Marquis

09-18-10, 10:15 PM

indeed. and critically, in the absence of proof-readers, fact-checkers, and any meaningful notion of "accountability." depending upon whether one is a glass-half-full/glass-half-empty type, anything and everything can mean anything and everything at all, or nothing. with the internet at one's disposal, can anyone really assert that there are no black swans?
I think a part of the problem is that many believe nihilism is a negation of all belief. With regard to the black swan, a nihilist is not going to say that it does not exist, or even that it has no purpose; but rather that that purpose is ultimately meaningless.
My own take on the situation is contained within a single question.
If all life on earth were to be wiped out tomorrow, who would care?

I suppose even existentialism annoys me at times. I touched on it before, recently, in some other thread I've forgotten. It smacks of adopting a belief in order to fill a void.
The question of necessary dishonesty with oneself is... exruciatingly painful.

wynn

09-19-10, 12:20 AM

Of course happiness is possible.

Does one consider a philosphical position every hour of every day?

But why doesn't one consider a/one's philosophical position every hour of the day? Why wouldn't one?

Because this not considering a/one's philosophical position every hour of the day is, by implication, a/one's philosophical position.

wynn

09-19-10, 12:53 AM

Usually, they are under an assumption of pursuing justice, but often this is resultant from a displacement factor of anxst from another, unlreated experience, such as a loss or violation. When one cannot obtain justice in one area, they associate other areas as aligned with their grief and cannot separate one issue from another.

the attitude towards this seeming "hypocrisy" is important, and that is where i think nihilism plays a critical role in preserving one's sanity.

Yes, in that sense, nihilism is a kind of meta-position.

Also, there does seem to be a parallel between nihilism and what is often termed "critical thinking".

Critical thinking does not assert a position, but claims to be merely a methodology.
(Yet it is also clear enough that any methodology is based on some particular system of values - whereby a position is implied.)

A nihilist is like a ironist or satirist - or a "critical thinker": he can sit down at the side and criticize what is going on, pointing out the faults and wrongs, without himself stating how it could or should be otherwise. He is a primarily commentator.
This approach has a long-standing tradition in Western culture.

It appears though that such commentators have tried to facilitate (social or personal) change that way; an ex-negativo approach based on the conviction that if that which deserves criticism is removed, then the superb, that which is above criticism will emerge or become readily visible.

But perhaps this above is an unduly optimistic interpretation of their motivation, and the commentators are actually happy with the state of affairs, however deserving criticism they may be to them.

Sarkus

09-19-10, 04:33 AM

Of course happiness is possible. Does one consider a philosphical position every hour of every day? Is it not possible to smile at the play of children without reflecting upon the meaninglessness of it?
While ennui may be present at times, it does not necessarily become the whole of ones existence - any more than happiness does. A man reacts in his own way to what he believes.Ok - so you think happiness is only possible when one is switched off from nihilistic philosophising?

But what about happiness within the remit of nihilism... i.e. if one was absolutely nihilistic, why could one not still be "happy"? Is there anything within the philosophy of nihilism that prevents one from being happy?

I consider a man to be the the sum of that which has influenced him; this is a simplified perspective, of course. Most are quite happy to state theirs beliefs or a argue a position. Few are inclined to ask themselves why they believe; even fewer to consider it honestly.But surely this can be regressed to absurdity such that all our influences derive from the first single-celled life. Unless, of course, you introduce an element that can give rise to new thought?

Ripley

09-19-10, 05:52 AM

Meaning?

Yes… what did I mean? Well, I�ll let you know that it�s a perfect drag having to explain one�s ad-lib many hours later. Especially for one that was quick and simple, which I figured was self-explanatory. So I decided to let it pass until I realized later on that perhaps I might have offended you somehow, which was not my intent.

Because from the outset I quickly ran through your responses on the topic only to see with great chagrin that the only reference I elicited on nihilism was that one single now stupid line. Well big shit then. But then I paused and thought, damn, I knew I should have used inbetweeness instead of inbetweener because inbetweener sounds too much like tweaker, drinker, stinker.

Or rather, it focuses too much on the semblance of a state of mind instead of an implication for a passage of time—still drunk, remember? I meant it for a passage of time; between two states.

So in my reference to nihilism, I should have used inbetweeness. Inbetweeness: a somewhat disoriented region between death and birth—that is, between the undiscovered self before God and the resurrected self after God. Everything in between is my quick and simple blurb for nihilism—the inbetweeness of being. Like being stoned.

Ripley

09-19-10, 06:05 AM

God is not necessarily the alpha of authority figures... some would say that the self is the alpha.How could the self be the alpha before God's?? Anyway, in lieu of God I could have said John Lennon or John F. Kennedy, depending on the nature of one's arrest.

but I'm not sure nihilism requires one to assert such a strong atheistic position.I don't think one aims to denounce God, but that God just doesn't matter much anymore. You know, like skipping boring conversation.

