/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7174681]

>tfw you're a moral nihilist but still get intuitively outraged at perceived 'injustice'

How do I integrate these cognitions?

[Anonymous No.7174688]

>>7174681
realize you're a human bean and hence a social animal who has an evolutionary past and has been raised in a culture with moral norms

oh and grow up :)

[Anonymous No.7174690]

Accept the Good you pussy

[Anonymous No.7174693]

by growing up and out of moral nihilism

[Anonymous No.7174695]

that intuitiveness is God, anon. Welcome to the brotherhood.

[Anonymous No.7174697]

>>7174681
>a moral nihilist


Get a load of this faggot.

[Anonymous No.7174699]

>>7174681
You can't and your body is physically reacting to how stupid moral nihilism is. So stop being a moral nihilist.

[Anonymous No.7174704]

>>7174681
I dunno, but perhaps you'll find the answer under your fedora?

[Anonymous No.7174707]

>>7174681

You're at a transitional point between two grounds for ethics. You were previously, most likely, a reflexive moral realist, and you've since come to find moral realism false: now it's time to actually study ethics and find that there are may other grounds to ethics other than an absolute universal law.

[Anonymous No.7174833]

>>7174707
>there are may other grounds to ethics other than an absolute universal law.
Like what?

[Anonymous No.7174852]

Its ok, hypocrisy is not uncommon.

[Anonymous No.7174855]

>>7174833
Individual conviction.

[Anonymous No.7174859]

>>7174681
>moral nihilist
>outraged at perceived 'injustice'
so you're NOT a moral nihilist

[Anonymous No.7174863]

>>7174855
You have to be an ubermensch for that though.

[Anonymous No.7174871]

>tfw you're not a moral nihilist but you can't give a shit about sex trafficking, sweatshops, refugees, or economic inequality
You're like the opposite of most people OP

[Anonymous No.7174877]

>>7174863
Individual conviction and knowledge of immediate circumtances is the source of all morality. It just gets objectified by a given culture in some external way (God, laws, Science, etc).

[Anonymous No.7174878]

Nihilism....

[Anonymous No.7174900]

find a REAL philsoophy lmao

[Anonymous No.7174996]

You realize that the two things aren't mutually exclusive.
>thinking emotions are an argument for moral realism

[Anonymous No.7174998]

dudes, my fucking balls itch.

[Anonymous No.7175022]

>>7174681
what i should read to be like Rust?

[Anonymous No.7175051]

Skepticism.

[Anonymous No.7175054]

>>7174688
This

just read Hegel.

[Anonymous No.7175065]

So what is the alternative to moral nihilism?

inb4 Theism

[Anonymous No.7175095]

>>7175065
>>7175051

[Anonymous No.7175106]

I can see how 'stop being a moral nihilist' is an efficient way to do away with this cognitive dissonance, but in order to do so I need some arguments why moral nihilism is wrong, lads.

[Anonymous No.7175110]

>>7174681
>moral nihilist
>renaming your tumblr gifs

[Anonymous No.7175150]

>>7175106
go hold a little girl down and cut her clit off while she screams for her mother and get back to me with the whole trenchcoat moral nihilist thing you fucking edgy yahoo

[Anonymous No.7175168]

>>7175095
Two different things. Moral Nihilism says that there are no fixed morals (killing is not necessarily bad, for example a someone killing a suicide bomber before he blows himself up)
It follows directly out of non-Theism

Skepticism
>Skepticism or scepticism (see spelling differences) is generally any questioning attitude towards unempirical knowledge or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere.

Where do you see the conection?

[Anonymous No.7175183]

>>7175150
>>7174996

[Anonymous No.7175186]

>>7175150
Just because he's a moral nihilist doesn't mean he lacks empathy, or a knowingly subjective system of morality.

[Anonymous No.7175214]

>>7174681
You just have to kill the better part of you is all.

I did it long ago, it made me precious few friends, and many enemies, but it felt so right that I scarcely noticed the loss.

I haven't been outraged by anything in years.

[Anonymous No.7175217]

>>7175186
>thinking being a 1st world goober completely insulated from any primal experience of reality doesn't directly correlate with muh moral nihilism heh

As Emerson said, reality is moral. It is self-evident to any man of action. Who am I gonna listen to, people who are out there living in the trenches or hucksters and cat ladies in academia?

[Anonymous No.7175224]

>>7175054

could you elaborate?
what does hegel talk about?
I can empathize with OP too btw.

[Anonymous No.7175230]

>>7174699
why is it stupid man?
It makes perfect sense to me. Just can't seem to find a way to integrate that with my behavior and reaction to things.

[Anonymous No.7175238]

>>7174859
no. I think OP realizes that nothing is inherently moral or immoral and might agree to that no absolute moral code exists.

However in day to day life, he finds himself unable to be stoic at acts that fall under the traditional notion of immorality.

[Anonymous No.7175241]

>>7174681

recognise the dichotomy of thought (nihilist) and emotion (outrage). if you want to be more logical and temper your emotions then stoicism is what you want.

if you don't want to be a hypocrite then remember that you are a nihilst, you do not believe in anything and therefore it is impossible for your actions to contradict your beliefs. besides, if you are a nihilist then you do not consider there anything inherently wrong with being a hypocrite; your desire to iron out perceived 'hypocrisy' is as internally incoherent as your outrage at perceived 'injustice'

it's better to be a human being and feel emotions than to be logically perfect every second of the day.

[Anonymous No.7175258]

>>7175150
that's a shit argument.
he might be a moral nihilist but as someone else pointed out, it does not mean that he lacks empathy or an understanding of what's the rational thing to do in a society that adopts a code for smooth functioning.

he might weight the utility of the enjoyment he derives from rape and spending time in prison and decide against it.

he will dismiss your idea because it's impractical and stupid. Not because he's not a moral nihilist.

[Anonymous No.7175262]

>>7175230
>why is it stupid man?

For starters, you intuitively know that it is wrong.

>can't seem to find a way to integrate that with my behavior and reaction to things.

Exactly, because it is not a tenable philosophy to base a life around. It's just an edgy mutation brought about by the modern notion that ideas need not have any relationship with reality.

[Anonymous No.7175325]

>>7175241

Thank you. this is a great fucking response.

