[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 223 KB, 800x1112, 9781909676954.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5246779 No.5246779[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Why nihilism is a bad thing?

>> No.5246783

Because opinionated armchair psychologists.

>> No.5246792

the word sounds kinda scary

>> No.5246801

>>5246779
Because the majority of people "don't get it"

>> No.5246894

>>5246779
What kind of nihilism are we talking about?

>> No.5246923

because its a naive view

>> No.5246928

>>5246779

Because 4chan despises everything that is edgy while acting as edgy as humanly possible. I want to rape nigger faggot Jews.

>> No.5247222

I haven't read into nihilism really but is it essentially center around morals being a fallacy?

>> No.5247235

>>5247222
Okay... I have no idea what happened to this sentence but you catch my drift.

>> No.5247238

>>5246779
it really seams like a dead end philosophy if you ask me

>> No.5247241

>>5247238
seems*
fuck me

>> No.5247246

>>5247222
You're talking about moral nihilism. However...
>>5247222
>>5247238
...there is also epistemological nihilism, nihilism of values. Some call a hatred of life nihilism too.
Then there's also distinction between active and passive nihilism, which I think can be applied to all of the above, except for the last one.
Some of these are seen as valid, some not. Some go against each other.

>> No.5247249

>>5247222

Depending upon the form of nihilism, it's lack of belief in components of the world and possibly even the self, though je pense would refute not existing to a layman.

>> No.5247254

>>5247222
Also talks a little about questioning the validity of cultural institutions like colleges. Might be a bit iconoclastic. Or maybe heavily. Not a lot of books written by nihilists, but more books written against nihilism, which has led me to believe it never really existed except as a kind of straw man to rail against by philosophical authors.

>> No.5247260

>>5247254
Same guy: Anyone know any good books by nihilists? Last time I looked, there were only about three in my library. Book list help?

>> No.5247262

>>5247249
>je pense would refute not existing to a layman
You mean it is a valid argument, so obvious to convince even a layman? Or that it would convince a layman into believing that is a valid argument while it is actually not?

>> No.5247264

>>5247262

both

>> No.5247279

>>5247264
Yes, the Je is inherently fractured and multiple, so both can be true at the same time.

>> No.5247303

It's only bad in the eyes of non-nihilists, such as my boy Fyodor "Jesus is Just Alright with Me" Dostoevsky.

>> No.5247361

>>5246801
What's not to get name fag. That's clearly what you want me to ask so you can show us all how intelligent you are, so prove you know what you're talking about.

>> No.5247410

Negates value. It's self-refuting and worthless so that's good enough reason to scoff at it.

>> No.5247422

We talking about the cookie cutter nihilism teenagers love?

>> No.5247428

>>5247422

Actually in Doestoevsky 'Nihilism' takes on an atheistic connotation.

>> No.5248005

Ask an existential nihilist anything.

>> No.5248051

>>5246779
It isn't.

People who have based their lives around "should" or "must" or "mustn't" just get whiny an angry when someone doesn't agree. It makes them afraid that they wasted their time.

>> No.5248166

because in addition to be wrong, it tends to incapacitate people rather than 'free' them

>> No.5248196

>>5248005

Why?

>> No.5248217

Because the statement "Life has no meaning" is not objectively verifiable and requires a leap of faith.

>> No.5248225
File: 17 KB, 222x235, 1405666095380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5248225

>>5248196

>> No.5248229

>>5247222
>morals being a fallacy
If your morals depend on some kind of divine authority, yes. Spoiler: they don't

>> No.5249726
File: 371 KB, 2000x1000, 1312341312.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5249726

>>5248166
He doesn't understand there is a difference between active and passive nihilism

>> No.5249833

It is just a necessary step on the route to understanding that all value is derived from implied valuations by sentient beings and that those implied values are arbitrary but ultimately adequate to make someone's life meaningful.

>> No.5249842

>>5249833
Well that's fucking depressing.

