Our nihilistic age

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

It seems to me that we live in a nihilistic age…
and why is that Kropotkin?

Nihilism is the act of saying no…of act of believing
in the negative instead of the positive, the yes…
people who are process of becoming who they are,
are denied that right… those who are gay or trans,
they are being denied that possibility… that is nihilism…
our identity is being denied by those on the right…
Notice who is being swept up in the SS/ICE raids…
blacks, women, minorities, the young… this attack on
us is identity based… if you are the ‘‘wrong’’ identity,
you are clearly set apart, attacked, arrested…
this is nihilism… and if you support it, as many
here seem to support it, then you are
supporting nihilism… it is as simple as that…

to find out who you are, to become what is possible for us,
that is the opposite of Nihilism… BTW, there is no
word that is the opposite of Nihilism… this alone tells us
that we are in an age of nihilism…we have words such as
nihilism, malaise, despair, melancholy, angst… but
where are the positive words, where is the thing we should
be engaged with? How can we even be engaged with it,
if we don’t even have a word for something that is the opposite
of nihilism, or the opposite of malaise…

as a noun, Nihilism means: the refusal to believe…

while many here hold to beliefs, they are nihilistic beliefs…
a contradiction to be sure, but one that is clearly present
in modern day America… the belief that ‘‘true’’ Americans
must hold to certain beliefs… the belief in the greatness of
IQ45… a belief in America first… a belief that certain people,
based on identity, is not a ‘‘True’’ American… these beliefs
are nihilism… to separate out people based on identity,
that is nihilism…to force your own belief on others, that
too is nihilism… the idea that my ideas/beliefs
are superior to your values and beliefs, that is nihilism…
the current movement to bring religion back into schools,
but only Christianity, no other religion, that is nihilism…

We live in a nihilistic age because only certain identities
are acceptable, and only certain beliefs are acceptable…

I will bring out Atheism… as an example…
the act of being an atheist, is a positive one,
not a nihilistic one… for in rejecting god, I am
also accepting that human beings can and will
be the arbiters of morality…
but that act is not about accepting pedophilia or
murders… I have already posted about that…
for those acts disrupt and damage the state and
the society… it is violation of the principle of
the declaration of Independence…

‘‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men/human beings,
are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness’’

Of sexual predators and murderers, they violate the
principles of holding to ‘‘certain unalienable rights’’
and they violate the principle of ‘‘life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness’’ and the actions of both,
must be rejected…because of the harm it does,
both to the victim and to the state/society…
that our state/society is moving toward a resuming
capital punishment, is just another sign of our
nihilism…

In fact, I am hard pressed to give us some signs
of us moving away from nihilism… every step toward
a totalitarian state, a dictatorship, is just another
step toward nihilism… for its goal is to have power
in one or two hands… and that is, by definition,
nihilism because it removes choices and possibilities
from our hands into a central dictatorship… that
has no interest in our rights, values or our lives…
we are devalued within a dictatorship and that
devaluing, that is nihilism… the negation of
human beings and their values, that is nihilism…
and that is the primary agenda of radical right…
to devalue as many people as possible…
and that is large scale nihilism…
every single law against gays or trans people,
to deny them their value, that is nihilism…

Nietzsche was right, he believed that the coming age,
would be an age of nihilism… and given how corporations
and large scale political movements such as Nazism
and MAGA, are just another attempt to devalue,
dehumanize people… to turn them from ‘‘Du’’ into
‘‘es’’ other… that is the classic case of dehumanization…
to turn du into es…

and how do we escape this nightmare?

the first step, as always, is to recognize, to become
aware of, who we are and where are we going…

Kropotkin

2 Likes
2

as it is in essays, we have our thesis statement…

That the current world is one where nihilism is
the predominant belief, value and political system…

That is the problem… what are possible solutions?
for stating a problem without some suggestion of
a solution is simple complaining about it, nothing more…
I want to begin with finding a word that is the opposite
of nihilism…

some choices are Virtus, Meliora, potentia…
are some words that may fill this need of a word
that is the opposite of nihilism…

Meliora: is a Latin word meaning ‘‘better things’’
or ‘‘ever better’’… Ad Meliora: towards better things

So is it better to seek out nihilism or is it better to
seek out Meliora? I think that is an easy answer…
So, how does one create ‘‘better things’’
or how does on create a ''better future""
I can be pretty certain that dehumanizing people,
devaluing them isn’t the path to a ‘‘better future’’..
for that is nihilism… and we want to avoid nihilism
if we want to create better things/a better future…
The act of denying a certain group of people, their
identity, such as gays, trans, minorities, that is not
the path to a ‘‘better future’’

What path would be a path toward Meliora?
equal rights towards all, acceptance and tolerance
toward people, acceptance of the right people have
to become who they are…

In childhood, and all parents, however, badly try to
present the ideals that are socially acceptable…
those ideals, are ‘‘WOKE’’ ideals… I taught it to
my daughter and you taught it to your children…
that is what we do as parents… to teach children to
share, to show compassion, acceptance of who you are…
we begin teaching all children basic ideals of ‘‘WOKE’’
values… that is how we teach children…
we don’t teach greed, or hate, or violence, or
inequality… those values are not the values that
we think children should have, so, why don’t we
hold those values into adulthood? why is greed, a
value we don’t teach children, acceptable in adults?