>it's better to be a human being and feel emotions than to be logically perfect every second of the day.

is it better to squirm in hatred and anger rather than being stoic and dispassionate? I'm not too sure about that.

[Anonymous No.7175328]

Men of morals are fickle creatures

They are often seen to offer kindness to one man, but scorn to another based on some arbitrary preference criteria, like what colour his skin is, or who he voted for.

Personal ethos is far more useful, and more important to the development of a strong character and sense of identity.

What's more, living by an ethos makes you less likely to fall prey to the hypocricy of those who selectively apply their morals.

[Anonymous No.7175347]

>there's no such thing as right or wrong
Ergo it's not wrong to have subjective opinions that are illogical or just plain retarded, and then enforce these opinions on others.

Nothing to integrate.

[Anonymous No.7175352]

>>7175262

no. i think it makes sense intuitively if i think about the ideology in isolation. I just need to get rid of the conditioning that i have been subjected to that makes me expect fairness and others upholding moral values.

>because it is not a tenable philosophy to base a life around.

it might not be tenable because of the constraints subjected by the society we're dependent on. doesn't necessarily mean that it's less valid. moral nihilism would fit extremely well in a different kind of society.

[Anonymous No.7175369]

>>7175352
>I just need to get rid of the conditioning that i have been subjected to that makes me expect fairness and others upholding moral values.
No you don't you fucking moron. That's the beauty of nihilism. You can expect that as much as you like and bitch and moan when people don't give it to you because there is no grounds for anyone to call your behaviour bad or wrong.

The lack of objective good and bad doesn't mean we have to let people murder. It might not be bad to murder, but it is equally not bad to lock murderers away or give them the death penalty.

You can literally do anything you want. That includes expecting people to behave a certain way with absolutely zero justification as to why they should other than 'muh feelings'.

Welcome to the ethical master race.

[Anonymous No.7175396]

>>7175369
Addendum:
>but i feel bad about expecting people to do things without a justification as to why they should
So? Feel bad about it, and still keep doing it. Literally nothing wrong with that.

[Anonymous No.7175397]

>>7175352
>if i think about the ideology in isolation

>>7175262
>an edgy mutation brought about by the modern notion that ideas need not have any relationship with reality.

>it might not be tenable
>doesn't necessarily mean that it's less valid

Dude.

[Anonymous No.7175406]

>>7175369

Ok. Despite that caustic response, I think you made a good point. I had not thought about the fact that like others being cunts, I get the convenient excuse for acting however I wish as well. And therefore I can bitch, moan and feel indignant on injustices.

However my feeling of indignance is not rational here. What am I being indignant about? someone acting in a manner perfectly compatible with my own ideology?


I see X rape someone. X's actions are compatible with moral relativism. I also ascribe to moral relativism. Yet I feel indignant at his actions which are compatible with my own ideology. I'm being illogical here. There's a contradiction.

inb4: you're allowed to be illogical you fucking moron.

I am allowed to be illogical but i think that if i abandon logic then there is nothing left. Just an abyss of craziness and irrationality which is not conducive to optimizing my happiness: which is my goal

[Anonymous No.7175407]

>>7175396
Justification beyond "This set of rules seems to be holding our society together in a fairly mutually beneficial manner" isn't really necessary, tbh.

Feeling bad about not having more justification than that is basically just navel gazing.

[Anonymous No.7175426]

>>7175397

okay. sorry. I worded that poorly.

I meant that just because it is not tenable with the societal structures we currently live in does not mean that this ideology is less valid.

In short: applicability of an ideology (moral relativism here) is not a criteria that I think should be used to judge it's validity.

[Anonymous No.7175439]

>>7175406
Even if you don't believe morality has any intrinsic value for it's own sake, presumably you wish to live in a society wherein you and the people who you value are free to go about their business without being raped, which is both distressing and inconvenient - imagine getting raped by a pack of wild Arabs every time you went to the shops for some bread and milk, you'd never get anything done.

It's about upholding a communal standard that everybody is expected to adhere to as a form of truce, this is conducive to everybody's wellbeing, and the only reason to follow it is to avoid the wrath of your peers, who may lynch you for being a dick without first stopping to debate philosophy with you.

Best to think about this sort of thing on a purely practical level really.

[Anonymous No.7175447]

>>7175426
Listen friend, you can play with words until the cows come home but if an idea doesn't 'work' that is probably because it is a bad idea.

[Anonymous No.7175458]

>>7175406
>Yet I feel indignant at his actions which are compatible with my own ideology. I'm being illogical here.
No you aren't. It's perfectly logical.
>X's actions are bad for society
>I live in society
>I want society to survive because that's good for me
>I am biologically wired to like things that are good for me and hate things that are bad for me (and by extension hate things that are bad for things that are good for me)
>X's actions are bad for me, therefore I hate them
Your feelings are completely logical.

So long as you don't say "rape is WRONG" then you've done nothing illogical.

>if i abandon logic then there is nothing left
Implies there was ever something there in the first place.

[Anonymous No.7175462]

>>7175369
Lmao this post can't be serious

[Anonymous No.7175466]

>>7175447
>pic

Well fella, without such dangerously irresponsible trains of thought, I shouldn't imagine we'd have invented the aeroplane.

Sometimes you have to ignore the strictures of what's been thought impossible, and take another crack.

You know how many prototype aircraft crashed before the wright brothers made their flight?

More than there've been attempts at Socialist states I'll wager.

Even then, who needs an excuse to bayonet bourgies?

[Anonymous No.7175468]

>>7175458
>So long as you don't say "rape is WRONG" then you've done nothing illogical.


Holy fucking kek.

[Anonymous No.7175471]

>>7175150
did you even read the OP?

[Anonymous No.7175473]

>>7175458
>Implying the only thing that exists is logic

u trollin?

[Anonymous No.7175477]

>>7175217
unwarrented 1950's dad rhetoric is tiresome as fuck tbh

[Anonymous No.7175478]

>>7175466
Shut up commie.

[Anonymous No.7175486]

>>7175462
>>7175468
>>7175473
Top quality.

