/lit/ - Literature

>>10161893
That's an incredibly interesting take on nihilism.
I grew out of it when I was around 18, it was early on in college. The big thing that set it off for me was the realization that negative meaning in life is still nevertheless meaning.

>>10161939
Isn't nihilism about absence of meaning?

>>10161893
you don't choose nihilism, nihilism choose you
more or less.
we live in a nihilistic epoch so like it or not we have nihilistic views ingrained.
also nihilism is good because is the anticipation of something better to come.
"the torch needs darkness to illuminate"

>>10161958
Yeah, that's exactly my point. It was the conflation of meaninglessness with negative meaning.

>>10161978
Oh look, a 17 year old.

>>10161978
You actually choose it like any ideology or religion, the only reason it feels like you described is because it also breaks your will and energy which makes it seemingly hard to get away from.

>>10161990
i'm not defending nihilism, all i'm saying it's something natural that will occur sooner or later in life.

>>10161978
That statment is false.
The nihilism comes out an interpetation from the lack of divine evidence and lack of scientific evidence from both a metaphysical and mental state about the meaning of life

However, it is still an interpretation, one may choose to believe in spirits if they want to. Nihilism ultimately is a way of thinking, not a way of life

I had a drunk talk with a friend last weekend and sort of came to the conclusion,
that most normalfags don't actually ever go as far as to approach serious nihilism.
They sort of glance at it from a distance and solely when reminded of nothingness by Rick and Morty or Neil DeGass Tyson tier shit.
The reason most think reading philosophy about self improvement is a waste or understanding the necessity of religion in some sense is archaic, is because they are just too brain dead lazy, uninterested, not curious, insular or whatever you can call it.

Really depressing somehow, that some people say: "When I have this car in 5 years I will be happy and I'll know my work has been worth it."

How am I supposed to respect or take advice from someone who never went as far as to have such, I'd assume, natural thoughts and questions about themselves which they would had to find answers to to cope with being?

>>10162058
>How am I supposed to respect or take advice from someone who never went as far as to have such, I'd assume, natural thoughts and questions about themselves which they would had to find answers to to cope with being?

Interesting.

I'm not religious myself but to quote Peter Hitchens when asked if he ever had doubts about his fate he responded with "every day", and remembering my teenage years when I was what you would call today a fedora atheist I never had any doubts or questions about myself or my beliefs.

I grew out of nihilism after I realized that it didn't really matter that nothing really matters. AND from an outsiders perspective, nihilism is just an excuse to be horrible to other people because of that stupid Rick Sanchez neckbeard logic.

When I cleaned my room

my back hurts

>>10162123

Finally, a sensible post

>>10162135
I have very bad posture

When I realized that objective morality can be rationally grounded.

>>10161893
Codreanau knew and met Evola and Eliade. Evola also wrote "The Tragedy of the Romanian Iron Guard: Codreanu", interesting.
Was he really that bad compared to the opposition of commies that followed in his wake, mind you i don't know anything about him, but a skimming of the wiki page - not reliable I know.
I've found the aforementiond book, but are there more that go into detail about his life?

>>10161893
i'm reading The Brothers Karamazov for the first time (along with some secondary literature about Dosto/Brothers Karamazov from my local public library) and seeing how nihilism can be bad. i see nihilism everywhere in society since religion has become widely discredited (for some warranted reasons) but the community/good values associated with religious practice could be helpful. i dont think i need to be religious to follow good values. i like the golden rule because i'm too plebeian to develop my own ethos and values

I grew up when i was some years old true story and check out my digits too nihilism suxks and existentiakisn rules

>he thinks he grew out of nihilism
cute

>>10162178
For My Legionaries is his autobiography, heartbreaking and beautiful. If what he writes about his actions is 100% factual I would consider him the most honorable man who ever lived.

>>10161978
what are you even talking about

>>10162182
Definitely.Dosto has the best arguments against nihilism, and other popular, let's say worldviews, that we inherently know are detrimental, but perhaps can't explain why. I'm also reading C&P in my public library with secondary literature, btw.
In C&P part 4 chapter IV where Raskolnikov speaks with Sonja about her faith, and the utter futility of her efforts.
She had to begin prostituting herself to support her family -- she's only half-related to it, on her father's side -- and because of this the familiy kicked her out of their home, even though she was giving all her money to keep them alive -- they had 3 kids and the father was, of course, a drunk, and drank her money away. Weekly. Her father dies. There's no money for the funeral, but Raskolnikov's donation. The kids have only one set of clothes each, patched and too small, same for the step-mother. She, the step-mother, has tuberculosis, and won't live much longer. One of the children will quite likely have to prostitute herself too, Sophia. She's 9.
Rasklonikova lays this out for her, and asks her why? in face of all this pointless suffering, she keeps on. The mother will die, the father is dead, the kids will be poor their whole lives, likely die of starvation, illness, violent murder, suicide... in short it will be a terrible life and death, whoring herself out through all of it. Why? There's no point. Why doesn't she kill herself, he asks her? She must be mad -- ill-minded -- is Raskolnikov's conclusion.
He doesn't understand, yet, and neither do I.

>>10161893
What is there besides obviously bullshit religion (*tip) and nihilism. Either there's meaning or there isn't right? My emotions matter to me but that's about it.

>>10162104
>nihilism is an excuse
>implying there's a reason that needs excusing

>>10161939
>>10161986
> having a concert of "negative meaning"
You weren't even a nihilist

>>10162103
This should really stop at the third panel

>>10162172
>objective morality can be rationally grounded

>>10162058
99% of people are no better than animals. Whenever you come across another soul actually capable of critical thinking make yourself known, we're all lonely.

>>10162495
Evolution, ever hear of it?

>>10162512
>dude care about your genes lmao, naturalistic fallacy, more naturalistic shmallacy
Go away Sam harris

>>10162520
>implying the naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy given everything is within nature
retard alert

>>10162528
Ok, I see what's going on now. 5/10

>>10161893
When I grew out of Stirner and adopted Rand's Philosophy

>>10162172
My nig

>>10161990
>late bloomer thinks 17 is the age of nihilism
>he wasn't an edgy depressed emo faggot at 13

>>10162548
I was referring to Kant actually kek

>>10161893
When I was seventeen. It happens naturally. You can't simultaneously believe nothing has value and also think everything must be torn down. That said, I didn't grow out of Stirnerism.
>>10161990
Hey fuck you.

>>10162635
When I was thirteen I was a Machiavelli-worshipping socialist.

Get on my fucking level.

>>10161893
Is this from For my Legionaries?
I still need to read it but my bookstore doesn't have it.

>>10162219
It's an autobiography, of course he's going to show the things he believed in in a good light, no matter what you or I may think. Both him and those retarded communists that followed were equally bad. He just didn't have enough time to fuck things up. The only marginally good thing about his movement was that he didn't destroy an entire social class just because they weren't stupid peasants or workers. Fuck both of them.

>>10162660
>Kant
I disapprove

Anyone in here who thinks they grew out of it is just deluding themselves. The easiest way to see it is to read there reasoning, nobody disproves the notion, they just list bad side effects that arise with its dominance. I wouldn't attempt to disprove a religion by mentioning something bad that is related to it, I would attempt to disprove it by forming an actual argument

>>10163032
t. woke centrist

oh boy another 200 posts about people who have no idea about nihilism

tl;dr nihilism doesn't imply negative meaning, only means lack of meaning - giving yourself the freedom to pursue what you enjoy (doesn't imply hedonism either) without the fear of hubris or social/cultural expectation.

I never went through a nihilist phase. I went through an agnostic phase, but that didn't make me give up on everything.

Does anyone truly live by nihilism though? Aside from some of those who kill themselves? It seems that people turn to hedonism instead. Isn't hedonism different from nihilism?

>>10161893

One doesn't "grow out of" nihilism in the sense of: being wiser, having a more accurate understanding of the world, "being right with the world", etc. Instead, what happens is that adults wish to participate in the world and so are deluded by this process into projecting meaning onto things (having kids is the most surefire way to project meaning into the world where none exists). I personally refer to this as /the delusion of the productive adult/.

>>10163219
this, once nihilism strikes it never leaves, the burning questions just becomes less important in the menial and responsibility heavy mind of an adult. The people who truly embrace it instead of forgetting it are easy to spot

Make a good argument against nihilism that isn't purely 'but the pragmatic effects of nihilism is bad'

>>10161893
>For me it was when I realized it was a tool (used, but not manufactured) to keep the people in total submission.

Your late 20s to mid 30s are going to be rough

>>10163306

And how do you spot them anon?

>>10163143
>>10163185
>>10163219
>>10163306
>>10163334
Out of any -ism under the sun; nihilism is the simplest to undercut and discard. Hell the very word is a contradiction in terms; by it's very nature it possessing its suffix of "ism" isn't valid.
Nihilism is a pseudointellectual act of mental annihilation. It's even a part of the word: 'nihil'

Nihilism is the rejection of philosophy outright, because nihilism is the claim that no answers are possible. That precludes any philosophical development. Once you have decided that no answers are possible, philosophy has become a waste of time. But further, if no moral values are possible, neither is life. So the only consistent nihilists are those who commit suicide. Nihilism has no answer to the axiom that life is an end in itself. Nihilism cannot defend the axiom that it implicitly purports; that life doesn't mean anything. It is mental destruction for sake of destruction. Hatred of the good for being the good.
Nihilists like to prattle that it, by it's very nature is impossible to refute,but nihilsim doesn't even need to be "refuted" because all it needs is and indentification of what it actually is: an anti-concept.
/discussion for all time

>>10163421

>Nihilism is the rejection of philosophy outright

[citation needed]

>no answers are possible

Only in regards to whether there is innate meaning in human existence, because there isn't one - it doesn't deny science or your own quest for personal meaning.

seriously yours is one of the most pseudo intellectual responses I've seen.

>>10163421
It's not an end; it's a starting point. You haven't thought about nearly enough if you haven't even realized that.

>>10161893
>When did I grow out of nihilism
When I realize anti-natalism was for pussies. Life > death

>>10163334
"The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it [...] The question is, how far an opinion is life-furthering, life- preserving, species-preserving, perhaps species-rearing"

Nihilism isn't something that can be disproven, it is only something that can be refrained from or accepted. The only argument against the claim that life is meaningless is that life has meaning, and I can't personally provide any evidence for either of those claims.

