Do You Know an Argument Against Nihilism?

[NeuralMonk]

Yes, the Logos.

Do you find posting on the internet to be stifling since you cant use your hands?

Not really, because I have to type. I find though when speaking with people that my fingers move over the letters of the words I say when I speak though.

However, when on video with Skype, I do have to zoom out to make sure my hand expressions are heard.

It is true that if I sit on my hands, my mouth does not move.

 

[John_Lazarus]

Wow, tough crowd.

I have my truth.
You have your truth.
God is THE truth.

Everyday, I learn HIS truth and admit I am wrong. How about you?

Yes. Everyday, I learn HIS truth and admit you are wrong. too.

Sorry, I could NOT resist that straight line…

 

[dmar198]

That dafy-nition is not accurate. Correctly defined Nihilism is the belief that all religions are a form of paganism

I think I must be misunderstanding you, because that definition of nihilism seems to make the task of disproving it much easier. If you just want to prove that not all religions are pagan, you could simply name a religion that doesn’t fit the definition of paganism, right? Webster defines paganism as “a religion that has many gods or goddesses, considers the earth holy, and does not have a central authority.” Abrahamic religions don’t have many gods or goddesses, therefore not all religions are a form of paganism. What am I missing?

and exist for the purpose of creating truth statements to coalesce power from the masses (Luther, Freud, Darwin, Marx progression).

To me, that definition makes nihilism sound like a kind of conspiracy theory.

If I’m understanding you correctly, they would claim Christianity exists to serve people’s lust for power, despite its statements like “My kingdom is not of this world.” I’m imagining a kind of “no true scotsman” scenario – the Christian points out that Christianity forbids us to lust for power, and the nihilist replies that that’s only a cover, the real purpose is to serve our lust for power. Is that what you mean by nihilism? Because I think by comparing this version of nihilism to the no true scotsman fallacy, it is easy to prove it foolish. Since all we’re doing is trying to come up with arguments against nihilism, I think that might be an effective one, unless I’m missing something. What do you think?

It is not that life is meaningless, it is that anything short of super human life is pointless.

That doesn’t make sense to me, do they think additional power would change life’s intrinsic value? How would the nihilist justify what seems like a non-sequiter?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

You stated that for me to clarify a vast body of thought into a smaller package for those asking is somehow going to cause me to be responsible for offshoots of nihilism being formed. I have no manifesto but the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Yet you are not even going to make the case that you’re not just giving your take. And really, I’m not sure you’re going to easily convince me that this isn’t just your understanding of nihilism given that I’ve encountered actual, suicidal nihilists. After an experience like that, any attempt to say theirs isn’t nihilism smells too much like a True Scotsman fallacy.

Wow, you provide interesting insight into your thought processes here. If all you are getting is my view on a topic, you are not doing your duty to these concepts.

My duty? I have no obligation to understand something that’s not properly explained or defended. Why should I believe in a certain understanding of nihilism when my own, raw experience makes for stronger cement impressed upon my mind?

As for Marxism and its offshoots, these didn’t occur because someone summarized Marx. These occurred because people see the inherent flaw in the argument, and think they are smart enough to improve upon it. No where here am I trying to improve on the concept or create a new body of work. Your logic is flawed as to my intent, response and outcome. Please study these things before you make statements which are accusatory in nature.

Sorry but:



You think those who didn’t think these improvisations were the result of their own summarized understanding of Marx? Look at Protestants and Sola Scriptura. They thought themselves better suited to analyze Scripture and came up with anti-Catholic conclusions.

Summarizing in of itself exposes you to the dangers of seeing apparent flaws and therefore, subconsciously prompting you to improve upon them (whether or not they actually, objectively exist).

Take the case of nihilism you’re making right here: You say it’s not about life having no meaning. Here you actually correct what you think is a bad summarization of what nihilism is. Unfortunately, I can just turn that around. Others here have pointed out why your positive characterization is suspect.

I am sure you have. Depression occurs regardless of belief. I had a close Catholic friend who committed suicide almost one year ago.

Sorry but again:

No matter how much you slice the logical pie, nihilism (as it is popularly understood by your opposing correspondents here) is more fertile ground for depressing, suicidal thoughts than Catholicism. I can easily make the case that what you’re calling nihilism, other philosophers and thinking heads classify as hedonism or objectivism.

You miss my point, I was not calling nihilism fake. It is a real philosophy. I am calling those who use Google or Wiki only fake. They are not able to dialog on the real issues, just a superficial understanding.

And who are you to say theirs is superficial? Do I have to cite a contemporary philosopher just to prove you wrong? Would you like me to phone those depressed nihilists I told you about and ask them the number of influencers they’ve cited to me that justified their dramatic take on human existence?