[Anonymous No.7175488]

Moral nihilists are in highschool and/or don't stidy ethics seriously

[Anonymous No.7175489]

>>7175477
snarky millennial aloof dismissal is played out tbh fam

[Anonymous No.7175496]

>>7175238
Actions can be inherently moral/immoral

You. Fucking. Pleb.

[Anonymous No.7175497]

>>7174688
tfw the first comment sums it all up and everyone commenting afterwards is a slow faggot

>>7175054

unless they're giving reading suggestiosn

[Anonymous No.7175505]

>>7175477
The fact that you think living through your actions and not your words is "1950s dad rhetoric" is top fucking lel and only confirms that millenials are completely out of touch with anything that doesn't retweet their epic burns and pedestrian insights

[Anonymous No.7175508]

>>7175496
Make like someone with a real job and prove it.

[Anonymous No.7175511]

>>7175489
It's justified when someone's argument comes down to calling his own position 'self-evident' for no reason at all.

[Anonymous No.7175515]

>>7175505
Everyone lives 'through their actions', it's the only way to live. This doesn't mean people who stress action without contemplation are somehow in the right for not thinking and not being able to articulate their beliefs sensibly.

[Anonymous No.7175517]

>>7175511
Why don't we have dialogue about it in the common-room and braid each others hair until we all get our periods together?

[Anonymous No.7175547]

>>7175505
>muh stereotypical 'millenial' boogeyman is behind everything I don't like

:^)

[Anonymous No.7175551]

>>7175517
>real men don't think

Truly epic, bro.

[Anonymous No.7175553]

>>7174681
a better question is: why do you care?

there's better things to worry about

[Anonymous No.7175558]

>>7175458

Okay. I see your point now. Thanks for clearing it out. I can feel outrage at someone else's actions despite those actions being compatible with moral nihilism because those actions aren't compatible with my own goal of optimizing my happiness.

Also I have the excuse that the first reply cites:
"realize you're a human bean and hence a social animal who has an evolutionary past and has been raised in a culture with moral norms"


Fair enough.

>Implies there was ever something there in the first place.

Also, isn't adhering to logic the best strategy to optimizing happiness. any other strategy has to be sub-optimal right? (I think that most of us choose to be rational logical beings because irrationality causes poor decisions that hinder optimization of happiness)

[Anonymous No.7175559]

>>7175547
Epic burn brah, retweeted.

Follow me @privilegechecker95

>:^)

[Anonymous No.7175573]

>>7175217
>my opinion is right, this is evident to any Man of Action
>if you disagree you are not a Man of Action and not a Real Man therefore

You literally argue like a bitch.

[Anonymous No.7175575]

>>7175515
Consciousness of oneself as a human being, and the dignity inherent in that, naturally precludes recognition of others as human beings sharing in these same faculties for love and joy, pain and suffering. Morality arises very naturally from this realization, from simply being.

But don't take my word for it nigga.

>>7175511
Don't take my word for it nigga

>To enjoy good health, to bring true happiness to one's family, to bring peace to all, one must first discipline and control one's own mind. If a man can control his mind he can find the way to Enlightenment, and all wisdom and virtue will naturally come to him. - Buddha

You want me to post a logical proof for a state of being that arises naturally from a mind at peace. C'mon.

[Anonymous No.7175582]

Moral fictionalism

[Anonymous No.7175585]

>moral nihilism

Stop being 12, and everything will sort if self out friendo.

[Anonymous No.7175586]

>>7175558
>isn't adhering to logic the best strategy to optimizing happiness
Anything and everything can be convincingly justified by logic. It might take 700 pages and only make sense in a parallel dimension but there's somebody out there who will read it and go "yes this is perfectly rational."

And this completely ignores that fact that regardless of logical ethical justifications for this action or that action the most logical thing for you to do at any one time is ignore ethics and do whatever makes you happy. Even if that is following ethical systems, you're still only following them because you want to, not because you "have" to.

[Anonymous No.7175589]

>>7175575
>inherent dignity
>arises naturally
>true happiness
>it's all natural and self evident I don't need any logical proof!!!

3spooky5me

[Anonymous No.7175590]

>>7175065
moral realism via deism. niezschean subjectivism. etc

[Anonymous No.7175593]

>>7175447

You seem to confuse society and reality.
Society!=reality

Just because a principle X works for society does not mean that it works for the entire universe/reality.

This also means that just because a general principle Y that speaks about reality doesn't fit well with our current societal structures then Y is less valid. It simple means that our societal structures need to change to adapt to Y which is a more valid principle of reality.

[Anonymous No.7175594]

>>7175573
Haha instead of having something to say about the actual argument, ie "all accomplished men of action are also men of moral principle," you got your jimmies rustled because the argument has to do with masculinity. Fuck off to your safe space faggot

[Anonymous No.7175595]

>>7175589
Haha once again the barista brigade is befuddled as to why someone might value human life. By the way nice meme faggot

[Anonymous No.7175602]

>>7175595
>befuddled as to why someone might value human life
No, I understand why you value it.

I don't understand why you think that because you value it this somehow creates a situation where it is objectively valuable.

[Anonymous No.7175605]

>>7175593
Human beings are social creatures and will always exist in a "society" of some kind.

Therefore when discussing the utility of a specific human philosophy (moral nihilism in this case) society DOES in fact equal reality.

Or you could go live in a cave and no one will bother you no matter how stupid your philosophy is.

[Anonymous No.7175619]

>>7175508
Humans are naturally sympathetic to other humans even when their own self-interest is not at stake (such as when we get involved with the emotions of a character in a novel, even though the characters well-being has no bearing on your own life). Sympathy is the measuring stick for judging moral actions.

[Anonymous No.7175621]

>>7175406
Every action one could take is compatible with nihilism, all behaviours are equally baseless within its scope. Having preferences over certain behaviours is not illogical and is nevertheless unavoidable. Simply accept the inherent subjectivity of your incliations.

[Anonymous No.7175625]

>>7175602
Because in a non-judgmental, supra-rational (or maybe even pre-rational) state of mind "purged of defilements", as the Buddha would say, the value of living beings practically screams at you. This is not a state of good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, in its highest modes it is a pure, nondual perception of reality, but you've never heard of any yogis or mystics going on killing sprees now have you?