Because somehow, we think that values we teach children,
are not acceptable in adults… but why? and how do values
such as hate and violence and greed, help us build
a ‘‘better future?’’ You cannot build a future on values
that are anti-human, anti-life… a future with negative values,
with MAGA values, is a not a sustainable future… it cannot
last or hold… one might believe as Yeats believes:

''Turning and turning in the widening gyre

the Falcon cannot hear the Falconer;

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

the blood dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all convictions, while the worst

are full of passionate intensity…

and in the words of the centre, are the
social and spiritual ethos that holds a
civilization together…

the center cannot hold because it is overwhelmed
by our nihilistic age… the values that led to two
world wars, that has led to constant warfare over
the last 126 years, that has led us to Nazi Germany
and its little brother, MAGA… comes from
its following Nihilism… it is easy to engage
in concentration camps and ICE, when
people and their values are denied, dehumanized,
devalued… it is easy, so very easy to create an
‘‘US VS THEM’’ system that has driven every
single dictatorship in the last 200 years…

a system that says yes, yes to Meliora, is a system
that can hold its center because those values are values
that are sustainable… values that dehumanize are values
that are not sustainable… values that are sustainable
are values like love, hope, acceptance, tolerance,
‘‘WOKE’’ values… the center can hold if, if we practice
and engage with values that are Ad Meliora…toward
better things…

So, what values do you hold and are they values
that help keep the centre holding, or are they values
that ‘‘the center cannot hold’’ with?

Kropotkin

1 Like
3

I believe I understand your position, but you have adopted an expansive definition of nihilism. Your central claim is that contemporary society, especially in America, exists in a nihilistic age where nihilism manifests as identity-based exclusion, authoritarian tendencies and dehumanisation. I can see how you frame this as a problem of beliefs that actively negate human value, and such dynamics seem to be present wherever discussion occurs today.

You argue that nihilism is not merely a “lack of belief”, but rather an active rejection of human potential and a denial of individuals’ rights to self-definition and flourishing. This certainly appears to be the case in cultural discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, racial minorities, women and young people, as well as in political forms such as restrictive policies and authoritarian governance.

I wrote a piece on my Substack entitled ‘One of Them’, in which I explored identity-based discrimination as a form of nihilism. The events you mention, such as SS/ICE raids, laws targeting certain groups and selective enforcement against ‘wrong’ identities, are indeed dramatically intensified versions of behaviour that I have witnessed throughout my life. I find your use of ‘Du’ (you, person) becoming ‘Es’ (it, object) to be a powerful expression of dehumanisation in everyday linguistic terms.

I would note that any belief can become nihilistic, not only white nationalist or ‘America First’ ideologies. Beliefs that claim superiority over others or restrict acceptable identities inherently carry a nihilistic dimension. The widespread and casual use of the word ‘treason’ in today’s America seems to reflect this mindset and signal a cultural decline.

I also understand your view of atheism as an affirmation of the human capacity for morality. However, it can also be a rejection of any moral framework, which makes it less clear-cut than your portrayal suggests. While I agree that immorality, whether or not linked to belief in deities, violates foundational societal principles, the relationship between godlessness and morality is complex.

I agree with you that support for capital punishment reflects a negation and devaluation of life, as do dictatorship, centralised power, limited choices and the erosion of citizens’ rights. Such patterns were evident in the twentieth century, though many have forgotten or never learned what led to those disasters. In recognising this, we must include the catastrophes of the Soviet and Chinese regimes, which are now, ironically, mimicked in style and intent by Trump.

Nietzsche conceived nihilism as the collapse of value systems and the absence of meaning, often following the decline of religious frameworks. I can also see why you argue that our age retains beliefs, but that these beliefs are ‘nihilistic’ because they negate dignity and possibility rather than generating meaning.

It is also clear why you identify with Kropotkin, the anarchist who advocated mutual aid and social cooperation as antidotes to hierarchical oppression. My own reading of history sees solidarity and collective empowerment repeatedly proposed and then opposed by those in power which is a dynamic that I associate with the story of Jesus and see as deeply ironic in our present era.

Having said that, I would caution against viewing this entirely in black-and-white terms, lest we risk adopting the same rigid mindset that we are trying to challenge.

1 Like
4

You don’t cancel out Peter.