>>10163502
>It's not an end; it's a starting point. You haven't thought about nearly enough if you haven't even realized that.
well descartes got past it in like an hour

>>10163421
> if no moral values are possible, neither is life.
You gotta explain the logic in here, anon.

> axiom that life is an end in itself
Big claim, bucko. What's your evidence that it is more than an emerging dynamic pattern. Do you even know the definition of axiom...

> anticoncept
> a refutation shouldn't need to be refuted because it is a refutation
Really makes you think...

When you niggas talk about the "meaning of life" that supposedly is non-existent or whatever I have no idea what you're talking about

can you elaborate?

if it means "what should i do" the answer may be hard but it's definitely out there, and possibly objective (e.g. if you're thirsty you should drink and so on)

>>10161893
What a brainlet in that quote

>>10163545
>Nihilism isn't something that can be disproven, it is only something that can be refrained from or accepted.
This. Nihilism is so worthless a notion that it and all concepts derived from it can be discarded without evidence. No discernable or useful conclusions can be derived from a nihilist base.
>>10163497
See above. Nihilism precludes such concrete notions such as citations.
---
The following is meant as a rebuke on you >>10163572 and that 'elaboration' for you >>10163575 :

There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not: it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible; it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil. Only a living entity can have goals or can originate them. And it is only a living organism that has the capacity for self-generated, goal-directed action. The goal of that action, the ultimate value which, to be kept, must be gained through its every moment, is the organism’s life.

Nihilsim is so worthless as to be trashed immediately but if one were to provide a hard-refutation this^ is what it would look like.

>>10163342

I'm interested in exacty what you meant with this reply to the previous post (which I did not write).

I'm also interested in whether you personally have lived through your late 20s and/or your mid 30s.

>>10161978
Not sure why you're being shit on. Modern Man is living in a state of meaninglessness and nihilism as consequence of abandoning the traditional archetypes of the Archaic Man.

These people need to read "The Myth of the Eternal Return" by Eliade

>>10162020
Exactly, we live in Kali Yuga, eventually this world will be destroyed and a better one will rise. Nihilism is a symptom of the final stage of the cycle.

>>10164367
A failure of introspection is not nihilism

>>10162362
>bullshit religion

Oh transcend, the meaning you seek lies in spiritual freedom from the cycle of time.

The repetition of divine gestures is the key to meaning.

>>10162635
Have you no empathy for your brother? Were you once not too, lost?

>>10164380
Is he not correct in a slight sense though? Modern Man killed God and we have to live the painful consequences of that? Are we not all in search of meaning?

>>10161893
When I had a kid, someone I would kill and die for.

>>10164398
Losing the validity of God does not mean losing meaning to a rational man.

>>10163729
I'm sorry, but I think your post is an argument for Nihilism, an explanation, rather than a refutation of it.

See how often you used the word "can" in your last few sentences.
Yes,
>It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible.
It makes it possible, that we all can agree upon, but that doesn't mean that "Life" has any objective intrinsic "Value" in it, or exists before it for that matter. It only means we can create it.
That IS nihilism. The lack of intrinsic Value in Life; and the realization than all Values are synthetically made.

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting you, would you care to refute me?

>quoting a anti-Semitic nationalist
/pol/ spotted. the only reason you made this thread is because you think Christianity and fascism is the solution to "the Jewish problem" which you believe Nihilism is a result of.

>>10165836
I suppose I don't understand then, if God isn't the root of meaning, aside for arguments of Art or Nature, then does "rational man" have meaning? Or it just the relativist slip'n'slide to nihilism. Are you talking about "create your own meaning"?

>>10164402

see >>10163219 . You're just deluded because now you're fully locked into adult participation for the rest of your life. This literally prevents you from entertaining truth.

>>10163421
That post meant fuck all.

>>10161986

You grew out of it because you were never a nihilist. Just a depressed idiot. Maybe actually read up and fully understand nihilism first. Baka.

>>10165904
Best post in thread.

>>10165904
Not him.but the the semantics of his usage of "can" is irrelevant, here is arguing that there is a biological determinant that goes into life being seen as inherently valuable that exists on an instinctual level.

Here is a challenge for you, buy a gun and point it at your head with a round chambered. See how hard it is to pull the trigger. Now go point it at someone on the street and see how hard it is to pull the trigger.

Now question yourself, if life has no intrinsic value then why is it difficult for me to kill myself or others?

>>10166278
Except nihilism on either the emotional level or intellectualized level is retarded
>Durr fuck religion and morality
>There is no disconnect between me, my actions, my concept of self, and my thoughts that is leading me to believe I have no moral code that exists on modal level with other people
>anything that isn't based on empiricism is false, because empiricism is axiomatically perfect

>>10166025
Life, living it, and living it well. It really just that simple. Faux-complexity to the answer is unnecessary and ultimately worthless.

>>10166329
Because we are wired like that in the head through evolution. It's the same reason it's hard to not eat when you are hungry or not go to the toilet or not sleep when you are tired. That doesn't mean there is intrinsic value in life.

>>10166368
>Just because I can't destroy life willy nilly doesnt mean I see some sort of inherent value in life tho
How many layers of dissonance are you on, bro? If life is meaningless and has not value whatsoever then destroying it should be as simple as tossing trash into the bin.
>Uses examples of instinctual life preserving behaviors mankind to prove that life has not value
Wut

>>10166394
It is as simple as tossing trash into a bin.
The reason it's hard to pull the trigger is because if you kill someone your freedom and life is instantly threatened. You have a survival instinct wired into you. If there was no penalty for murder you bet your ass people would start pulling triggers like tossing trash into the bin.
Back before 'war' and real penalty people were being killed all the time.

>One half of the people found in a Nubian cemetery dating to as early as 12,000 years ago had died of violence. The Yellowknives tribe in Canada was effectively obliterated by massacres committed by Dogrib Indians, and disappeared from history shortly thereafter.[3] Similar massacres occurred among the Eskimos, the Crow Indians, and countless others. These mass killings occurred well before any contact with the West.

>>10166425
>Back before 'war' and real penalty people were being killed all the time.
As part of ethnic conflicts which continue today, and which doesn't automatically mean that ancient people were fine with killing?

Lmao, so because
>Dude war existed in the past
Meant that taking a life was easy?
>Your freedom and life is insanely threatened
Don't forget you're a nihilist. Say
>Your nothing and nothing is immediately threatened
:D

>>10166443
Just because you have a survival instrict doesn't mean there is meaning to life.
You could be accidentally killed too at any moment.
And taking life through out history has been easy. You think Hannibal slept badly because his army killed 100 men a minute in Battle of Cannae?
>Your nothing and nothing is immediately threatened.
Why would the words change? What are you talking about?

Well, I always took it to mean the lack of an intrinsic meaning to things left the burden on us to find meaning. Unfortunately this also happens to be the philosophy of larping.

>>10166329
>The presence of a survival instinct is proof of higher purpose
Full pseud

>>10166469
>Just because you have a survival instrict doesn't mean there is meaning to life.
It literally does by default, otherwise there would be no instinct
>You could die at any minute
That's not a refutation of the value of life, that just means life can be lost easily.
>Hannibal
Understood the value of life and sacrifice of war, which is why he was forced to leave Rome Alone after Rome invaded Carthage under the threat that Rome would massacre the civilian population of Carthage.

Warriors sacrifice themselves to war and conflict, it's not something you ever get used to it's just something you learn to deal with over time. No one understands the value of life more than a soldier.
>Why would the word change
Because life is nothing and freedom is nothing, they are based on morality and axiomatic assertions of meaning.

>>10166628
>I don't value life at all!
>Gets scared when facing death
>Can't obliterate life as though it were nothing
>Cringes when he is confronted with the thought of death
Please, nothing it more bourgie and pseud than nihilism.

>>10166634
>It literally does by default, otherwise there would be no instinct.
Why do you think this? And what about the people WHO do kill themselves?

>>10165904
Certainly
>Values are synthetically made
And what exactly is WRONG with them being "synthetically made"? You don't reveal why such a thing is bad or undesirable just that it is.

>It makes it possible, that we all can agree upon, but that doesn't mean that "Life" has any objective intrinsic "Value"
And this is the criterion you are regarding things by that wrecks the whole of your structure.
There are, in essence, three schools of thought on the nature of the good and value: the intrinsic, the subjective, and the objective. Only the third is true. The intrinsic theory holds that the good is inherent in certain things or actions as such, regardless of their context and consequences, regardless of any benefit or injury they may cause to the actors and subjects involved. It is a theory that divorces the concept of “good” from beneficiaries, and the concept of “value” from valuer and purpose, claiming that the good is good in, by, and of itself.
The subjective theory holds that the good bears no relation to the facts of reality, that it is the product of a man’s consciousness, created by his feelings, desires, “intuitions,” or whims, and that it is merely an “arbitrary postulate” or an “emotional commitment.”
The intrinsic theory holds that the good resides in some sort of reality, independent of man’s consciousness; the subjectivist theory holds that the good resides in man’s consciousness, independent of reality.

The objective theory holds that the good is neither an attribute of “things in themselves” nor of man’s emotional states, but an evaluation of the facts of reality by man’s consciousness according to a rational standard of value. (Rational, in this context, means: derived from the facts of reality and validated by a process of reason.) The objective theory holds that the good is an aspect of reality in relation to man, and that it must be discovered, not invented, by man. Fundamental to an objective theory of values is the question: Of value to whom and for what? An objective theory does not permit "context-dropping" or “concept-stealing”; it does not permit the separation of “value” from “purpose,” of the good from beneficiaries, and of man’s actions from reason.

You are merely taking Nihilism that there is no intrinsic values, blanking out that it isn't the intrinsic theory you should even be opperating by.

>>10166665
>Why do I think this
Because it's true
>What about the people who kill themselves
>Implying killing yourself is easy
All of my keks

>>10166682
It's not true at all. Explain to me why having a survival instinct means there is inherent meaning to life.
>Implying killing yourself is easy.
What? There are mental patients who gouge their own eyes out and pull their hair out and hurt themselves without blinking an eye. There are mass murderers who kill school children then themselves without too much thought. It might be easy for you, but not for some people. You are going through hoops trying to justify this.