[Anonymous No.7175628]

>>7175325
better in the sense that it's psychologically healthy, it's more sociable, and it's more authentic. but i guess it's your decision, if you prefer to be stoic. it's quixotic to feel outraged at things but if you own your emotions in their absurdity. if you're a nihilist you should realise there's no option that's objectively preferable to the other. it's natural for me to hide my emotions but i realise now that it's unhealthy and contributes to my loneliness.

[Anonymous No.7175634]

>>7175619
>Sympathy is the measuring stick for judging moral actions.
Really? Make like someone with a real job and prove it.

And don't give me any shit about measures being subjective either. Whether we measure a pole in metres or feet it is objectively so many units long, no matter which units we use.

[Anonymous No.7175644]

>>7175625
>the value of living beings practically screams at you
So?

It's not enough to say that your perceptions are reality. You have to prove it. If it isn't proven then it isn't so.

[Anonymous No.7175648]

>>7175605
>Therefore when discussing the utility of a specific human philosophy (moral nihilism in this case) society DOES in fact equal reality.

wat. Do you genuinely believe that? that the merits of a philosophy are best determined by how applicable it is to a society?

what the fuck. who decided that? and NO. society does not equal reality. that statement is factually incorrect.

[Anonymous No.7175655]

>>7175575
>as a human being, and the dignity inherent in that
I'm not even memeing when I say you need to read Stirner.

[Anonymous No.7175658]

>>7175634
Er but I just provided an example Another example would be watching a play and caring if an actor succeded in preventing the murder of another actor. Even though the actions are not real and have no bearing on your life, you still care. I consider myself more a humean relativist (a sensible subjectivism I guess) in which morality is relative, but only to humankind. Our sense of sympathy has evolved along with reason to make moral judgments possible. So, in a way, our sense of morality is indeed inherent, but it is not universally objective but rather hinges upon the evolution of mankind. I allow that inherent morality could be different in 2000 years or so.

In sum, Make like someone with a real job and
Read Hume.

[Anonymous No.7175665]

>>7175594
>the actual argument, ie "all accomplished men of action are also men of moral principle,"
That is not an argument, especially when your notion of accomplishment is a moral judgement directly tied in to your definition of men of moral principle.

[Anonymous No.7175672]

>>7175644
It is your perception that morals are not objective. it is my perception they are.

If it being my perception that morals are objective puts the onus on me for proof, well, what about you?

get out of this one you meme loving fuck.

and don't give me some shit about hurrr i can see that morals don't exist, because nah, it's just your perception that's skewed that way. So prove it.

[Anonymous No.7175673]

>>7175648
>merits of a philosophy are best determined by how applicable it is to a society

Obviously. Philosophy is meant to be taken seriously and therefore the effects of a philosophy ought also to be taken seriously. If a philosophy produces a broken society then that is a good indication that it is a broken philosophy. Know a tree by its fruits.

[Anonymous No.7175675]

>>7175658
So you're saying that we are biologically pre-programmed to find some basic things good and some basic things bad, and from these basic things we will naturally use our reason to derive fairly similar systems if we are in fairly similar environments because our needs and moral wants are based in biology (i.e. inherent)?

If not please correct me.

Makes sense, and I'd agree, but it doesn't prove that this is the "right" way for things to be. It's not objectively correct, and so it's worthless. It's just a description.

[Anonymous No.7175680]

>>7175628

About psychological health:
when I go through that reaction 2 steps happen

1. I feel anger and hatred.
2. I express anger and hatred.

I agree that IF I feel anger and hatred (1) then it is psychologically healthy to express them (2)

However I do not think that feeling hatred and anger(1) in the first place is healthy at all. I want myself to NOT have that feeling of anger itself. that feeling is unhealthy and unproductive.that is good enough reason for one to look ways to stop feeling angry.

[Anonymous No.7175683]

>>7175665
It is an argument, because it's not supposed to reveal the truth about anything, it just casts light on the kind of yahoos who argue moral nihilism: seriously, who are you going to let tell you about what is or isn't real, people numbed by modern society into believing there is no objective value in anything at all, or the type of hardy, authentically alive men and women who built that society for them?

[Anonymous No.7175693]

The male desire for justice exists at the genetic level.

[Anonymous No.7175694]

>>7175683
>seriously, who are you going to let tell you about what is or isn't real, people numbed by modern society into believing there is no objective value in anything at all, or the type of hardy, authentically alive men and women who built that society for them?
The ones with the best arguments and an ability to present them without resorting to 'I chop down trees so I'm right'.

[Anonymous No.7175696]

>>7175672
>why is the onus on me for proof,
If you don't provide proof, I won't believe you.

It's up to you to decide what you want to do, but it's literally that simple on my end.

>So prove it.
Prove what exactly? That morals aren't objective?
I can't. It's entirely possible there is a 100% unarguably compelling moral system out there that is as objective as the planet we're standing on.

But I've never seen it.

I don't believe morality is objective because I have never seen proof that it is.

What I can tell you is that so far your moral system is not breaking that mold.

[Anonymous No.7175703]

>>7175683
all of the most accomplished people are de facto moral nihilists.

[Anonymous No.7175705]

>>7175703
edg.y

[Anonymous No.7175718]

>>7175705
it's merely an observation, m8. people with morality aren't flexible enough to improvise their way towards any sort of accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.7175724]

>>7175694
Hahaha oh my god you really, honest to god think all I'm saying is "me lumberjack, me am strong, rarrrr hold the door for old ladies rarr CHECKMATE MORAL SUBJECTIVISTS".

I'm actually referring to the kind of homespun morality and folksy wisdom that salt of the earth types exude, and it does not even have to be salt of the earth types, it can be anyone whose had a hard life and done some soul-searching. These people brim with a real, authentic view of the world that absolutely demolishes the pedestals of twinky nerds and cat ladies trying to tell me nothing means anything but by the way let me tell you about gender politics in Harry Potter.

>>7175696
And it could be possible we live in a godless void, but how real morality feels down here in the human level tells me that's not the case.

[Anonymous No.7175730]

>>7175718
>some dead inside faggot CEO who only feels alive when he's snorting lines of snow off a ladyboy's ass
>"accomplished"
>"authentically alive, real"

gimme a break faggot, you know exactly what i meant

[Anonymous No.7175748]

>>7175724
Firstly:
>how real morality feels down here in the human level tells me that's not the case.
This isn't proof.