It’s an impossibility.

You are a deluded psychotic by your own admission.

You need to exist to claim that you don’t exist.If you claim that you don’t exist then you are a liar who exists.

So give it a rest,your posts are boring…truth has moved on now.

You don’t make up the rules at all,you either abide by them or you don’t.

Clearly,in your case you don’t.

5

Thank you for your response Bob…
It’s nice to engage with someone in
philosophical terms… especially given
this is a philosophy site…

The reason I argue for nihilism being a negation/devaluation
of human beings is because if you think about Nihilism
in its traditional terms:

Nihilism: the belief that all values are baseless and
that nothing can be known or communicated…
A true Nihilist would believe in nothing, have no
loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps,
to destroy…

the fact of the matter is that there is no such thing
as a ‘‘true nihilist’’… for example, the Nihilist
who proclaims that the world is evil and corrupt,
still holds to a value, he still has a belief that he
is using to guide his thoughts and actions…
granted they are negative beliefs, but they
are beliefs, he holds and act on… the exact same
way you hold onto and act upon beliefs…

We are confused as to what nihilism is and
who is actually a nihilist… there are no such
thing as a ‘‘true nihilist’’ one without beliefs or
values… that person doesn’t exist, nor has a
‘‘true nihilist’’ ever existed…

I am trying to bring the term nihilism back into being
and engaged with the reality on the ground…

Kropotkin

6

let us flesh this out some more…

one of the classic people accused of being a nihilist is
Max Stirner… and yet, he still held beliefs and acted
upon those beliefs… the opposed many isms,
as seeing them as unacceptable authority over the
individual… Opposing an ism is, by itself, is not
nihilism… and even Stirner still held to the idea
that the ego existed… and by holding that one thought,
he showed himself not to be a ‘‘true nihilist’’…
BTW, Stirner was anti-capitalist and pro-labor…
hardly nihilistic beliefs as millions including me,
hold to that position…

There has not been and nor has there never been, a ‘‘true nihilist’’…

Kropotkin

7

So, part of nihilism is the act of devaluing…
So, which act or actions is closer to devaluing
people? Laws against gays and trans people or
laws protecting people’s right to be who they are?

Clearly, laws devaluing people is closer to
nihilism… but it is not an absolute thing,
this nihilism…we can, based on our own
beliefs and values, declare anyone who opposes
these set of values and beliefs, to be a nihilist…
I say America is not the greatest country on earth,
and someone, somewhere will call me a nihilist…
Because I don’t hold to their belief…
given this, we have to be careful who we declare
to be nihilists, and why they have this designation,
and not another… we toss about words without
giving any thought as to their meaning or their
place within that discussion… I too could become
more mindful of the words I use and to their meaning…

Kropotkin

8

People equate power with truth.

Undermining the scriptures makes every subsequent lie possible.

First, the question whether certain passages are really inspired, then suggest some parts are cultural, not universal, next claim translations are unreliable and finally make personal interpretation more authoritative than the text itself.

Each step erodes confidence in Scripture.

Open minded theology that makes everything relative.

Today parts of Scripture are myth, when believers trust scholars more than Scripture. The bible is treated as ancient literature rather than divine revelation when scholars’ opinions outweigh prophetic authority.

This is the current movement, not only to bring back into schools, but to all of us, those that do not accept this open minded theology will suffer the consequences.

No need to worry Pete, for the time being……

9

At the moment we have atheists who exist, because they need to exist to claim that they don’t exist claiming that everything and everyone is a misrepresentation of reality (an illusion).The world is a mental health asylum presently run by some of its psychotic inmates.

Atheists need a doctor.

It’s binary data software which computes that it doesn’t possess life.

It doesn’t.

Binary software only exists.

The individual interprets varying frequency electromagnetic binary energy waves emitted from vibrating matter so the individual isn’t vibrating matter or the energy waves emitted from it.

Atheistic and Theistic scientists know this already so why are they spouting so much laughable scientific nonsense?

Attractive and Repulsive electromagnetic force ABSOLUTES!!! which do not cancel out are not related to good and evil.

Attractive/Repulsive=Attractive/Repulsive

Balance…..Stillness.

MAINSTREAM SCIENCE IS FOUNDED UPON AN ATHEISTIC STARTING PHILOSOPHY WHICH IS BIASED AND DOES NOT EXPLAIN REALITY SCIENCE!!!

Mainstream atheistic +=- and -=+ starting philosophy science is absolute BS.

10

It is true that what is accepted as “truth” in any given society or context is heavily influenced or distorted by those who hold power, making truth a social construct linked to power dynamics, but that doesn’t make it an absolute or objective fact.

That is why, on a practical level, speaking truth to power is recognised as a courageous and risky act. Those who challenge the official or powerful narratives expose themselves to dangers but also potentially shift what is accepted as truth, illustrating the tension between power and truth in social interactions.