 

[RGCheek]

Not really, because I have to type. I find though when speaking with people that my fingers move over the letters of the words I say when I speak though.

However, when on video with Skype, I do have to zoom out to make sure my hand expressions are heard.

It is true that if I sit on my hands, my mouth does not move.

Lol, I catch myself spelling words phonetically as I talk to myself as I type, lolol.

 

[NeuralMonk]

Yes. Everyday, I learn HIS truth and admit you are wrong. too.
Sorry, I could NOT resist that straight line…

 

[PoliSciProf]

For some compelling reading on this question, consider Nihilism by the world class metaphysician Stanley Rosen. To summarize: the issue is: Is Reason Reasonable? The answer is Yes.

 

[John_Martin]

That dafy-nition is not accurate. Correctly defined Nihilism is the belief that all religions are a form of paganism and exist for the purpose of creating truth statements to coalesce power from the masses (Luther, Freud, Darwin, Marx progression). Since it is mankind who defined god, mankind can also kill god. Since the very existence of god is the power of mankind, it is man who is god but doesn’t understand this. Anything short of perfecting mankind towards the evolutionary end, the super man, is pointless. Once the super human emerges, they will define ultimate truth to form the power structure needed to purge humanity (read death camps). Super Humanity will be the new race of gods, starting the cycle over. The current form of this is those seeking the singularity.

It is not that life is meaningless, it is that anything short of super human life is pointless.

A true nihilist hopes you believe that way, because if you do give up, what they consider, your sub-human belief, their job to rid the world of imperfection will be easier. You will have already understood the theory.

A solipsist cannot state for certain, that only they exist and everything else is a psychotic delusion. All they can state is willful ignorance. To state for certain, one must have a view outside the psychosis which breaks the theory (logically). However, even if true, whose dream is it? If it is my dream, an entity so powerful to create such a vast creation must be god, and powerful enough to not allow the end the dream (death). Therefore, by definition, there is a god, and the theory is false, because if I truly am in control, everything is all my fault now. What a sick bastard I am for allowing all this pain and suffering.

That being said…
None of these actually deal with one person. Jesus Christ.

Jesus stated he was God, to prove it He rose from the dead and left martyrs to prove it. Jesus stated that HE was the way, the truth and the life. Jesus made the ultimate truth statement. Because of that, the pagans, and the religious both conspired to kill him.

Nihilism has issues because Jesus being God means that all other truth statements are false, paganism is false. Mankind did kill God, but Jesus the author of life could not remain dead because the author of life could not exist life-less. Jesus was the super man, and they are correct, any other pursuit but Him is false.

Solipsist had a dream that all mankind needed salvation. The solipsist created a God, in the image of a God they could not know. Jesus walks into that dream, and awakens the sleeper. Arrise sleeper, for your salvation has come. Come awake and live.

Alas, neither group wants to tackle Jesus because they know, He assails their logic. He is the name above all names, the logic beyond all logic and the King of all kings.

mmmmmmmmmmm… I enjoyed reading that. Thank you.

 

[BrassAnkles]

What are some good arguments that refute nihilism or show it’s contradictory.

Tell a nihilist that you will consider his belief if he can stop talking about right and wrong.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

What are some good arguments that refute nihilism or show it’s contradictory.

You know it is said that there are no atheists in foxholes. Well, I think there are no Nihilists in rape centers. It seems that once one experiences injustice on a deep level, Nihilism loses all logical bearing. Navel Gazing is in fact a luxury of the privileged. It is also their crutch.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Everyday, I learn HIS truth and admit I am wrong. How about you?

No, once you accept the Truth. There is no need to be wrong every single day afterward.

 

[NeuralMonk]

You know it is said that there are no atheists in foxholes. Well, I think there are no Nihilists in rape centers. It seems that once one experiences injustice on a deep level, Nihilism loses all logical bearing. Navel Gazing is in fact a luxury of the privileged. It is also their crutch.

I agree to a point.
It is not logical bearing but philosophical application. Nihilism actually justifies this injustice as a continuation of Darwinian philosophy. It is man who stands outside nature in their world. Nihilism doesn’t reject injustice, it embraces it as a part of the process to produce the super human.

To be honest, most Christians cannot explain injustice and God’s role properly though either.

For those needing it, I will help.

God is so good, so fantastically good, beyond all good that is good, that when evil is in God’s hands, evil MUST DO good. Note, I didn’t say evil IS good, because that would be contradictory, I said evil must DO good, which is a progression.

To prove that point God sent his only begotten Son, to his created children. We mocked Him, we rejected Him, we betrayed Him with a kiss of all things. We abused him, we tortured Him, we falsely accused Him, we beat Him. Then, we took this innocent man, and did the largest injustice of all, we killed an innocent man.