Secondly:
>it could be possible we live in a godless void, but
Why is there a but? Why does nihilism scare people into sneaking on that but? It could be possible we live in a godless void full stop. You don't need to tack on "but society needs right and wrong to function" because nihilism doesn't preclude that. Society can impose a "right" and a "wrong" as much as it wants under nihilism. This entire thread is full of people explaining why.

[Anonymous No.7175769]

>>7175730
what's your idea of accomplishment then?

[Anonymous No.7175770]

>>7175748
We both conceded our respective perceptions of reality will never amount to proof of either our positions, why are we arguing? I feel this shit in my bones, that's all the proof I need. If I'm wrong, oh well, but at least I'm not some edgy faggot

[Anonymous No.7175780]

>>7175724
>I'm actually referring to the kind of homespun morality and folksy wisdom that salt of the earth types exude, and it does not even have to be salt of the earth types, it can be anyone whose had a hard life and done some soul-searching. These people brim with a real, authentic view of the world that absolutely demolishes the pedestals of twinky nerds and cat ladies trying to tell me nothing means anything but by the way let me tell you about gender politics in Harry Potter.
You're not offering any arguments except saying certain people you agree with are 'real' and 'authentic'.

>all I'm saying is "me lumberjack, me am strong, rarrrr hold the door for old ladies rarr CHECKMATE MORAL SUBJECTIVISTS".
That is exactly what you are doing.

[Anonymous No.7175782]

>>7175769
>his only idea of accomplishment and living a real, full life is some gay don draper-type shit
>le morally nihilistic business man

kek

[Anonymous No.7175784]

>>7175673

philosophy here speaks about what IS not what OUGHT to be.

moral nihilism speaks about a general principle that I can claim IS true because I have not observed any evidence that can justify the claim that there are any moral values.

philosophy should be judged based on how accurately it depicts reality. it has no obligations to what consequences it could have for society. just because the principle of reality stated by a philosophy does not have nice consequences for the society does not mean that the philosophy is less accurate about reality itself.

eg:
Atheism: There is no god:=Statement about what IS reality

If hypothetically a society that believed in religion turned out to be amazing, it would not mean that god exists in reality.

just because believing in god's existence bodes well for society does not mean god actually exists in reality. therefore guaging the merits of a philosophy based on how good a society it produces is fucking stupid. it doesn't make it true.

[Anonymous No.7175796]

>>7175782
So you don't have an answer to my question?

[Anonymous No.7175800]

>>7175780
heysuuuuuuus christoooooooo nigga. once again, it is not an argument FOR moral realism, but it is an argument AGAINST moral nihilism, because I'm pretty goddamn fucking sure twinks, shrews in academia, and faggy french "intellectuals" who can only talk about dicks and semiotics haven't got it all figured out

[Anonymous No.7175808]

>>7175800
Again, saying that 'real' and 'authentic' 'salt of the earth' people disagree is not an argument against anything.

[Anonymous No.7175814]

>>7175796
Let's be honest here, whatever I write is gonna get lambasted for being "spooky" and blah blah blah so nah go troll somewhere else

[Anonymous No.7175816]

>>7175770
Well we don't have to argue if you don't want to, but my concluding remark is that it's not smart to pin your hopes on a potential objective morality without proof, and that you shouldn't consider just your perception as adequate proof.

Nihilism isn't just my perception, it's the resultant position of me only believing in things that can be proven. Your belief system is the result of you believing in your perceptions because you consider it adequate proof. That's not automatically a dumb bad idiot thing to do, so don't think I'm implying that, but I would say that if you can't prove your position to others maybe you should ask how it was that you proved it to yourself. You can't measure the accuracy of your perception for something like this, so how can you rely on it?

Anyway, it's up to you.

[Anonymous No.7175829]

>>7175808
It is nigga because we're making statements about reality, and the people who are living in reality (not insulated from contact, physical exertion, and the acquirement of basic needs) have generally healthier and sounder worldviews than academics sitting around sipping on machiattos and getting high off their farts

[Anonymous No.7175830]

>>7175814
So you don't have an answer and are aware that anything you may come up with will be easily dismissed as bullshit.

Alright.

[Anonymous No.7175837]

>>7175829
All people live in reality and you presented no sound argument for people living in your preferred part of reality having moral authority over those living in the part of reality you dislike.

[Anonymous No.7175841]

>>7175816
I prove it to myself by meditating and reading the words of wise men. I can prove it to you if you gave meditation an honest go. You will find a sense of morality, or at least a deep compassion, develops quite naturally apart, and actually in spite of, sterile intellectualizing. My only proof is (in the best of moments, anyways): I am here. And I love it, whatever it may be, along with those who are here with me. That is my morality.

[Anonymous No.7175887]

>>7175841
If your meditation doesn't take you beyond moralism you are doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.7175913]

>>7175837
We are creatures of the savannah and jungle. We are animals birthed from nature, do you agree?

An authentic life needs some contact with nature, with the more brute realities of being alive, instead of being cordoned off everything that is unpleasant or inexpedient. This can include the physical molding of the body, the exposure to the elements, the consumption of natural foods (lel if you need me to define 'natural foods': opinion discarded), social contact conducive to a healthy frame of mind and self-concept. It is possible to achieve these things anywhere. I am not advocating for primitivism. What I am advocating for is interfacing with reality on an intimate level, as we were meant to, or rather, the way evolution designed us to be.

Don't go sharting about teleology, our programming just dictates this is just what we respond to positively, mind, body, and soul. You want proof? My fucking childhood in the Balkans nigger. The attitudes of my grandparents, whose passion for life withered to a stump after moving here. I am not decrying modernity, but I am decrying its numbing effects, and "nothing means anything lol!" is a symptom of it. Perhaps it's true, but when it comes from Adam the-faggot-with-pipecleaners-for-arms, whose never worked a day of physical labor in his life, trying to tell me gender doesn't exist, morality doesn't exist, beauty doesn't exist, it's just too kek too bare.