It might be... but if you don't have the courtesy to explain why...You mean, spoil my grand exit??

Sarkus

09-19-10, 02:30 PM

How could the self be the alpha before God's?? Anyway, in lieu of God I could have said John Lennon or John F. Kennedy, depending on the nature of one's arrest.How could the self not be the alpha before God when one does not begin from an a priori assumption of God's existence?

I don't think one aims to denounce God, but that God just doesn't matter much anymore. You know, like skipping boring conversation.Again - this doesn't require the strong-atheist position of denouncing God. An irrelevant God is still God - a God that does not exist is not.

You mean, spoil my grand exit??A meaningful entrance would suffice for now. ;)

glaucon

09-19-10, 03:52 PM

The term theism has lost all meaning and application and we are witnessing the last gasp end finale of theism today.

...

Theism is not based on laws or logic, but is akin to a political party today:
...

Not to be dismissive but, was there a point to that at all?

The content of what you wrote is fine in and of itself (though contentious...) but you failed in any way to make it relevant to the topic at hand.

glaucon

09-19-10, 03:52 PM

does a rejection of essentialism necessarily imply existentialism? IOW must one who asserts no intrinsic meaning/value necessarily posit that existence precedes essence?

I'd say not necessarily, but definitely sufficiently.

Although, I would quibble with the common 'definition' of existentialism being rendered as "existence precedes essence".

In any case, I was just trying to clarify my position.
Certainly a potentially interesting topic in and of itself...

glaucon

09-19-10, 03:52 PM

I think a part of the problem is that many believe nihilism is a negation of all belief.

Precisely.
My point from the beginning.

People (including the OP...??) are misusing the term.

glaucon

09-19-10, 03:52 PM

How could the self be the alpha before God's?? Anyway, in lieu of God I could have said John Lennon or John F. Kennedy, depending on the nature of one's arrest.

I don't think one aims to denounce God, but that God just doesn't matter much anymore. You know, like skipping boring conversation.

You mean, spoil my grand exit??

A meaningful entrance would suffice for now. ;)

Ripley,

Sarkus' point here (though made in jest) is quite apt.

There is no necessity to continually introduce 'god' into the discussion.
However, if you feel you must do so, at the very least, do so in a reasonable manner.

Big Chiller

09-26-10, 11:19 PM

RE: How can a nihilist be happy?

I think nihilists and atheists alike should be very happy and feel very lucky to feel assured that they will never have to face eternal toture as they do not believe in it. :p

Michael

09-27-10, 12:22 AM

According to some Christians, you will face eternal torture - feeling lucky? ;)
IOW you are just as happy as you always have been because you don't think you're facing eternal torture - you don't believe you will burn in hell for eternity. THAT seems stupid to you. Other people burning forever, that makes sense to you in some warped way, but you roasting in agonizing pain for not accepting Jesus - no way!!! THAT'S stupid!!! :p

*turns to pray towards magic moon rock*

Big Chiller

09-27-10, 08:13 PM

francois

09-27-10, 09:31 PM

I'm not impressed. Atheists don't believe in God altogether which I was pointing out that's why they should feel so secure and happy to never worry about eternal torture. By the way in my religion we're always afraid and are supposed to ask God to save us from eternal torture, and we are not allowed to say for certain whether someone will be given eternal reward or purnishment.

The relieving part of being an atheist isn't that there's no hell: it's that there is no god. Because if there is a god, he's an asshole. I'd rather there be no god than have someone in charge of everything who's a complete prick.

Big Chiller

09-27-10, 09:54 PM

Except that part that why anything is possible why you yourself should exist at all?

Michael

09-28-10, 12:52 AM

This is silly...
Why don't God-believers ever ask: Why should Gods exist at all? Oh, but they do, it's just their answer is stupid: Gods have always existed, or one has or two or whatever. Flying Spaghetti Monsters have always existed, we just can't see them, but when I die I will float up into a pasta bowl and live life forever in this heavenly sauce....

We know the Universe exists - - and that's it. All this nonsense about Gods and Heaven/Hell is just some bullshit used to control people's behavior. If you stop to think about it: it's got to be the silliest bullshit ever peddled. BUT brainwash a child to believe that bullshit and it's no longer funny, but "serious stuff".

George Carlin - Religion is bullshit. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o)

To think, there are literally MILLIONS of people who believe in an Alien Overlord named Xenu ... and these millions of people (many whom used to Muslim) worry about their Thatan-levels and whether or not the "Mother Ship" is going to pick them up AFTER they die. People really believe that bullshit. They worry about a magical Alien Overlord Ooooo and if they don't pray to Xenu five times a day and worry all damn day long, Xenu will use his magic invisible death-ray and send them to Hell ... other idiots pray towards a magical moon rock and worry about Allah. Same bullshit, different smell.