God took all that injustice, all that evil and is made it be the salvation of the world. God took the ultimate injustice, and that injustice MUST DO the ultimate good.

The real trick is letting go of my right to justice, and putting it in God’s hands. In response, St. Paul states, “You MUST forgive.”

On the point of naval-gazing, I only practice that long enough to get the lint out of the “button”

 

[NeuralMonk]

No, once you accept the Truth. There is no need to be wrong every single day afterward.

It would be dishonest for me to say I know God’s truth. It is not a matter of acceptance, but a matter of knowledge.

“I confess to Almighty God…” It is my most grievous fault.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It would be dishonest for me to say I know God’s truth. It is not a matter of acceptance, but a matter of knowledge.

“I confess to Almighty God…” It is my most grievous fault.

I find God’s Truth quite easy to know. It has been revealed has it not? Not following it is another matter. But knowing it is not really that hard. And once you know it, you don’t really un know it. But even if the argument was made that when one sins they deny the Truth I would still say that as Christians we are called to know the Truth, act on it, and live in a state of Grace. We are not all sinners all the time. Once forgiven, we are as clean as a newly baptized baby.

 

[NeuralMonk]

I find God’s Truth quite easy to know. It has been revealed has it not? Not following it is another matter. But knowing it is not really that hard. And once you know it, you don’t really un know it. But even if the argument was made that when one sins they deny the Truth I would still say that as Christians we are called to know the Truth, act on it, and live in a state of Grace. We are not all sinners all the time. Once forgiven, we are as clean as a newly baptized baby.

If truth were so easy, we wouldn’t need synods and councils.

It has been revealed in Jesus, but that is a relationship, always fluid. Both spouses and religious will understand that statement.

You didn’t disprove the argument about denying the truth, but you are correct we are called to know it and about reconciliation.

Even Pope Francis has a confessor.

However, these stray from the point. The point is that you nor I have God’s infinite truth in the realm of knowledge. We may have Him but we don’t have it. To say we do have it makes us a liar.

If I am wrong (which occurs often), and you do have infinite truth, can you answer this question: Why, when I am working on my car, and a socket falls, it always lands at the hardest place to reach? I am thinking if I understand that, other matters of faith will be easier.

One of the most freeing things to say is, “I don’t know.” Not like my kids when I ask them, “What happened to your hair?” Not that kind of “I don’t know” but a real honest confession.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

If truth were so easy, we wouldn’t need synods and councils.

It has been revealed in Jesus, but that is a relationship, always fluid. Both spouses and religious will understand that statement.

You didn’t disprove the argument about denying the truth, but you are correct we are called to know it and about reconciliation.

Even Pope Francis has a confessor.

However, these stray from the point. The point is that you nor I have God’s infinite truth in the realm of knowledge. We may have Him but we don’t have it. To say we do have it makes us a liar.

If I am wrong (which occurs often), and you do have infinite truth, can you answer this question: Why, when I am working on my car, and a socket falls, it always lands at the hardest place to reach? I am thinking if I understand that, other matters of faith will be easier.

One of the most freeing things to say is, “I don’t know.” Not like my kids when I ask them, “What happened to your hair?” Not that kind of “I don’t know” but a real honest confession.

I can see that this is going nowhere.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I can see that this is going nowhere.

Wow, talk about irony. A meaningless thread on nihilism.

(Look for the humor. It’s there.)

 

[NeuralMonk]

Wow, talk about irony. A meaningless thread on nihilism.

(Look for the humor. It’s there.)

Glad you said it. Wouldn’t come well from me.

 

[John_Martin]

If truth were so easy, we wouldn’t need synods and councils.

It has been revealed in Jesus, but that is a relationship, always fluid. Both spouses and religious will understand that statement.

You didn’t disprove the argument about denying the truth, but you are correct we are called to know it and about reconciliation.

Even Pope Francis has a confessor.

However, these stray from the point. The point is that you nor I have God’s infinite truth in the realm of knowledge. We may have Him but we don’t have it. To say we do have it makes us a liar.

If I am wrong (which occurs often), and you do have infinite truth, can you answer this question: Why, when I am working on my car, and a socket falls, it always lands at the hardest place to reach? I am thinking if I understand that, other matters of faith will be easier.

One of the most freeing things to say is, “I don’t know.” Not like my kids when I ask them, “What happened to your hair?” Not that kind of “I don’t know” but a real honest confession.

Not only sockets, but the special screw needed to fasten the headlight to the fender falling under the battery, then down to a second level of sheet metal, but not all the way through to the ground.

As for irony, I think very few have read the content to perceive irony or the absence of it, and are picking lint.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Wow, talk about irony. A meaningless thread on nihilism.

(Look for the humor. It’s there.)

That was pretty funny!