[Anonymous No.7175917]

>>7175887
If you construe "loving-kindness" with anime-tier moralism you're doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.7175925]

>>7175675
You can't prove morality objectively, though some arguments seem more compelling than others. Yeah, your summary is more or less correct. Morality is an evolutionary trait that developed along with language and reason. For instance, language (at the most primitive level) is inherent, as is the ability to pick it up quickly. It developed along with reason and, Hume argues, so did morality.

[Anonymous No.7175935]

>>7175913
All ways humans live are 'nature'. There is no such thing as 'unnatural living'. You might as well tell a crow he shouldn't build a nest. You're really fond of unwarranted distinctions.

There is no way to 'interface' with 'reality' on a less 'intimate level', everyone per definition lives in reality, an office worker no less than your wood gathering grandmother.

You still provided no argument at all except for 'my authentic people are more in touch with what is actually real and natural faggot therefore I am right'.

[Anonymous No.7175947]

>>7175917
If you think that your feelsies universally and magically develop from sitting on your ass you are doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.7175956]

>>7175935
I went from being the typical 4chan stereotype to working out, taking a hike once in awhile, taking it slow and living more mindfully instead of overthinking everything, and I can tell you I feel infinitely more alive and 'real' doing the latter than the former.

It's obvious you just have no concept of what I'm talking about. That's fine. Have a good day.

[Anonymous No.7175968]

>>7175947
Laffo is this bizzaro world? did I wake up in the faggot dimension? What planet are you on that you think meditation is just "sitting on your ass", like I'm on here trying to sell snake oil, and it hasn't been scientifically proven up and down to produce positive changes in brain chemistry? Fuck off you clown.

[Anonymous No.7175987]

>>7175956
You honestly have no idea what an argument constitutes, do you?

I don't care if you take walks, that isn't an argument. Your feelings and the rest of your blog aren't either.

[Anonymous No.7175992]

>>7175968
Could you refer me to the study that shows that meditation leads to a particular morality?

[Anonymous No.7176006]

>>7175987
Like I'm gonna sit here and argue with someone who thinks there's no difference between an office worker and a wood gathering grandmother. And you think me trying to explain to you that there in fact is, and that you obviously have no concept of this in your own life, you think I'm continuing the argument.

You're a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.7176012]

>>7174681
It's part of your biology.

[Anonymous No.7176029]

>>7175992
the entirety of the buddhist canon you fucking twit holy lol

but here's another one for you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/opinion/sunday/the-morality-of-meditation.html?_r=0

>Although we don’t yet know why meditation has this effect, one of two explanations seems likely. The first rests on meditation’s documented ability to enhance attention, which might in turn increase the odds of noticing someone in pain (as opposed to being lost in one’s own thoughts). My favored explanation, though, derives from a different aspect of meditation: its ability to foster a view that all beings are interconnected. The psychologist Piercarlo Valdesolo and I have found that any marker of affiliation between two people, even something as subtle as tapping their hands together in synchrony, causes them to feel more compassion for each other when distressed. The increased compassion of meditators, then, might stem directly from meditation’s ability to dissolve the artificial social distinctions — ethnicity, religion, ideology and the like — that divide us.

[Anonymous No.7176078]

>>7176029
The Buddhist canon isn't a 'study' in the contemporary sense and the article you quoted is sloppy pseudoscience at best, especially given the notion that most people are culturally indoctrinated with associating meditation with 'loftiness', which is completely overlooked in this experience.

I admire a lot of aspects of Buddhist philosophy and practice but I never got the marriage between being freed from nonsensical beliefs while persisting in unwarranted morality.

[Anonymous No.7176088]

>>7176006
>Like I'm gonna sit here and argue with someone who thinks there's no difference between an office worker and a wood gathering grandmother.
One works in an office, the other gathers wood. Both are reality.

One isn't demonstrably any more 'real' than the other. I don't see why you fail to grasp this.

[Anonymous No.7176089]

>>7176078
>those people were just culturally indoctrinated to exhibit the behaviors that would demolish my argument!!

lol ok breh

[Anonymous No.7176100]

>>7176078
Buddhists draw a line between conventional truth which encapsulates dualities such as right/wrong, good/evil, and ultimate truth, which is experienced only in Nirvana. This is not solely a Buddhist concept. In higher mystic states one also achieves a nondual perception of reality, which is likened to the experience of the divine and which is, although not quite moralistic, recognizes the fundamental unity of reality and acts accordingly.

[Anonymous No.7176104]

>>7175497
tfw samefagging and not even changing your capitalization to hide it

[Anonymous No.7176117]

>>7175987
You might actually be autistic if you can't understand what he's saying.

[Anonymous No.7176122]

>>7176089
People associate meditation with holier than thou behaviour. If you let them engage in meditation and then give them the chance to be holier than thou they are more likely to do so than when they didn't previously get a holier than thou reminder.

This makes it harder to ascertain that meditation in itself, without cultural baggage, leads to a certain sort of moral behaviour.

Especially since meditation is easily associated with different types of behaviour if one wants to.

>If ordered to march: tramp, tramp, or shoot: bang, bang. This is the manifestation of the highest Wisdom. The unity of Zen and war of which I speak extends to the farthest reaches of the holy war.

etc.

[Anonymous No.7176128]

>>7176100
How does one act accordingly to the fundamental unity of reality and how does one act unaccordingly?

Isn't this realisation precisely that there is no way to act either accordingly or unaccordingly?

[Anonymous No.7176132]

>>7174681
being a moral nihilist does not mean you have to ignore what humans and society percieves as injustice.

[Anonymous No.7176138]

>>7176117
I understand what he is saying perfectly well, I just think it's unwarranted bullshit and a tiresome old appeal to nanna's wisdom.

[Anonymous No.7176161]

>>7176138
Go for a walk sometime. It's nice. You can be more aware of your environment, and it feels like time isn't slipping away from you as fast as it does when you are arguing with someone on 4chan. This you could call "living in reality" but of course everyone lives in reality.

[Anonymous No.7176166]

>>7176161
I go for walks a lot, but that doesn't mean that I consider my going for walks to back up any claims I make.

Even if I would plow the fields and volunteer at an orphanage it still wouldn't magically give credence to whatever comes out of my mouth.

I honestly don't see why this is so hard to grasp.