>>10166671
>You are merely taking Nihilism that
*You are merely taking Nihilism to mean that

>>10166671
What is reality is bad question.
This post tells us fuck all.

>>10166701
>Explain to me why having a survival instinct means there is inherent meaning to life.
Because if life wasn't valuable or meaningful you would sit in a chair and slowly starve yourself to avoid existence
>The existence of schizophrenia and psychopathy "mental illness" means that life as a whole means nothing
Nice nadir fallacy you placed on all of humanity tho. Psychopaths aren't human, and the severely mentally disabled aren't sane.

>>10166710
>Fuck all
How? Did you read the rest of the post?
The objective theory of value hard-refutes nihilism and not in my opinion either.

>>10166713
Remember friend; don't opperate on his intrinsic premises when wrecking nihilism. This is not the approach to take.

>>10166713
>The existence of schizophrenia and psychopathy "mental illness" means that life as a whole means nothing
I didn't say that. You said a survival instict must mean there is inherent value to life when not all people have a survival instict only healthy humans.

>>10163421
>>10163729
>>10166671
Nihilism status: btfo

>>10166729
>when not all people have a survival instict only healthy humans
Except you're still using a nadir fallacy to apply the laws of extreme psychosis onto healthy people?

Top kek, you're not one for empiricism are you? I never said that life can't become meaningless, just that life isnt inherently meaningless. The severely mentally I'll either need to be studied or humanly disposed of, psychopaths need to be executed or studied.

>>10166359
How does one strip the complexity and accept that it is that simple? Are you arguing for some kind of Zhuangzi Taoism perspective?

>>10166773
No. I am arguing from an Objectivist perspective.

>>10166766
Yikes what a brainlet.

>>10166786
Life has meaning if there is an inherent instincts to protect it, because a lot of human behavior is inherent.

Sorry pseud, your own Schopenhauer esque intellectualization of your own virginity does not make life inherently meaningless

>>10166785
What led you to adopt the Objectivist perspective?

What books can you recommend to understand Objectivism?

What is the Objectivist perspective on religion?

>>10162103
remove the Satan bit and it's pretty spot on

>>10166800
Makes literally zero sence.
This is like a toddler trying to justify something.
How the hell does the fact that some human beings have a self preservation instinct mean there is inherent value in life? How could that possibly make sence? There are species that have gone extinct.
The whole of humanity could be cancelled with atomic bombs then there wouldn't be any humans. Were is the value then?

>>10166821
>You have a an instinctive basis to value life
>Therefore life is worthless
This is unironcally what you are saying. You are also saying
>Because people die
>Life has no value
Ad nauseum , and every time you say this I'm telling that that just because life ends doesn't mean it wasn't worth living a priori. People come, people go. That is how life works. Same with every other animal

>>10166848
You don't seem to grasp the idea of a higher meaning. I almost don't want to try to convince you because you might get depressed even though embracing Nihilism makes you more free and less depressed. But if we found out tomorrow a massive asteroid was to end it all and human history was erased. What higher meaning did it have? Not just some individual human experience. That is the argument here.

>>10166813
John Galt's Speech from Atlas Shrugged: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F5nhYo5nx4
The Virtue of Selfishness
Philosophy: Who Needs It
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology
-by Ayn Rand

Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand
-by Leonard Peikoff

>>10166890
>You don't seem to grasp the idea of a higher meaning
Nice projection there
>You can't handle the truth
I used to be both an anti-natalist and nihilist, then i entered senior year of high school
>If you were going to die what meaning did everything have
I love how you can't even comprehend the concept of a priori deductive logic. Tell me how the answer is inherently nothing and not the sum of human experiences you had based on innate behaviors you were born with a priori. Please.

>>10166949
Why would 'the sum of human experiences' be the reason for life? It's living "just because". That isn't an answer. Existance is ontologically pointless.

>>10166949
>You can't handle the truth
>truth
Proof that you know it's true just can't stomach it.

>>10166996
>It's living "just because"
Yes, because it's
>Inherent
>Behavior
That you can't overcome. You're just re-asserting your a priori deductions over and over again.

>>10167001
>Empiricism doesn't exist
Go ahead, try to play Russian Roulette plz, and if you actually believe what you preach you won't feel anything

>>10167004
We basically got nowhere.
"Just because" isn't a answer.
Saying meaning of life is inherent human behavior is like being a slave.

>>10167007
This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Are you in middle school? Just because it is hard for you doesn't mean its the reason to live. Really, really flawed logic.

>>10167017
>Inherent behavior doesn't exist a priori
So uh you gay, straight, bi? Do you hear voices in your head? Because if you do, cut it out faggot just stop being so gay lol
>>10167026
It's means you value your life on an instinctual basis, how much more fedora can you be?

>>10167035
The instinctual basis is a illusion. You are literally a weak slave.

>>10167059
>Hey just stop hearing voices in your head faggot.
>Dyslexia? Pffftt just read you little shit
Actually you're just intellectualizing your own depression into a philisophy you don't actually understand.

YOU are the slave, and you're enslaved to yourself

A lot of people are saying Dostoevsky ITT, I had a similar experience.
I read House of the Dead when I was 18 and was struck by how people in such a horrid environment could find the inner strength to carry on with their lives and not just end it all. I read Crime and Punishment which had a very similar vibe although WAAAY more autistic about it, symptom of the main character, whatever.
Been reading more holocaust narratives and gulag lit (Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Drowned and the Saved, Kolyma Tales, Maus, and yes, everybody's favorite meme The Gulag Archipelago are notable), have come to the conclusion that people define themselves within a historical context, and that the "meaning" of their life will become apparent after they die. This meaning is entirely subjective, but it does exist, in the same way that money is said to have value... There is a dialectic to which people contribute all over the world, that dialectic has changed over time, my aim as a person is to contribute to that dialectic, moving it forward. Thus, due to the fact that I only have one life, we should try to do good for this world instead of wallowing in some nihilist stupor.
Big ups to Hannah Arendt and Eichmann in Jerusalem, that book is brilliant. Evil is not demons, they do not exist. Evil is a man sitting at his desk ordering thousands to be executed.

I don't know if I 'grew out of it,' because I still think that there's no inherent meaning. I just stopped being a pussy and let it run my life, and instead decided to try to enjoy life and literally just laugh more.
So far its fucking great

>>10163306
>>10163219
>>10166153
Kek, no. I reject your own meaning-laden ideology and choose my own, just as you have done.

The groundlessness you worship undermines your own certainty about uncertainty. Unlike you, I am not blind to the values I cherish.

You guys assign negative values to a philosophy that rejects all values, then you mistake it for a way of life, ignoring that it's a way of thinking.

Nihilism isn't eternal stagnation, it doesn't imply that the nihilist has no ambitions, will, instincts, preferences, goals to achieve. It also doesn't imply that a nihilist man doesn't have any values. He thinks that values and meanings are synthetic, but that doesn't mean that he must chose to act out against them, or even merely reject them. He rejects the idea that these values are inherent, but he's under no obligation to reject these values themselves.

You can think that life has no value and still be against murder, for example, for a variety of reasons.

>kek y not starve yourself to death
Because I do not need an inherent meaning or value assigned to my life and actions to make existing and acting worthwhile.

>y do anything
Because whether I do or not do a specific action is ultimately meaningless, but I still have preferences and I try to act according to them.

>but if u have preferences u assign values
Yes, but I do not believe that they're inherent or truly meaningful in the grand scheme of things. If there's spaghetti and a bowl of shit in front of me, I'll eat the spaghetti, even though it's as futile as eating shit.


Keep in mind that not all actions are derived from existential philosophy. You do not need a higher purpose or a system of values to take out the trash, etc. Some people can live their whole lives without having an existential crisis, living based on whims and artificial goals, never asking "why" or "why not."

>>10163841
>I'm interested in exacty what you meant with this reply to the previous post (which I did not write).

Because the OP's conclusion is based on a normative argument in this case "nilhism is used to keep people in total submission, I dont like this therefore it is wrong".

Where the pain comes is that he (and it certainly is a he) responded to this by jumping straight into an ideology based not on demonstrating nihilism to be wrong and this brand of nationalism right but because its conclusion is more comforting.

By making truth = comfort hes essentially cutting himself off of it guaranteeing confusion and arrogance.Whilst hampering the ability to deal with fundamental problems.

Its the philosophical equivalent of the person who as soon as they feel unfulfilled in a relationship or job their solution is to simply change to a new one.

>I'm also interested in whether you personally have lived through your late 20s and/or your mid 30s.

Im 31 though I will say my comments are informed heavily by my encounters with communists/marxists

>>10167135
That stone still didnt have an existence within itself.

>>10162104
>I realized that it didn't really matter that nothing really matters
you weren't a nihilist until you made this realization though?

>>10168575
*throws stones at you

>>10162488
Someone hasn't gotten to the fourth one yet. Lucky you

>>10166817
Nah, Satan as an archetypal figure in the subconscious of all men is very real. He does exactly what the Bible says he does.

>>10163143
Just because you can't argue against it under some presuppositions doesn't make it true. It's a morally abhorrent philosophy and ought to be rejected on those grounds.

>>10165904
You can't do anything without values. To do is to prefer one state over the other, by some criteria. This applies if you act randomly or arbitrarily or not at all, you are always making a choice. You can't even think without an innate value system guiding the thoughts. None of this has to be consciously articulated for it to be true. Nihilism in this frame is absolutely incoherent.

When I converted to Catholicism

Will you fight ?

>>10168982
*gets raped by priest after service*
Heh, it was personnel, kid

>>10169005
Fighting or not fighting are both contributory to the meaninglessness that define everything. Asking what I will do is already wrong, because there's no me, not really. That's the point. Mickey is a fool.

>>10169023
>because there's no me, not really.
prove it
*throws stones at you*

>>10169029
>prove it
it's a thing manifest
determinism is EXTREMELY intuitive if you're logically minded it's impossible to appreciate it in totality but the intelligent man sees the necessity of the fractal nature of its implication

>>10168822
Liberate humans from slavery and grant them the knowledge that of themselves and the freedom to pursue their own goals?