>> No.5249847

>>5249842
Only if you let it be.

>> No.5249890

makes a mockery of values and philosophies & hurts feelings

causes crises (and boredom)

>> No.5250379

>>5249842
Why? It is a road to being creative and loving your creation.

>> No.5250761

>>5249833
Doesn't sound necessary, more like creating your own abyss.

>> No.5251642

>>5250761
You can definitely get the illusion of a meaningful life without and it is basically indistinguishable from the conclusion after traveling through nihilism. It's really a question of whether you have the emotional fortitude to accept the truth about value. If not, It doesn't really matter, you just shouldn't go down the nihilist path.

>> No.5251703

>>5251642
>to accept the truth about value
Would you say that when you accept this truth, you already see new values coming from a distance? It seems your realization (a.k.a. the truth) of the baseness of your previous values already implies new values.

>> No.5251718

The only real nihilism I know about has to do with the Nihilist / anarchism movement that occurred in Russia, and I really only know about this thanks to reading a biographic essay on Dostoevsky, in which talked about Dostoevsky's viewpoint on this matter and how it influenced his writings. If you know anything about the writer, you would know that he thought the Russian nihilists were idiotic and edgy teenagers -- kinda like most of us. The Russian nihilists wanted to tear down the establishment due to mistreatment from their government. Although they called themselves "anarchists" occasionally, they really wanted to tear down the current government, completely, in order to rebuild an entirely new one.

To Dostoevsky, this didn't make sense, because once you remove everything, you are left with nothing. How do you rebuild from nothing? Additionally, Dostoevsky also believed that the government wasn't completely bad either. There were things about the Russian government that were "good", so why waste your time removing the "good" parts as well. Instead, Dostoevsky argued against nihilist movement and wanted people to CHANGE the government, rather than DESTROY it. Destruction seems to be what nihilists, at least referring to this Russian movement, had as their goal, and destruction is usually, if not always, seen as a bad thing.

Reading this thread, there seems to be something called "moral nihilism", which seems to be the belief that morals don't exist. Having just finished up with some Greek philosophers, I feel like I can add in some two cents about what I've learned. Some of the Greek philosophers believed that morals were a natural thing of life, and not only that, but morals were actually decided by nature rather than man. Their reasoning behind this was more based on religion. One of the things the Greeks often talked about was "what exists" and "what doesn't exist". I personally believe that morals DO exist because nature has given men the ability to think and thoughts are something that exist, and part of thoughts is morality.

>> No.5251778

>>5251718
>Some of the Greek philosophers believed that morals were a natural thing of life, and not only that, but morals were actually decided by nature rather than man. Their reasoning behind this was more based on religion. One of the things the Greeks often talked about was "what exists" and "what doesn't exist". I personally believe that morals DO exist because nature has given men the ability to think and thoughts are something that exist, and part of thoughts is morality.
Moral nihilism, as a useful thing, is only a meta position helping you to change or produce new natural morals. The final goal is to create your own and believe in them with every part of your body, thus making them in fact natural, them now actually being a part of the nature itself.

>> No.5251785

>>5251718
just the fact that you call them "morals" means you're applying a supportive POV from the get go

nature is neither good or evil, and from a nihilistic perspective any opinion/morals/whatever is equally worthless

>> No.5251821
File: 14 KB, 180x246, 1390620314029.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5251821

Because most people, including some people on /lit/ don't understand what it is, even self described nihilists.

>> No.5251884

>>5251703
No, no, no. The illusion is that the meaning is extrinsic. The understanding is that the only meanings are implied and therefore arbitrary. The point is that the values being arbitrary is not means for depression. You need to accept that value you imply are valuable to you and that that is all that matters.

>> No.5251914

>>5251884
shut up crowley

>> No.5252015

>>5251914
Who the fuck is Crowley? That shit is straight up Nietzsche.

>> No.5252056

>>5246779
its p boring