Can you show me something that does not have meaning?
a universe with no perspective to witness it has no meaning
That is an intellection that has meaning. You cannot show me a universe that has no perspective.
the ‘being’ of men
Too easy.
NEXT…
somebody kindly move this thread to the mundane babble!
How bout this… the concepts we’ve yet to discover. For instance there was a time when the words ‘quantum physics’ had no meaning. It would be like me saying ‘pholfacadas’ to you guys now. Perhaps in a few years that ‘word’ will be given meaning. But right now it is meaningless beyond the letters that comprise that ambiguous sound.
Obviously those words have meaning, Rami. Kindly move yourself to mundane babble or offer more of a challenge.
Old_Gobbo,
Good, however, “pholfacadas” now means (beyond the meaning of the letters that comprise it) a word that may mean something in the future, or as you have defined it “a concept we’ve yet to discover.”
You’re right… but my point was more along the lines of the words I haven’t uttered or thought about.
then again… I suppose what I’m talking about would exist on a timeline, which is a concept.
I’m not sure praxis… but i don’t think that nihilism is based so much on ‘meaninglessness’ but more the abandonment of values, they don’t buy into anything… at all. Nothing can be known or communicated. Keep in mind this is not the same as seeings things as meaningless, more just the acceptance that we’ll never know these true meanings. Except for maybe an urge to destory, which is indicative of those who would want to ‘deconstruct’ themselves into a nihilistic framwork. I’m nto sure though… I have to admit I’m not that well versed in nihilism
Seek the answer in the nearest mirror, Praxis.
Exactly, you can’t abandon your values. It’s an fallacy to think you can, therefore, nihilism is false.
This is a false intellection because things have value. How can any particular value be false?
I take it this is too much for you and your merely being modest, Phaedrus, at least your honest.
Either my response is too complex for you or too simple. Whichever one, I meant no offense. You ask “can you show me something that does not have meaning?” I say you could just as easily have it backwards- can you show me one thing that does? Depending upon your particular philosophy, you have no inherent meaning. Are you the very image of a bored God? The result of some (un?)happy accident? And does it matter? Perhaps a meaning you assign for yourself is as valid as one you’re given by others or read from some book.
Modest or not, the answer was sincere. Make of it what you will.
-P-
Yeah but your second statement is predicated on the truth of your first one. How can you prove that ‘value’ is a uniform concept, perhaps value is derived from those who view/experience it. If you perceive things as having no value, then for you, they have no value. If you suscribe closer to realism then things take on different values. I think this is why Nihilism is so convienient in some ways. Like I said I haven’t read alot about it, but you can’t just say 'it’s a fallacy to think you can’ and have that be your argument.
Old_Gobbo,
Granted I’m not presenting my argument well, and I thank you for your patience, this goes to Phaedrus as well.
I submit that to perceive something is, at least in part, to assign it a value. I’ll just ask you: can you perceive something and think about it coherently/functionally without assigning it a value?
“No value” is a value, is it not?
Phaedrus,
Yes, every word in this response has meaning. The best part about the example of these words is that we both agree on their meaning enough to have functional communication, though perhaps not optimum communication.
K I’m really baked right now so you might have to wait for a better answer, but think of it this way
What if your belief structure is such that your act of ‘assigning’ values renders all values pretty much obsolete because you pass over every instance with moral indifference. For example, I don’t give 2 shits about the 34,005th peice of sand that is somewhere in pile I’m holding in my hand. For me it has no value because it’s almost non-existent.
This isn’t like math where it’s a 0 or a 1… it’s much more subjective. In this case, ‘almost no value’ and no value are close enough.
That won’t get us anywhere, Praxis. I say not a word has meaning, then you say every word has meaning, . That’s not argument, that’s simple contradiction. I paid my money for an argument. 
How about, “[your least favorite person on ILP] having sex”?
How about a futile death?
How about the sound of one hand clapping?
Actually, once something is shown as an example, it has a meaning in terms of the question it answers.
So, no, I cannot show you the meaningless as a particular.
No you didn’t.
I don’t know - are we talking about some intrinsic, universal kind of CAPITAL LETTERS meaning…? Because these ‘words’ are no more than a buch of 1’s an 0’s on a magnetic disk, any meaning they have is of the fleeting, temporal consensual type - words twist themselves frequently - bad to me is bad, bad to Michael Jackson is good…
Meanings, like everything else, depend on your POV, the time you occupy, the society you mix with. Nothing is carved in stone.