>>10168819
The fourth is way more idealistic than the third, so saying I'd be lucky for getting there is nonsensical. Also, the fourth panel is absolute cringe

>>10162548
Except rand didn't ground objective moralising in rationality

>>10162940
> and also think everything must be torn down.
Not nihilist because then you'd be saying there's value in tearing down things. People who don't understand nihilism need to stop posting

>>10166329
>a biological instinct means something has inherent meaning
Wow. If a woman came in front of me and was naked and gagging for it, my peepee would go vroomvroom for boomboom in cooncoon. This means there's inherent meaning in sex.

>>10166671
>of value to whom and for what?
>when your objective morality was actually subjective all along

>>10163421
>if no moral values are possible, neither is life
How can one man spout so many non sequiturs?

You don't grow out of nihilism, you chicken out.

>>10161893
Serious discussion does not belong here fagbots post memes

>>10161893
>>10166278
To be fair, it is biologically impossible to be a true nihilist, most just flirt with it a little bit. That's why I grew out of it, I basically just ignore the glaring issue (or "ultimate truth") with existence and strive to avoid being static, because remaining static amounts to death. I do not want to die.

>>10169334
>Not nihilist because then you'd be saying there's value in tearing down things. People who don't understand nihilism need to stop posting
Yes, that was his point. You are not the ultimate authority on nihilism, you hold value in things, though they may be subtle and repressed. He was pulled by the allure of truth but contradicted by belief in value.

The REAL Nihilists™ seem to love these threads, a good time for elitism but no, I understand when others fail to correctly grasp something that I place...value in.

>>10169305
Read The Virtue of Selfishness and get back to me.

>>10169334
>>when your objective morality was actually subjective all along
Referentiality is not subjectivism dumbass.
>non sequitur
Morality is a concomitant effect and requirement of life.

>>10161893
One cannot grow out of nihilism. One can only accept it like a man or shrink away from it like a coward.

>>10169473
Kek >>10167632

>>10169428
I actually understand nihilism far better than that guy, though I'm not a nihilist. The point is saying you're a nihilist then doing things a nihilist wouldn't just means you shouldn't say you're a nihilist in the first t place, rather than saying nihilism is dumb because when you (thought you) were a nihilist, your ideology contradicted itself.

>>10169465
When you have to refer to the wants of specific people which are formed by their subjective mindsets, then it is subjective

Nice unfounded statement about morality, now support it

>>10169446
>Read yet another book that's double as long as it needs to be with shit prose
Yeah no. I got halfway through atlas shrugged and put it down because it was unbearably shit. If you really understood it, you should be able to summarise her ideas.

>>10161893
I don't know if really have. At this point I just dodge the word meaning unless I need to use it to talk about semiotics.

I was born and raised as what I'd call a soft atheist. What some people call nihilism was more of a default for me, and not really an issue; I was more concerned with other doubts like solipsism. I'm a big fan of watching the Turing test duke it out with the man-in-the-Chinese-room argument. Blade Runner was an important movie for me, I felt that it conveyed the difference between just faithfully saying "the people around me are real" out of desperate hope, and actually understanding that you too are the "fake," even if that word has a misguided connotation attached to it. I think life is a matter of learning to love the machine before having the fact that you are one spoiled to you.

>(used, but not manufactured)
I like this distinction

>>10162539
>>10162548
>out of stirner and into rand instead of the reverse
>rand rationally grounded objective morality
do suicide

>>10169580
>I don't know if really have.
if I really have

>>10161893
Thankfully I sensed it was shit from the get go and never subscribed to it in the first place

Is it valid to tell a nihilist to kill themselves if there is no value in life?

>>10161978
Best response ITT

Nihilism is not a philosophical position, but an event in which the highest values devalue themselves. We have rejected the gods and they have fled, all we can do is prepare ourselves for the possibility of their return.

>>10170222

I don't understand what you mean by preparing for the possibility of their return.

Just speak normally, there is no need to convolute the language to try to sound more intelligent.

Nihilism arises when you realize there probably is no god, and when you die nothing happens, simple as that.

>>10170152

it actually isn't, and this is a mistake that normies constantly make (it's happened already in this thread), predictably.

>>10170247

Because killing oneself would mean to operate on axioms relating to the values of death vs no death, when nihilism dictates there are no real values.

>>10161978
nihilism doesn't mean thinking obsessively about death. the nihilistic epoch that you describe is the modernism or the human condition in modernity which is pondering a lot about death and the non existence, and trying to find a way to life from there. nihilism is a pure catholic thing, it never happened anywhere else. we can probably deduce from here that modernity is inherently catholic or anti-catholic and that it is a struggle against this catholicism which killed everything alive and made us obsessed about dying, out of fearing never to have lived. which is a struggle all thinking people should pursue imo.

>>10170266

Are you drunk or insane?

>>10170270
why would you say that now

>>10170282

Because you are morbidly incoherent

>>10163575
Haha I get it. If you are living you should die! Just give it some time . . .

>>10170289
maybe because you don't see the context which is the history of catholicism, and how it's still living underneath the apparent political/philosophical structures that we have right now.

>>10169528
>When you have to refer to the wants of specific people which are formed by their subjective mindsets, then it is subjective.
Apparently you need these words defined to you.
>Subjective:
"Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought"
>Relative:
"Existing or possessing a specified characteristic only in comparison to something else"
What an man subjectively wants means fuck all to what he objectively needs and should want.
Objective is a hard-opposite to subjective not relative, you idiot. Common mistake.

>Nice unfounded statement about morality, now support it
Certainly.
Ethics and morality is an objective, metaphysical necessity of man’s survival. A moral code is a system of teleological measurement which grades the choices and actions open to man, according to the degree to which they achieve or frustrate the code’s standard of value. The standard is the end, to which man’s actions are the means. A moral code is a set of abstract principles; to practice it, an individual must translate it into the appropriate concretes—he must choose the particular goals and values which he is to pursue. This requires that he define his particular hierarchy of values, in the order of their importance, and that he act accordingly.
Man must choose his actions, values and goals by the standard of that which is proper to man, in order to achieve, maintain, fulfill and enjoy that ultimate value, that end in itself, which is his own life.

Galt’s speech: “Man has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of choice—and the alternative his nature offers him is: rational being or suicidal animal. Man has to be man—by choice; he has to hold his life as a value—by choice; he has to learn to sustain it—by choice; he has to discover the values it requires and practice his virtues—by choice. A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.”

>>Read yet another book that's double as long as it needs to be with shit prose
How on Earth do you know it has shit prose if you haven't read it? Because of Atlas? Ayn Rand's nonfiction is stylistically different from her fiction. I can actually half-sympathize with people who accuse Atlas of having shit prose but what you have to understand is that Atlas is a mechanism to present her philosophy to the layman. All one really needs from Atlas is John Galt's Speech (optionally d'Anconia's money speech". It cointains the rawest essence of Objectivism.
I like to recommend it in audiobook by merits of Christopher Hurt's masterful performance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F5nhYo5nx4
>inb4 3 hour speech too long
Every single iota of that speech needed to be there, it is exactly as long as it needs to be. The rest of the book could have been condensed but what it does is truly set the context for the speech by giving you a grasp on the state of the world and the minds of the people (in-book) listening to it.

>>10169580
Rand's Egoism is completely superior to Stirner's and I can back that up. Let's see your argument to the contrary.

It's literally a dice throw that you and your family aren't dying from the plague in the middle ages right now. People who don't believe in Nihilism are too comfortable.

>>10170439
>It's literally a dice throw that you and your family aren't dying from the plague in the middle ages right now
>And therefore nihilism
That being technically true doesn't mean that it cannot be discarded as an utter irrelevance.

Nihilism has already been hard-demolished in this very thread.

>Nihilists repeatedly moving the goalposts to what constitutes nihilism whenever they get btfo: the thread

>>10170407
>Let's see your argument to the contrary.
I'm not a contrarian and recognize no need to say things that are patently untrue

>>10170454
>>10170470
>Thinking they can escape Nihilism
Boy you guys have a tough road ahead of you.

>>10170527

>They don't realize being is meaning

>>10170544
>Thinking there was meaning when the being is taken away from you.

>>10170519
Semantics faggot. Ok: then explain why it is untrue.
Challange: I believe I can outcompete you.

>>10170470
This.

I never did. It's what I built my current belief system on. I'll never understand why people always jump back to nihilism like it's the be all and end all of philosophy, it's almost masochistic to me. It's like someone walking through an art gallery and forcing themselves to ignore the paintings to only see the white canvas they are painted on to.

Think of nihilism as a white board. You can write whatever you want on it, anything at all. You can write maxims, principles etc and form opinions all the way up to whatever complicated belief structure you want. At that point nihilism becomes a comfort, because you know that however much effort you put into building said belief structure, you can always just wipe it all away and begin again. If the one you have is working for you and is enhancing your life, then keep it. If it isn't, wipe some or all of it off and start again.

If someone tells you that there are more important reasons to think critically about philosophy other than as a way to enhance your own life then they are liars, either lying to you or themselves. When you realise this you've grown out of your nihilistic adolescence and into a more mature state. The best thing you can do is constantly ask yourself the question: does any of this make my life any better?

I just wish more people thought like this. There are few people as insufferable as those who vent their angst at people who, despite being completely aware of their meaningless existence, choose to put up a facade of belief. If you believe so strongly that nothing has meaning then prove your faith by killing yourself. Depending on how much proselytising you've been doing, nobody might even be upset.

>>10170407
Please, back it up

>>10170242
>Nihilism arises when you realize there probably is no god, and when you die nothing happens, simple as that.
Your conclusion does not follow from your premise

>>10170699
Not everyone lives for happiness. Only the Englishman does.

>>10169334
>Wow. If a woman came in front of me and was naked and gagging for it, my peepee would go vroomvroom for boomboom in cooncoon. This means there's inherent meaning in sex.
Imagine being this autistic.

You have an instinctive reflex that values life inherently. That does not mean the presence of any instinct means something is given inherent value, there is simply one instinct within you that gives life inherent value

>>10170752
You have an instinctive reflex that values pussy inherently. That does not mean the presence of any instinct means something is given inherent value, there is simply one instinct within you that gives pussy inherent value

>>10170242
>Just speak normally, there is no need to convolute the language to try to sound more intelligent.