[Anonymous No.7176170]

>>7176122
You got it breh, you've cracked the case. They were all just faking. Real life is an anime, no altruistic action exists because a buzzfeed article told me to be more empathetic towards my fellow man.

lmao just stop

>>7176128
By preserving and protecting individuals and environment to the best of their ability? Have you ever experienced ego death? Your notions about it are juvenile. There is no morality in it, neither is there an amorality. At the highest, most transcendent levels of consciousness there is only love/light/the Truth. This is what the early philosophers like Plato meant when they said beauty or virtue was a hallmark of the Gods.

[Anonymous No.7176179]

>>7176166
Jesus fucking Christ dude, for what, like the fifth fucking time?

Why would I listen to what twinks and cat ladies have to say about morality (since this everything is relative shit is a fruit of modernity) when we are so spiritually bankrupt as a nation right now? Who am I going to listen to, again, the people who've got their finger on the pulse of life or office drones? Jesus H. Fucking Christ do I need to post a recording of Morgan Freeman reading this post a word a minute for you to fucking get it?

[Anonymous No.7176210]

>>7176179
>repeats again how nanna's wisdom is obviously superior for no reason and doesn't provide any argument at all except that he likes it more than the other thing.

No wonder you hate academics, you simply can't argue sensibly without appealing again and again to some sort of unwarranted folk wisdom.

[Anonymous No.7176214]

>>7176170
Why do you think people are not influenced by their cultural conceptions of the behaviour they engage in?

[Anonymous No.7176222]

to the moral nihilists out there

dandelion flowers are (almost always) yellow
murder solely for pleasure is wrong
the average number of legs humans have is less than two
one ought not rape their own grandmother
/lit/ is for psuedo intellectual losers

explain to me why some of these sentences are truth-apt, while others aren't. what's so special about these moral statements, that truth does not apply to them in the same way it applies to declarative statements.

what's so special about moral propositions? why aren't they truth-apt? on the srface they have the same structure as truth apt statements, so what's going on?

Also, what do you mean by moral nihilism? Do you mean moral statements are truth apt, but every single one is false? or do you mean they aren't truth apt at all?

Isn't "there are no moral truths", a moral truth?

[Anonymous No.7176231]

>>7176222
>the average number of legs humans have is less than two
>dandelion flowers are (almost always) yellow
>/lit/ is for psuedo intellectual losers
how are these moral statements?

[Anonymous No.7176235]

>>7176222
why do i get the feeling you're confusing the word 'moral' with another one?

[Anonymous No.7176237]

>>7176222
Burden of proof is on the cunt claiming they are, in fact, truth-apt.

[Anonymous No.7176241]

>>7176210
I am not him, but nanny has likely had a wider range of experiences and emotions than the flabby dead-man-walking office drone loser who's life consists of waiting for the weekend so he can watch netflix, eat a microwave dinner and finally spend two hours edging himself to humiliating pornography.

[Anonymous No.7176262]

>>7176210
Your discounting of the older generation's wisdom says everything about you're coming from.

Fuck off already.

>>7176214
Onus is on you to prove that is what's going every time a regular meditator does something altruistic. I'll be waiting, champ.

>>7176237
>morality has been self-evident to pretty much all of the great thinkers and authors pre-Nietzche
>it's on you to prove it doesn't exist faglord!!!

get a load of this guy

[Anonymous No.7176264]

>>7176241
That doesn't make her less of an idiot necessarily. You can drag a downie across half of the earth, doesn't make him more sensible.

I don't care about who makes an argument, it's about the argument. I don't increasingly value a shitty argument because it happened to be made by an old person or a salt ay the fookin earth peasant or something. Appealing to those people as if I would emotionally shut down and say 'of course, it's grandma saying it, I was wrong all along!' is a shitty way of making a point.

[Anonymous No.7176277]

>>7176262
>if you don't like me nan you're wrong she's me nan so she's dead right she is

Again and again with this shit. Learn to argue.

[Anonymous No.7176295]

>>7176264
For the sixth time, dude.

I am not arguing FOR moral realism with my appeal to lumberjacks argument here, but what I am arguing is these type of people are most likely onto something compared to pasty academics. Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

It's not a LOGICAL PROOF of OBJECTIVE MORALITY

It's SUPPORT for the conclusions of OBJECTIVE REALITY because they have been expressed by nearly all individuals with healthy minds and bodies. It's not PROOF, it's SUPPORT.

Not PROOF.


SUPPORT.

Their life experience SUPPORTS there being some moral or at least "right" way to do things, because it is EXPRESSED in their basic life competency and the soundness of their minds and bodies. As opposed to SEXUALLY NEUROTIC, or otherwise SHELTERED individuals who live a faint shadow of existence and who only feel alive when they're about to cum.

These are generalizations, but I've yet to meet an outdoorsman whose also a moral nihilist.

Say it again nigga. Out loud. Print this fucking post out.

Not PROOF, SUPPORT.

Fucking crikey.

[Anonymous No.7176313]

>>7176295
There is no 'support' either. You realise your dismissal of people who don't live like you prefer is itself a moral judgement, right?

You're basically saying 'I love lumberjacks and their opinions and people I dislike are wrong because they are decisively unlike lumberjacks'.

You need to get out of the woods and into school.

[Anonymous No.7176315]

>>7175262
>quoting a literal nazi on morality

[Anonymous No.7176320]

>>7176313
You're literally autistic dude. You need to get out of school and into the woods.

[Anonymous No.7176339]

>>7176320
It's not autistic to demand a coherent argument. You've offered nothing more than a self-referential appeal to peasant wisdom.

You can't think, and that is exactly why you are so sure of yourself.

[Anonymous No.7176351]

>>7176339
Autismal as fuck

[Anonymous No.7176374]

>>7174855
ding ding ding

I consider myself the source of objective moral facts.

I decide, for myself, and by myself, what actions are wrong and what are right.

why would I trust anyone other than myself to make moral judgments?

especially considering, that if I were to trust someone else (such as the bible, qaran, sam harris, etc), I still have to use my own judgment that their judgments are correct.

so either way I have to decide for myself, so why not just cut the middleman

[Anonymous No.7176388]

>>7176351
>all I can do is meme

As suspected, enjoy your folksy wisdom my Balkan friend.

