atavistic:
a: recurrence in an organism of a trait or character typical of an ancestral form and usually due to genetic recombination
b: recurrence of or reversion to a past style, manner, outlook, approach, or activity
That being the case then, on the contrary, my own nihilism is quite the opposite of that. It is derived from how I have come to think about the world around me given that no one has yet to convince me [of late] that a God, the God, their God does in fact exist.
Human interaction in a No God world is, in my view, reasonably consistent with the components I have chosen – given some measure of human autonomy – when confronting things like peace on earth: identity, value judgments, political power. Then my argument above kicks in. Which you basically ignore.
Then why this: “Have you a cure for suffering that can top Buddhism?”
To which I responded. To which you then chose not to respond.
To talk about God – you, me and others here – is, in my view, to invoke the manner in which I construe the meaning of dasein. And that is deemed to be negative by the objectivists [God or No God] who do not wish to explore the extent to which what they do talk about is more an existential contraption than the embodiment of the real me – possessing a soul – in sync with the right way to talk about God.
In other words, when some speak of offering positive thoughts here, what they are really after are thoughts that reinforce and then sustain the comfort and consolation that their own view of God [in relationship to peace on earth] provide them. And, among friends or in church or around the dinner table, that is to be expected. But this is a philosophy venue.
Here, we’re expected to go a little deeper.