Ooh, ya got me there. Sorry that I've actually read some philosophy before entering a philosophical discussion.

Nihilism doesn't need escaping, it just needs its context.

It is a fact that no thing has meaning independent of mind. It is also a fact that there is biologically predetermined meaning i.e. Love. There is also the conscious-arbitrary assigning of meaning i.e. Art.

All these facts coexist comfortably. The conflict arises when we assign 0 value to everything. Why would you do that? There's no rational basis for that. It's the product of depressive feelings. That's an explanation not a justification.

>>10170758
Except an instinct that inherently values life isn't the same as a sexual drive. I love this false comparison you have going on just because of how butthurt you are

>>10170774
Nihilism is about the highest meaning, and if there is no highest meaning everything from top down doesn't really matter. Of course you can say 'I created this clock, it's purpose is to stand on the wall and tell time.' But it doesn't REALLY matter.

>>10162362
>obviously bullshit religion

>>10170741

I don't believe happiness exists the way most people think it does. It's not being or feeling positive all the time, or being hedonistic. I think of it more like a temporary respite that gets you through the constant suffering of existence. A satisfaction with things how they are for a small amount of time, before you have to get up and do something that is personally meaningful to you, whether you can rationally justify it or not. For me that means trying to experience as much as I can and constantly reflecting on experience from as many different viewpoints as possible. From that I try to gleam some wisdom that might extend the time that I can exist in the small window of satisfaction. That being said, I believe I am being tricked.

t. Scot

>>10161893
I feel like I never had it to begin with. Even my young 16 year old self was concerned with what meanings were worth pursuing, not that there was none at all.

I was always a perspectivist so subjectivity didn't really bother me either.

>>10170731
Sure.

Max Stirner's "spook" is similar to Ayn Rand's "anti-concept"; just less concrete.
In Stirner's writings he indicts systemic philosophy as such and attacks the notion of values held by others (either of the state or other men) as impositions on the individual to be rejected at his pleasure.
Ayn Rand's view of a logically defensible system of Ethics demanded by man's nature (and metaphysically derived) if he expects to live in a world among beings of the same nature is objectively better. The anarchistic world of Stirner's ideal is utterly trumped by the minarchistic one of Rand's.

(Not saying Stirner is AnCap here) LfCap>AnCap because Minarchism>Anarchism and in turn because Objective Law>Polycentric Law. Laws both Stirner would reject as "Spooks" and "impositions on the individual".

Stirner's prose is filled with sweeping indictments of society, morality, and even civilization itself. Rand and Stirner were both very controversial but in Rand's case she would wax iconoclastic only in areas which warranted it and no further. Stirner was widely iconoclastic often for the sake of being iconoclastic. Stirner does not strongly derive his epistemology from metaphysics (Man's nature causal from the facts of material reality). Stirner evacuates epistemology of its objects, namely the ideas, of which he shows the "historical and psychological roots". Something Objectivism would never do; that is an inherently nihilistic mental act.
Rand rests her entire philosophy on ONLY one axiom in Metaphysics: that existence exists. That reality is an objective absolute and that man's nature is derived from it. All else proceeded from here concluding in LfCapitalism.
Striner can be observed to rest upon an axiom IN ETHICS that morality is neccessarily a constraint and impostition of which he takes as undesirable as given. A floating abstraction.

Honestly at the end of the day the most fundamental difference between Rand and Stirner is the the latter held convinction in the idea that Might makes Right whereas the former held convinction in the same but with the principle that Might be subordinated to Right rationally and directly derived from the facts of man's existence.
When the day comes we upload our minds into the internet and enjoy indestructibility and immortality in it; THEN I will soft-convert to Stirnerism. That's what would be required in a world of Stirner's Anarchist ideal. Max Stirner is actually a great read (and honestly if we're talking pure writing ability; superior to Rand.) and I find his world view to be iron-clad IF I rhetorically accept his axioms and premises. Which I, in fact, do not.

>>10170844
>highest
There is no orientation in space. Whether you're standing on Asia or North America, The sky is a sphere and up is in every direction. Up is literally down, the highest is literally the lowest and nothing at all.

If assignation is meaningless, then these words are empty and there is no dispute or knowledge or anything but being, the spirit changing shape and gaining and losing awareness. If that's so, then responding is but a universal dance and nothing more.

But you don't believe that. Which makes you a shallow hypocrite who doesn't understand the meaning of his own words.

>>10170933
You completely misinterpreted the way highest was used. He didn't mean literally highest like a tower, but highest meaning.

>>10170949
You're so fucking stupid. Define "highest" in the context of "highest meaning". It's impossible.

>>10163185
sounds gay

>>10170972
Everything.

>>10170989
Exactly. Concession accepted.

>>10171001
Existance with respect to the universe
-
-
-Everything
-
-
Everything top down is meaningless. If the highest meaning is meaningless.

>>10171015
>highest meaning is meaningless.
Quite the definition buckaroo. The highest high is higher than the highest high. If you use the word your defining in the definition, then it's not a definition, it's an acknowledgement of retardation.

& existence is a subset of everything, so you haven't created a heriearchy, but merely a oneness, unity, a whole lot of bullsheeeet.

>>10171073
We are talking about meaning here. The meaning of existance. It's a hierarchy of meaning.
The highest meaning is the only we should be talking about. Art, love all that goes under it.

>>10171097
It's subsets of sunsets all the way down m8, one in one in one in one equals one hun.

>>10171126
Not when talking about meaning.
I originally replied to this. >>10170774

>>10161893
>/lit/, when did you grow out of nihilism?
When I realised all nihilists are depressed, weak willed people who use the mantra of "why should I care about anything when nothing matters" to justify why their life is shit and accept that it will never get better. They wallow in their arrogant, self-absorbed, self loathing while life passes them by.

>>10171133
You are fully enamored with your life of illusion and 'cool' distractions to keep you nice and "happy". You don't want to accept the truth, worrying it might make you unhappy. When your loved ones die and the illusion breaks you'll go searching for some permanence, and wont find it. This can be overcome with Stoicism, which is accepting it.>>10170439

>>10166671
>And what exactly is WRONG with them being "synthetically made"?
They aren't objective.

>>10171164
Not him, but directly state this 'truth' you have referenced.

>>10171173
Irrational ones aren't, rational values are.

>>10171182
>Irrational ones aren't, rational values are.
Oh, anon, you're such a riot.

>>10171164
>literally le reddit, rick and morty tier life doesn't matter we're all gunna die excuse
You didn't address my argument about nihilists using "life doesn't matter" as an excuse for not living the life they want to live. If nothing matters why don't you do exactly what you want todo and be damed about the outcome? You won't because you don't know what you want, you have no passion, no drive, no ambition, you hide behind your pseudo-intellectualism, your vague understanding of a shitty way of thinking that people adopt because they can't find a meaning to their own life so just accept that life doesn't matter in general.

>>10171210
You CAN do what you want that isn't the argument here. Nihilism doesn't dictate what kind of life you ought to live, just that it doesn't have any value that, is the argument. There is someone here saying the life you lived had some intrinsic value, that is the thing you don't want to accept.

>>10171191
Light mockery is not be taken seriously. Make an argument. Presumably I opperate from opposing premises to yourself so I will need be made cognizant of the notion as it exist in your mind on your terms.

This relates to a price of advice I gave my friend once:
>"You'd be surprised how often folks need to be reminded that other people aren't psychic."

>>10171238
>just that it doesn't have any value that, is the argument
Not him, and what I am saying is that argument is hard-refutable and that has been done itt.

>>10171277
It hasn't. It never has. Even Nietzsche believed in Nihilism he just wanted it to be overcome. It's fine if you want to try and 'overcome' it. Just remember that if you dig deeper enough it's still there.

>>10171295 (p1)
>It hasn't
Read once again, particularly [this]:

Out of any -ism under the sun; nihilism is the simplest to undercut and discard. Hell the very word is a contradiction in terms; by it's very nature it possessing its suffix of "ism" isn't valid.
Nihilism is a pseudointellectual act of mental annihilation. It's even a part of the word: 'nihil'

Nihilism is the rejection of philosophy outright, because nihilism is the claim that no answers are possible. That precludes any philosophical development. Once you have decided that no answers are possible, philosophy has become a waste of time. But further, if no moral values are possible, neither is life; value is not arbitrary but a epistemological necessity of life. So the only consistent nihilists are those who commit suicide. Nihilism has no answer to the axiom that life is an end in itself. Nihilism cannot defend the axiom that it implicitly purports; that life doesn't mean anything. It is mental destruction for sake of destruction. Hatred of the good for being the good.
Nihilists like to prattle that it, by it's very nature is impossible to refute, but nihilsim doesn't even need to be "refuted" because all it needs is an indentification of what it actually is: an anti-concept.
Why is this not just a mere assertion of mine?:
There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not: it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible; it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil. Only a living entity can have goals or can originate them. And it is only a living organism that has the capacity for self-generated, goal-directed action. The goal of that action, the ultimate value which, to be kept, must be gained through its every moment, is the organism’s life.

>>10171295 (p2)
"Intrinsic" values being the criterion you are regarding things by is the thing that wrecks the whole of your shoddy structure.
There are, in essence, three schools of thought on the nature of the good and value: the intrinsic, the subjective, and the objective. Only the third is true. The intrinsic theory holds that the good is inherent in certain things or actions as such, regardless of their context and consequences, regardless of any benefit or injury they may cause to the actors and subjects involved. It is a theory that divorces the concept of “good” from beneficiaries, and the concept of “value” from valuer and purpose, claiming that the good is good in, by, and of itself.
The subjective theory holds that the good bears no relation to the facts of reality, that it is the product of a man’s consciousness, created by his feelings, desires, “intuitions,” or whims, and that it is merely an “arbitrary postulate” or an “emotional commitment.”
The intrinsic theory holds that the good resides in some sort of reality, independent of man’s consciousness; the subjectivist theory holds that the good resides in man’s consciousness, independent of reality.