[Anonymous No.7176405]

>>7175065
moral realism

[Anonymous No.7176581]

>>7175913
>dam the-faggot-with-pipecleaners-for-arms, whose never worked a day of physical labor in his life, trying to tell me gender doesn't exist, morality doesn't exist, beauty doesn't exist

I spent my summer chopping wood and attacking Blackbery bushes with a weed whacker and I'm here to tell you that gender doesn't exist, morality doesn't exist, and beauty doesn't exist. New sincerity and the never-ending quest for Authenticity make me sick. And you are a creten.

[Anonymous No.7176589]

>>7176339
>mfw blacks are literally Nietzche's satyrs that live outside of history

[Anonymous No.7176590]

>>7176237
>Burden of proof is on the cunt claiming they are, in fact, truth-apt.

then shouldn't you therefore have to prove that the above statement is truth apt?

[Anonymous No.7176591]

>>7176581
>And you are a creten.
Monsieur Chretien for you, cuckmeister general.

[Anonymous No.7176593]

>>7176581
And you're a faggot

[Anonymous No.7176596]

>>7176590
I'm just a friendly passer-by explaining the rules of the game. Normative statements are per definition not truth-apt, by the way.

[Anonymous No.7176608]

>moral nihilism
Start by realizing this is biggest spook in philosophy, and then read an introductory book on ethics.

[Anonymous No.7176613]

How do you overcome nihilism without money?

[Anonymous No.7176615]

How do I break out of seeing everything in an opressor/opressed duology?

[Anonymous No.7176617]

>moral nihilism
I refuse to believe anyone subscribes to this thought over the age of 16

[Anonymous No.7176639]

>>7176608
>Moral nihilism (also known as ethical nihilism) is the meta-ethical view that nothing is intrinsically moral or immoral

How is this spooky?

[Anonymous No.7176717]

>>7176315
Werner von Braun was a genius and a saint.

You are a bigot.

[Anonymous No.7176756]

>>7176241
What does your nanny's life consist of?

[Anonymous No.7176878]

>>7176295
If every nanny and woodsman agreed that 2+2=5 would you take this is evidence that 2+2 objectively equals 5? If none of them offered any proof to back that theory up other than them choosing to believe it, would you accept that?

Do you think it's possible that the kind of people who you are describing adopt that morality, not because they're tapping into some objective reality, but because given their situation it's conducive to have those morals so naturally they acquire them? i.e. that type of morality leads to the most happiness in so-called healthy minds, therefor it's adopted in pursuit of happiness, not objective insight.

Essentially you're selecting for a certain type of person and then pointing out overlap as some kind of crazy phenomenon that can only be explained as higher truth.

[Anonymous No.7177219]

>>7176210
>appeals to academics
>doesn't realize that nearly every serious ethical position in academia revolves around objective morality

Pseudo detected. Highschoolers shouldn't mention academia

[Anonymous No.7177226]

Realize you probably ARENT a moral nihilist.
Because moral nihilism is the silliest nihilism there is. Not that its not grounded in its beliefs, but it tends to ignore the moral theory that preceded it.

[Anonymous No.7177249]

>>7174681
altruism is evolution
Directed towards the self it is mastery
Directed towards others it is charitas
It's benevolence in action
Morality is an intuition of this higher human conduct. I think people shouldn't be so quick to disavow this innate nobility for nothing and basically adopt the sociopath's perspective

[Anonymous No.7177545]

who /INFP/ here?

[Anonymous No.7177630]

This thread is even more embarrassing than all the evangelist ones focused around blowing Aquinas' cock. Congrats lit, you've hit a new low.

[Anonymous No.7177665]

You are not a moral nihilist. Humans have morality literally hard-wired in their brains, you can't remove that just by reading Stirner/Ayn Rand/what have you and buying an old-fashioned hat.

[Anonymous No.7177686]

Why should a nihilist get any more intellectually nonplussed at instinctive indignation than he does at instinctive hunger?

Both are evolved behavioural responses to the environment. I would go as far as to say that the "crux" of nihilism is recognizing that the former is really no different than the latter. Just as you eat to appease hunger, you can act socially in a way that appeases your indignation. Neither has a fundamental moral dimension.

Just atoms and shit mang : ^ )

[Anonymous No.7177692]

>>7177665

[Anonymous No.7177694]

>>7175573
a virgin or a jilted lover or a feminist or a garden variety idiot strongly detected.

[Anonymous No.7177696]

>>7174681
the fact that you want to "integrate" is in itself a sign of your first assumption of being a nihilist invalid.

and oh yeah like an anon said ..Grow up :)

[Anonymous No.7177708]

You think that's bad? I agree with Stirner's moral nihilism yet I also have faith in and love for the Christian God.

At the moment I try to rationalize it as 'Jesus was an egoist too' but I feel like I need to get this sorted eventually.

[Anonymous No.7177728]

>>7177665
>Humans have morality literally hard-wired in their brains
What about sociopaths and autists?

[Anonymous No.7177909]

>>7174681
18+

[Anonymous No.7177966]

>>7175022
police files regarding child abuse and murder.
true crime

[Anonymous No.7177994]

>>7177728
They're not normal moral humans but what's your point ?

[Anonymous No.7178023]

>>7177994
My point is that you can live fine without morality. Even if you have something hard-wired in you nervous system, you can overcome it. I mean, you're not taking a shit in a middle of your backyard, when suddenly you want to take a dump. You go to bathroom.

[Anonymous No.7178029]

>>7178023
I agree, anon. You an overcome most urges and emotions. Perhaps by good education. But you can't overcome morality or amorality, can you ?

Didn't they try it with Alex in Clockwork Orange?

[Anonymous No.7178036]

>>7178029
>Didn't they try it with Alex in Clockwork Orange?
That's a fiction book

[Anonymous No.7178055]

>>7174681
You can be a moral nihilist, and still have strong ethical beliefs. Just because ''in itself'' something isn't inherently good or bad, doesn't mean that in actual human life one should treat it as such.

[Anonymous No.7178123]

>>7177665
Friendly reminder that moral nihilism is a meta-ethical stance.

[Anonymous No.7178134]

>>7177686
Most useful post itt.