Opposite of Nihlism

The other extreme.

I can hardly fathom any philosophy or perspective that may come close. All that comes to mind is this gigantic orange sponge with enormous pores that the average human being can casually walk through. Sort of makes me nervous.

I don’t know a whole lot about Nihlism, but it seems very enslaving – in the same way its opposing perspective would be. Both perspectives save their owners from thinking, because the answer to all of life’s perennial questions are dealt with without resistance. It’s something or nothing.


[I tried searching for this, I hope this hasn’t been covered]

Oh please, elaborate! :slight_smile:

(the coping mechanism for nihlism)

There is no real opposite to nihilism, but blindly accepted, inherited religious beliefs serve the purpose rather well.


A giant sponge, you say? …Huh…

Any system of morals or values, or rather, the proposition that there are or can be morals or values - this is the opposite of Nihilism. Quite simple. I don’t see how Nihilism is enslaving - I’m sure any given Nihilist is capable of changing his or her mind. Its awfully lazy to depict a philosophical position that you disagree with as being necessarily enslaving. I’m not a Nihilist, but I do take offense to you saying that it saves its proponents from thinking/dealing with life’s perennial questions. Nihilism, like any enduring philosophical position, is the result of thought and contemplation.

A Standard Nihilist Argument:

P1 - Morality purports to be normative.
P2 - Normativity relies on objectivity.
P3 - If there is no objective fact of the matter about what is right and wrong, then morality is impossible. [P1, P2]
P4 - There is no objective fact of that matter about what is right and wrong.
C1 - Morality is impossible. [Hypothetical Syllogism: P3, P4]

All of the premises in the above argument have been debated throughly by ethical theorists, many of whom have thought them to be compelling. It is precisely for this reason that so much effort has been made to formulate an ethical theory that evades it. Some ethical theorists have gone as far as rejecting premises 1 and/or 2, which they had previously taken for granted. Others have attempted to show that there really is an objective fact of the matter about what is right and wrong, but it really hasn’t been the same since the death of god.

One reaction has been to bite an awfully large bullet and saw that morality isn’t prescriptive. That is to say, that a moral system can only be built by an individual, for himself, and that it does not attempt to prescribe behavior for others. This form of ‘‘morality’’ wouldn’t rely on normativity and objectivity in the same way as our classical conception of it. This may be the best solution, but it is an awfully significant reduction of Moralism, which proves the strength of Nihilism

I don’t recall writing that I disagreed with Nihilism.

Enslaving isn’t necessarily a negative thing, it’s just a describing word.
I used it to describe the rigidness of the philosophy; after you’ve planted yourself on Nihilism, everything else is sort of reduced to speculation. Of course Nihilism entails thinking about life’s perennial questions, but it’s only contemplation. Which is great, but enslaving still in the sense that one is no longer searching for answers because it’s already known they’ll never find a thing they want. It’s like walking to vending machine after consciously deciding to leave all of your change at your desk. Disabling. But hey, who needs chips.

Pandora: Sponges gleefully soak all liquids in without any bias of recognition. A sponge reminded me of a possible opposite to Nihilism because Nihilism enthusiastically rejects everything without bias while a sponge enthusiastically does the opposite.

I thought maybe a religious belief would make for a good opposite too, but a lot of religions are focused on the afterlife. The preference of an afterlife over present life is sort of nihilistic in a sense because it serves as an extreme form of skepticism, the denial of one’s initial life in this world as being anyone’s ‘real’ form of existence. Instead of a lack of objectivity holding certain religious believers back from finding truth or meaning in this world as with Nihilism, faith stands in for religious believers.

I think this only makes sense with regards to your point if you believe that faith in a religion sought after takes precedence over one that is inherited. I don’t think it does. Faith is faith, regardless of passivity

aesthetic- Nietzsche makes this same point. He claims that Christianity is a prime example of nihilism. I agree. That’s the problem with nihilism. It’s not really a school of thought - it’s a flavor. No one is a true nihilist. In fact, a better candidate for the opposite of nihilism - philosophy. or maybe “cogent thought”.