The objective theory holds that the good is neither an attribute of “things in themselves” nor of man’s emotional states, but an evaluation of the facts of reality by man’s consciousness according to a rational standard of value. (Rational, in this context, means: derived from the facts of reality and validated by a process of reason.) The objective theory holds that the good is an aspect of reality in relation to man, and that it must be discovered, not invented, by man. Fundamental to an objective theory of values is the question: Of value to whom and for what? An objective theory does not permit "context-dropping" or “concept-stealing”; it does not permit the separation of “value” from “purpose,” of the good from beneficiaries, and of man’s actions from reason.

[You are merely taking Nihilism to mean that there are no intrinsic values, blanking out the realization that it isn't the intrinsic theory you should even be opperating by.]
No more moving-the-goalposts to what constitutes nihilsim allowed. Have a quote;
>You must attach clear, specific meanings to words, i.e. be able to identify their referents in reality. This is a precondition, without which neither critical judgment nor thinking of any kind is possible. All philosophical con games count on your using words as vague approximations. You must not take a catch phrase – or any abstract statement – as if it were approximate. Take it literally. Don’t translate it, don’t glamorize it, don’t make the mistake of thinking, as many people do: “Oh, nobody could possibly mean this!” and then proceed to endow it with some whitewashed meaning of your own. Take it straight, for what it does say and mean.

>>10162123
Same. Peterson showed me the way from the underworld, but then told me to get the fuck back in there and rescue my father.

A guy can't get a break.

>>10170929
>difference between Rand and Stirner is the the latter held conviction in the idea that Might makes Right

Not that poster.

Im not familiar with Rand but isnt Stirners thought more that might is one of the things used to turn a spook into property?

>Striner can be observed to rest upon an axiom IN ETHICS that morality is neccessarily a constraint and impostition of which he takes as undesirable as given. A floating abstraction.

Morality only becomes a constraint when you hold it as being higher or more sacred to your own interests and an individual. It is certainly something that could be rendered into ones property.

Likewise depending on ones understanding of morality it could hold the same position that gravity or any natural law has in the life of an egoist

suurp, drinks the water, ahhhh so refreshing. i am glad that my life is driven by objective goals i must say. i look out of an window and outside i see trees and their colours are a darkish green like the tshirt a friend of mine carried several weeks ago which underlined his beautiful blue eyes. he had asked me whether he should war darkbrown pants with his dark green tshirts, he thought it would look fittingly but he was also afraid of looking like a tree and being mocked as "treeloser" or "Treeloving faggot" by his peers. he asked me because i am an expert on such matters as style, fashion but also Nihilism. You must know that i'm quite nihilistic and have also a wicked sense of humor. Sometimes people say: i think it's really nice that we can drink this tea and such a wonderful sunday evening, here outside, while the sun is shining and i respond: Can you prove that? and i smirk and laugh in their face and shout: it means nothing! It means nothing at alL! It's not pleasant, it's meaningless you deluded fuckwits. You are just believing that this has meaning but life is inherently meaningless. Your values they are nothing to me. Your faces they are nothing to me. You are not even atoms because words are nothing to me. my own words are nothing to me i'm just pretending but i'm conscious of pretending. I'm talking but it is nothing to me. They looked funny with their mouths opened in shoock and their eyes wide and twisted and one of them sneezed and i said: uh, how'd you do that. and he walked up to me and took a finger into his nose, got the snot out and smeared it into my face and he said: You are also absoutely nothing to me. And he walked off and his group with him and they ate cake and tea somewhere else but it was nothing to me. Of course i felt "hurt" or "embarrassed" but these are meaningless physical reactions. They are "objective" but devoid of any subjectivie content and so irrelevant to my consciousness which is subjective. I walk into the exact other operation for i was not intent on facing the sneezingmans gang again. His face had been so.... fresh and unabashed and not timid as is mine when i look into the mirror and see it. His eyebrows were curly like a pig tail and his teeth a glistening white like the pure heart of jesuschrist. It was all nothing to me. Nihil Morari is what i always say. I am looking out of my window, i say, i think "nihil morari" i think. And it's true. It's simply true. I am a man of no pity. I am unburdened. Christianity is a meme. Love is a meme. Truth is a meme. Words are a meme. If you ever dare to ask me: So what are you even doing with your lfie f it's nothing to you, i say: This question is nothing to me and stare out of my window, i think. and the boy who had asked me this went out of the room and into the trees and there he picked up a brown leaf and crumbled it in his hands and ate the pieces and rubbed his tummy and said: wow, yummy and i watched and objectively i felt longing but subjectively it wa

>>10171450
>Nihilist, believes nothing has inherent meaning
>"a friend of mine"

Really makes you think

>>10171450
8/10 grinned the whole tiem

Is nihilism even relevant in our time and age? seriously guys think back to your day to day memories. If you fuck a girl does it matter whether nihilism is real or not? Is it really important that when after i went out of the house and walked down the stairs and then realized that my shoe was loose and that while i had tied my shoebands they were so loose that it felt uncomfortable and a slight pain was also spreading in my feet and i moved down to my feet and tried to tie them back together but at that moment a flash lighted up and a young girl with horse teeth but she was nonetheless kind of beautiful and cute and her hair was bound in a pony tail and it was golden brown and her eyes were blue and her lips quite beautiful - she was twelve- but she was interesting and she said: "gotcha mister" and laughed like a retard but it was cute. And i smiled and said: What do you mean gotcha? You didn't get shit." and she ran away screaming and died at age 35. ii tied my shoebands back together and fell flat on my face. I had actually tied my two shoes together. I was bleeding but nonetheless i laughed HA HA HA HA and looked with hate if anybody around me saw it. There was nobody there so i started hitting the ground. I calmed down quickly, it factually took me 3 seconds to calm down i got up and breathed in deeply and said: I'm a protector. Protectors have a cool calm head. I'm invulnerable so that i can properly protect those that i love. I breathed in and out and sighed and felt suddenly surprisingly tired. I had only walked for 10 metres but i inspected my soul and realized that my desire to take a walk had passed already and because i'm conscious and because it's a scientifically proven fact that it's always bes tto just listen to what you rbody tells you i acknoweldged that my desire for being outside, in the city with people i didn't know (who is that fat guy tall with the curly hair and the terrible reddish blond beard and that rectangular face, he looks like a big fat dumbass) and i walked back in for i am in touch with nature eternally and i laid down in bed. I positioned a neidle on my forehead and took a hammer out of my breastpocket and hammered the needle heavily into my forehead and said: 1: Stop being such a god damn nihiist. 2. Nietzsche is your popstar. 3. Netflix and Chill. 4. It's both length and girth that matter. 5. Never ever speak to me or my son ever again and so on until the needle was inside and i felt good again. I fell asleep forever because i was dead. When i woke up it was already morning again, i had slept for 10 hours and i got up and scatched my dick and balls lengthily for i had that sweaty naked-sleep-itch-on-a-sweat-soaked-matress feeling and i was scratching with a lot of intensity and was also semi hard but it didn't matter to me. My mother always told me that only Nihilists play with their pensis and so it didn't matter to me and i put on socks first, they were white and dirty and reeked of unnameable things and

>>10162539
>>10162548
Stirner pretty much encompasses Rand though.

>>10171861
Except Rand pretty much btfo Anarchism. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/anarchism.html
And Stirner has fuck all relevant to say about Capitalism.

>>10171450
>>10171534
Stop

>>10161893
If all meaning is synthetically made, in other words, there is no a priori meaning. Why should anyone even care? Obviously there is a contradiction in that you have to put meaning in nihilism as the baser truth of existence. But outside of that, why not settle on some synthetic meaning, either of your own creation or of another...or y'know, that of matter, of the biology that dictates your brain - of which you cannot escape, simply because you exist to begin with. I don't understand this part. Why does no a priori meaning remove the validity of a posteriori meaning, and render it not worth subscribing to ("worth" is another contradiction)? Maybe it doesn't, but that tends to be the main view of so-called nihilists. Would nihilism exist without the concept of objective meaning, of a priori meaning? If a priori meaning is something that doesn't actually exist to begin with, why entertain the concept of it? It amounts to idealism, treat it as it is in reality. With it removed, would nihilism have any real point?

>>10171928
Good thing Stirner transcends those concepts. I know you've never read him, now.

>>10171450
>>10171534
I bet you could write a book in this style and get your dick sucked.

>>10171944
>transcends anything
So he and spookfag memers assert.
If you think Striner wasn't an anarchist both explictly and in effect it's you who hasn't read him.
The worst thing I dislike about him

>>10171944
>transcends anything
So he and spookfag memers assert.
If you think Striner wasn't an anarchist both explictly and in effect it's you who hasn't read him.
Also read >>10170929 me

>>10163185
>giving yourself the freedom to pursue what you enjoy (doesn't imply hedonism either) without the fear of hubris or social/cultural expectation.
If everyone did that, we'd essentially be living in Hobbes' State of Nature, where the strongest makes his desires a reality without any regard for others.

>>10170827
Instincts can't value you dipshit. Instincts react. To say that instincts have inherent value would be to say that the swing of my dick when slapped across your face has inherent value because there where instincts involved.

>>10171861
Except Rand is spooked as fuck and is a reactionary ideologue.

>>10172248
Stop sluring Rand and look at the arguments in >>10170929 deal with them or just admit you dont understand Rand / have been spooked by Stirner

>>10172248
>ayn rand
>reactionary
Why do leftists always misuse right wing terms but still get mad when others misuse theirs?

The fact that no one here has died of dehydration, implies that none of you have been nihilists for even a week.

Do I need to spell out the reasoning? Nihilism means nothing has value. If you assign no value to anything, then there's no reason to act, even to drink water. You would lie inert until death. As all you fags are still alive, none of you have been nihilists, just depressed.

>>10172235
That's probably the dumbest thing I've heard. Valuing life is axiomatic to you based on biological determinism.

Go ahead and *try* to kill yourself without feeling a thing. Want to know.why you feel that way? Because you
>Value
>Life
It's not the same thing as pain or sexual stimulation either. The mere existence of fear of losing one's life is proof that life matters to you, because why would you be afraid to lose nothing?

>>10172248
>Rand
>Reactionary
She is like the fucking queen of the bourgeoisie you dip

>>10170699
>clinging to the desire of a creation of a personal narrative

you will get bored soon

>>10172471
and she came from the USSR which makes that a reactionary stance, you double-dip

>>10172477
>Being pro bourgeoise to the point where you are borderline ancap
>Reactionary
That's like saying a socdem is more reactionary than an ancom. You're right - but that doesn't mean socdem is reactionary

The real problem of nihilism is how do we screw our subjective values to the sticking place? Aren't we only triggered by nihilism because we can't sustain our chosen values? Like spaghetti against the wall, it always falls. This is what we should be talking about. Specifically, how can we learn to care about being good people. I know I hate people and love to laugh at their misfortune, but this does me no good. I'd be much happier if I cared about "them", but it's so hard when they're such cunts. How do we choose love? That is the problem of nihilism.

>>10164373
Yes we truly are in the Age of Forgetting. hare krishna my friend

>>10172477
By which I take to mean you then think that her being a proponent of Laissez-Faire Capitalism is an OVERreaction? I bet that's what it is.

>>10172499
you can't sustain your belief in the intrinsic value of the things you used to value before nihilism under a worldview that considers the concept of intrinsic values incoherent. you have to rewire your brain and make existence precede essence

>>10162058
>>10162505
It's seems so pretentious but I feel the same way. Most people have no idea what it's like to collide with reality. Everyone is too doped up on light and "mindfulness" that they don't actually experience experience. They just live in their own insular, cotten-padded world, not empathising with anyone except duplicates of themselves.

>>10162082
>Peter Hitchens when asked if he ever had doubts about his fate he responded with "every day"

This is very beautiful. It's a fact that you cannot truly believe in God, Good, Evil, etc., without at the same time doubting that they even exist. If someone never questions their belief in something, they don't actually believe it.

>>10172470
That's probably the dumbest thing I've heard. Valuing pussy is axiomatic to you based on biological determinism.
Go ahead and *try* to cut off your dick without feeling a thing. Want to know.why you feel that way? Because you
>Value
>Pussy
It's not the same thing as pain or death either. The mere existence of fear of losing one's dick is proof that pussy matters to you, because why would you be afraid to lose nothing?

>>10164384
The most divine gesture is killing yourself

>>10172470
You are getting what Nihilism is completely wrong.
I don't even understand how you could believe just stupidity. No one here agrees with you.

>>10172553
you attempt to use a parodic version of his argument as a rhetorical device to make him look at the flaws in his own reasoning without bias but i happen to agree with both posts

>>10172553
Imagine being this retarded. Am I actually talking with a 3rd grader right now? First of all, conflating the sexuality with the primal instinct of preserving life is absurd, mainly.becsuse sexual impulses are under the umbrella of the biological.imperstive to preserve your life

You value your life because you fear losing it. Prove me wrong without being a brainlet plz.

>>10172567
>>10172570
>samefag
Being afraid or survival instinct have nothing to do with value of life. You aren't seeing the bigger picture at all.

>>10172559
We are arguing over existential nibilism and I am asserting that valuing life is axiomatic based on biological determininism

But do explain your own cognitive dissonance. This is just getting pathetic, I'm currently being "refuted" through little kid tier mockery and logic.

>Everything is pussi :DDD

>>10172576
>Being this much of a butthurt pseud

>>10172576
>Instinctively valuing life has nothing to do with valuing life
I would like to hear why.

>>10172570
you must realize that in saying that your self preservation instinct is an indicator of valuing life you presuppose noncognitivism which in his mind would be begging the question because he believes that value statements represents propositional beliefs

>>10172576
how on earth am i the same fag when we literally disagree with each other you dense fuck

>>10172570
Imagine being this retarded. Am I actually talking with a 3rd grader right now? First of all, conflating the primal instinct of preserving life with the primal instinct of procreation is absurd, mainly.becsuse self preservation impulses are under the umbrella of the biological.imperstive to preserve and spread your genes
You value your life because you have a drive from your genes to pass your genes on to the nest generation. Prove me wrong without being a brainlet plz.

>>10172577
We are arguing over existential nibilism and I am asserting that valuing pussy is axiomatic based on biological determininism
But do explain your own cognitive dissonance. This is just getting pathetic, I'm currently being "refuted" through little kid tier mockery and logic.
>Everything is lithe :DDD

>>10172577
HAHA you are either really afraid of the truth or really aren't getting the bigger picture.

>>10172591
why do some people (males) not value pussy

>>10172598
they got confused and think they have a uterus

>>10172598
why do some people (males) not value life aka kill themselves.

>>10172598
why do u value pussy?
LMAO BTFO KEK

>>10172599
convincing answer. i guess biological determinism isn't that determinate and axioms aren't quite that axiomatic

>>10172605
axioms are epistemically unattractive anyway
yuck axioms

>>10172583
Actually I think he is a pseud intellectualizing his own ineptness and blaming it on the world at large
>>10172584
If you don't value your life, it's nothing. If you do value you life, you will fear losing it. Therefore it has inherent value

I would actually like to see your refutation so far I'm 100% right and you're just a little kid kicking and screaming

>>10172595
No one has explained it to me then, probably because they are afraid and are projecting?

>>10172611
>The color red... is red
FUCK OFF FUCKING AXIOMATIC KNOWLEDGE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH

>>10172614
If you don't value your dick, it's nothing. If you do value getting pussy, you will fear losing it. Therefore it has inherent value
I would actually like to see your refutation so far I'm 100% right and you're just a little kid kicking and screaming

The point here is clear, you blithering idiot who thinks a reiteration of your stance serves an additional purpose. There is no difference in instincts, so an instinct to preserve life is not different from the instinct to pass on genes. The only way you tried to solve this was arbitrarily putting the self preservation instinct above that of passing on genes so it supercedes it, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the exact opposite should be done. Yet this all misses the point that instinctual urges have no bearing on value in a philosophical sense, and saying otherwise would be a peak naturalistic fallacy

>>10172621
>all axioms are tautologies
The law of identity is the only non controversial axiom tbqh, so shit example. Not him btw

>>10172583
How about we drop the language and do a little experiment. Cut your throat. Did you do it? Why not? It's not like it matters.

>>10162635
>13
>too slow

I'd worked out and perfected nihilism by age 10.

Getting through my nihilistic stage so early meant I was free to begin to explore polytheism in great depth at 13, which led me through paganism, right the way back to animism.

I find animism feels right for me. I am happy with the spiritual experiences I have on a daily basis.

>>10172621
>he puts blind faith in laws of logic
unparsimonious

>>10172623
>There is no difference in instincts,
Nice a priori deductive logic you fucking pseud. Pro Tip: there is .

I don't know what else to tell you, you value your own life in itself because of biologicaly determined instincts. It's as simple as that, and there is no ability to dance around this with semantics , all you are doing is ad hominem over and over and over again that shows nothing but extreme egocentric tendencies

>>10172628
>The law of identity is the only non controversial axiom tbqh, so shit example
Men are men and women are women.

There are MANY people who don't think so, anon.

>>10172644
So you have value and a person who killed himself doesn't? You are at a 12 year olds level. Do you stop having value when you die? What if the human species gets wiped out were is the value then? To refute Nihilism your life should have meaning forever.

>>10172644
>a priori
>deductive logic
Lmao

Apart from intensity which isn't even really measurable , there really isn't. Please provide a difference you think there is so I can laugh at you more

I don't know what else to tell you, you value pussy in itself because of biologicaly determined instincts. It's as simple as that, and there is no ability to dance around this with semantics , all you are doing is ad hominem over and over and over again that shows nothing but extreme egocentric tendencies

Also, I'm pretty sure you don't know egocentric and ad hominem mean because your sentence makes no sense when you use them. Embarrassing.

>>10172623
>Yet this all misses the point that instinctual urges have no bearing on value in a philosophical sense, and saying otherwise would be a peak naturalistic fallacy
Oh yes because noticing modality in human behavior is inherently a naturalistic fallacy.

>>10172651
Gender isn't clearcut tbqh, people have different physiological constitutions even after genetics so rough, shitty groups like men and women, though useful, aren't the be all and end all.

>>10161893
When I had to pick the pieces of my life up and get in the fight.
Everything is at its core still meaningless, but I have a sense of ethical determination.

>>10172628
law of non contradiction and excluded middle are just restatements of (and reducible down to) the law of identity. they're all tautologies

>>10172658
Survival isn't clearcut tbqh, people have different psychological constitutions ever after genetics so mentally ill people kill themselves or hurt themselves without a thought.

>>10172633
no way dude i totally want to live

>>10172665
Survival isn't really in the same vein as gender, but apart from that I'd agree. What now?

>>10172654
>So you have value and a person who killed himself doesn't?
Except people who kill themselves still fear death and value life. Someone doesn't understand how suicide works lol>>10172655
>Apart from intensity which isn't even really measurable , there really isn't.
>He doesn't even know about genetics, epigenetics, Pavlov, Freud, any kind of models of human behavior or psychology
There are whole fields dedicated to the subject
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct

Top freaking kek, imagine being so absoutrly invested in the concept of there being no Biological imperatives that affect human behavior on such a scale that you're willing to engage in THIS amount of cognitive dissonance.

I challenge you again, if it doesn't matter then kill yourself based on my dare

>>10172666
Then guess what you value?

>>10172668
Uhh...That there is no intrinsic to life.

>>10172658
Just because people stray from the perfect male or female form doesn't mean they don't exist. Is every freckle and birthmark grounds for a new category of identity? But God forbid we admit that intersexuality is abnormal, instead of just throwing out the entire gender spectrum like a Shulamith Firestone

>>10172670
>Except people who kill themselves still fear death and value life.
Not all do. Also you didn't answer my other questions.
>Do you stop having value when you die?
>What if the human species gets wiped out were is the value then?
>To refute Nihilism your life should have meaning forever.

>>10172674
>Not all do
No, all do and this should answer all of the the other questions. Here is something to ask though, what is "value" in any context?

>>10172671
i was going to say that i just have an irrational compulsion to stay alive, from which my values can't be inferred, because instincts are by definition absurd and irrational as i'm not the author of my mind, but then i changed my mind because value honesty, which is a conscious choice of mine repress certain instincts and cultivate others which is why it counts as a value. so instead i'm not going to say anything

>>10172682
>this should answer all the other questions
It doesn't Answer the questions
.>Do you stop having value when you die?
>What if the human species gets wiped out were is the value then?
>To refute Nihilism your life should have meaning forever.
>what is "value" in any context?
Not real.

>>10172673
>perfect male or female
Nice presuppositions

>is every freckle and birthmark grounds for a new category of identity
Yes, to be as accurate as possible. And we do actually create new identities for people with different freckles, birthmarks, etc., when we give them names - names and individuals are the most true classifications, everything else is shit

>>10172672
I'm not that retard, I'm the based pusiposter

>>10172670
>he actually thinks namedropping psychologists and randomly spouting broad genetic terms and psychological terms serves to show that intensity of an instinct is actually measurable

I challenge you again, show the impulsr for procreation is an element of the impulse for self preservation, rather than the other way around

>>10172683
There is nothing irrational about modality and biological imperatives, it's an imperative you're following ffs.
>Rationality is decided by originality
No, otherwise the most rational form of music would be white noise randomly edited
>I value honesty
>I think that's a conscious choice
Hmm...

>>10172687
>It doesn't Answer the questions
Except it should, you should be smart enough to understand that by having a inherent and inbuilt biological imperative that values life
>If we stop existing we can't value life , but we still objectively do while we exist
>Because your life does have meaning forever

>Not real
Except it is, because it's inherent behavior to place value on things.

>>10172688
>I challenge you again, show the impulsr for procreation is an element of the impulse for self preservation, rather than the other way around
What is the point of pro-creation? To pass on your what of yourself, exactly? To create what, support who? Why does the drive ultimately exist?

>>10172697
>Your life stops having value when you die.
There we have it folks, Finally you are a Nihilist. took long enough. You aren't quite there though.
You life never had meaning to begin with. Finally we are done.

>>10172702
To pass on your genes. The drive exists because genes that don't promote their own propagation won't propagate so only genes that promote their own propagation will exist with time

>place value on things.
>place
You are placing value. It didn't have value at the start.
Another major flaw in your thinking. You are trying to create value.

>>10172689
>There is nothing irrational about modality and biological imperatives
it's not based on reason so it's just as irrational as my heart beating in response to nerves being stimulated.

>>I think that's a conscious choice
it's in accord with my will so unless it's a huge coincidence and i just happen to will things that independently happen, it is my conscious choice. maybe one day i'll get addicted to heroine and all will have an instinctual craving for the good stuff but i wouldn't count it as something i value because it out be out of accord with my will.

>>10172704
Except still has meaning when you live, therefore life has inherent meaning. I'd this is the final boss of nihilism - really stupid semantics that says because death exists life had no meaning - then I'm suprised anyone can believe in it.

That's possibly the most retarded thing i've ever heard.

>>10172715
wew there are many typos in my post but i count on the bright minds of /lit/ to be able to interpret my post by starting with the set of all possible ways my post was meant to be written and slowly ruling out possibilities that are incompatible with what i wrote so far until only one is left

>>10172706
Which creates inherent behavior in the possesors of those genes meant to continue their legacy, or in other words to continue themselves on a meta level

>>10172715
>Comparing reflexes to instincts
You didn't even read the wiki link I gave you, did you?
>Addiction is an instinct
Wrong, it's an extremely intense habit and disease of the mind thay creates physical dependence over time. Remember when I name dropped Pavlov? There is a difference between habits and instincts

>>10172727
>You didn't even read the wiki link I gave you, did you?
you gave the link to the other guy so i have an excuse

>>Addiction is an instinct
seems irrelevant whether it's an instinct or not, dare i say special pleading? we can create as many ontological categories for thoughts and feels as we like, but in the end values were (loosely) defined here (not by me) as being things that you value, and given that "i value" has the word "i" in it, i find the notion that i can value things without my consent to be somewhat funny. i may even go as far as to say it goes against my philosophical intuitions about the word value!!!

>>10172688
>Nice presuppositions
Considering that gender and biological sex correlate in almost all cases, I would say it is a fair supposition to make. The except to the rule does not break the rule.

>>10172734
>seems irrelevant whether it's an instinct or not, dare i say special pleading?
Not really, instincts are inherent, habits form through contanct with the environment and can be overridden

T. Former alcoholic

>Semantics about consent over value
Doesn't change the fact that you are born with inherent imperatives.

>>10172722
But the carriers of the genes are just that, being simply fleshy, ultimately irrelevant
vehicles

>>10172736
>people indoctrinated withing a framework of gender say their gender is what they think it should be and this means it's a fair supposition

>>10172743
>instincts are inherent, habits form through contanct with the environment and can be overridden
i don't see how it matters. for purposes of being unable to change them they're all the same to me.
t. current addict

>>Semantics about consent over value
rude. do you disagree with my suspicion that values require an element of deliberation in order to count as values? do you want to substitute the "things i value" definition we have got going?

we are surely born will lots of irresistible compulsions, and it certainly feels very urgent to abide by them, i'm not sure if i would call them imperatives as that half implies a moral ought, but i definitely don't think that "i" necessarily value things that i have an instinctual or habitual craving for. if i was born addicted i would equally dislike it even if my genes had something to do with it.

>>10172748
>But the carriers of the genes are just that, being simply fleshy, ultimately irrelevant vehicles
Except it's not irrelevant because you were literally born with the imperative to breed and flourish , its how our dopamine system is set up, and is why it even exists.

>>10172751
>i don't see how it matters. for purposes of being unable to change them they're all the same to me.
>t. current addict
Except you can. It just sucks ass trying to do it because of how hard a positive association you've built up by abusing your dopamine system for so long, which in itself can be called akin to perdition
>Due values need to be consiously decided
Some yes, others no. Most values we create fundementally support or surround ones that are already imperative to us in some manner, but at the same time I'm not a universalist when it comes to ethics

>If I was born addicted
You literally can't by definition

>>10167135
good post.

>>10172748
>the male/female dichotomy is wrong because an awareness of it is instilled via indoctrination

ITT: Nihilism is wrong because it hurts my gentle sensibilities and I've chosen an answer of virtue for what was a question of truth

>>10172766
can you explain in what sense of the word "value" are you speaking when you say that an involuntary reaction is being "valued by" or is "a value of" a person? i don't mean to make an appeal to dictionaries, but i for instinctual reactions of habitual tendencies that are out of accord with my will, i will not say that i value them in the sense of regarding them highly, thinking they have worth, merit, or usefulness, and so on.

>You literally can't by definition
what if someone was miraculously born with the exact same mental conditions as an ordinary addict, identical in every way except that they didn't acquire the addiction by indulging in their desires.

>>10167135
Do you trust the pull of history? Do you trust that it's necessarily heading in a good direction? I would think that the meaning of life would be above and beyond the historical forces.

>>10172759
>the carriers aren't irrelevant to the genes because the carriers are born with the imperative to spread the genes
Hmm

>>10172770
An awareness of it will obviously impact the answer people give, making the dichotomy a self fulfilling prophecy that doesn't exist by virtue of it having any bearing on pre-awareness reality, but by virtue of changing reality so people accede to it

>>10172779
>that doesn't exist by virtue of it having any bearing on pre-awareness reality

But how did it emerge in the first place, if not as a practical, observable reality? It's true that intersexuality and transgenderism are not clearly observable, and that some non-Western cultures have developed third-genders. But culture aside, the biological fact remains, there is only men and women. Anything that diverges from that literally constitutes an abnormality.

>>10172771
>Nihilism has nothing to do with anything but epistemology
Wew

>>10172779
>Not realizing that the carriers literally are the genes

>>10172796
What other interpretation of it is even worth discussing friendo

>>10172798
>not realising that the cars literally are the car drivers

>>10172794
>how did this social construct emerge
Probably because it's simplistic, generally superficial and reductionist, but useful, and hunter gatherers had small enough populations and high enough infant mortality rates they can ignore abnormalities

>the biological fact remains, there is only men and women.
>except these entities which are neither men nor women, but there are ONLY men and women
Imagine creating this self refuting a definition

>>10172774
Value is simply worth, the lense which we decide value comes from certain innate imperatives born into us. These innate imperatives are not the same as habits, as habits are formed in order to attempt to fulfill the imperatives that are born into us.
>What is someone is born with a habit
Again, they can't by definition , although that is a bit semantical as some people will state that habits can be innate when habits are defined as all observable modes of behavior regardless of how they occur (innately or through experience)

>>10172807
>Not realizing that comparing biology to a biological entitiy operating a tool is a stupid comparison
You are made up of what? What provides the basis of your life? What is expressed that determines how cells are organized all throughout you?

>>10172809
Really stupid.

>>10172812
The carriers are tools themselves, that's the point retard

I'm made of subatomic particles. They provide th basis of my life. My cellular organisation depends on cellular position, internal environment, external environment and my genes

>>10172809
what would you say about people that have ideas about how and why some things have value that don't come from innate imperatives? would it be correct to say that they value different things?

>>10172801
is it true to say that the cause of nihilism is a shift in view about the nature of meaning, which occurs when someone tries to account for (and justify their beliefs about) the value of things they revere, but is unable to ultimately ground them in a foundational source of value?

>>10172823
I'd doubt it. A person is far more likely to entertain the values of others as subjective than their own. I would think it'd be a combination of such perspectives that lead to nihilism.

>>10172836
i don't understand what you mean

>>10172557
3edgy5me

>>10163729
Define 'life' and 'self-generated action'. Protip: it's tricky.

>>10173311
Not edgy at all, it's literally what jesus orchestrates for himself. It's the most divine thing he ever did, pleb. Read the bible

>>10173578
>Read the Bible
>Fell for the Judeo-Christian Meme

Divine Gestures predate the Kike on a Stick

>>10173576
No it isn't
Man's Conceptual faculty

>>10173832
which quickly breaks down when scrutinized.

>>10173848
Into what?

>>10173890
life: has DNA, for edge case of e.g. viruses

self-generated action (whatever the fuck that means): self is not homogeneous, agency is determined by a complex.

>>10173896
So components? And?

>Agency is determined by a complex
Yeah for the subconscious mind. We also have conciousness mind.

Presumably you think these points indictment my original point you replied to? Do tell. Or are you just talking out of your ass?

>>10173908
don't forget unconscious. I don't have access to those processes. My sense of self is an incomplete picture. I'm merely along for the ride.

btw, drop the high-school debate sense of urgency. It's incredibly obnoxious.