The case of Galileo Galilei is a famous example of how power and truth can conflict. In the 17th century, Galileo was condemned by the Catholic Church and forced to retract his support for the heliocentric theory, which contradicted the Church’s teachings at the time. He was deemed “vehemently suspect of heresy”, sentenced to house arrest and banned from publishing his works. Nevertheless, his scientific theories were later validated by the broader scientific community.

Your statement that questioning inspiration, cultural relativity, translation reliability, and personal interpretation erodes confidence in Scripture reflects real tensions in Christian biblical interpretation and power dynamics. While some conservative traditions continue to resist allegorical readings, favouring a more literal or historical approach instead, the idea that myth and allegory play an essential role in Scripture is now widely accepted among theologians and biblical scholars.

My imaginative and allegorical interpretation of scripture is in contrast to the fundamentalist tendency to avoid an integrative vision, as well as to rigid literalism. I embrace myth as a living, conscious dimension of spiritual awakening, rather than as a form of regression or escapism.

The tension between modern symbolic spirituality and conservative literalism highlights the dynamic way in which biblical texts function as sources of deep imaginative and existential meaning, expanding the perspective to include the modern understanding that ancient texts used symbolism to represent concepts for which we now have a vocabulary.

As part of a cohesive theological framework that encompasses spiritual, moral and cosmic dimensions, symbols can enrich rather than diminish the meaning of the Bible by bridging ancient and modern consciousness.

11

Stick to sound philosophy and the science that totally backs it up and explains the psychological.

Sound philosophy is NOT biased in its assumptions regarding a God.Its UNBIASED!!!

The moment you veer to the right or the left in your biased RELIGIOUS starting philosophical assumptions,whether that be an atheistic or theistic assumption is when you fail.

The present cognitively biased starting philosophy (+=- and -=+) that mainstream atheistic science adopts for all its theories is wrong.It could have adopted a theistic starting philosophy (+=+ and -=- ) for its science if it chose to do so but it didn’t.It would still have been wrong if it had.

+/-=+/- is the correct UNBIASED and UNRELIGIOUS starting philosophy for REALITY!!! science.

Nobody’s bloody interested in atheists RELIGIOUS views on the existence of God anymore….its boring …or the philosophical guess that they adopt for their science which we know is wrong….come on guys move on!!!

12

All matter did not enter the cosmos from a MYTHICAL single point neither will it all exit into a MYTHICAL single point either.

Not when we KNOW that it ALL enters and exits the cosmos from/into the multiple holes at the centre of the multiple galaxies (in varying timescales) all the time in the present.

The issue we have with cognitively biased ATHEISTIC scientists and their initial starting philosophical RELIGIOUS GUESS!!! which initiated all their BS science is that they know absolutely nothing all about sound philosophy and psychology so they will never come up with a united science.

Atheists are the last people that we should be seeking advise off and they definitely shouldn’t be leading science.They haven’t got a clue which is why all their theories have failed.

Mainstream atheistic science is a total FARCE.

13

I have never seen anyone die for the ontological argument. Galileo, who held a scientific truth of great importance, abjured it with the greatest ease as soon as it endangered his life. That truth was not worth the stake.

14

You are shifting the goalposts here. What I said was:

Giordano Bruno (1548–1600) died for ideas that verge toward ontological daring, even if not the ontological argument per se. He proposed an infinite universe filled with countless worlds, each reflecting the presence of God, whom he equated with an infinite substance immanent in all being. This is an ontological radicalisation and a pantheistic or panentheistic vision.

The Inquisition’s records list charges such as:

  • Belief in the eternity of the world
  • Denial of the divinity of Christ as unique
  • Magical and hermetic teachings
  • Belief in a plurality of worlds

In essence, Bruno died for an ontology or an ontological vision. His ontology was too expansive and non-Christian for the Church.

When people died at the hands of the Catholic Church (formally, through the Inquisition or ecclesiastical courts handed to secular authorities), it was rarely because of abstract metaphysics alone. But intellectual and spiritual ideas often became dangerous when they implied challenges to authority, dogma, or social order.

Arianism, Catharism, Pelagianism, and Adoptionism were all debates that went to the heart of ecclesial authority because to say something different about the nature of Christ was to challenge the Church’s entire interpretive claim over Scripture. Punishment varied, but by the 13th century, formal inquisitorial structures could lead to execution for “obstinate heresy.”

From the 14th century onward, the main intellectual “danger zone” became who controls access to Scripture and truth.

  • John Wycliffe (England, 14th c.): translated the Bible into English; argued for scripture over Church authority → declared a heretic after death.
  • Jan Hus (Bohemia, 15th c.): preached similar ideas; burned at the stake, 1415.
  • Later, Tyndale and others followed the same path: vernacular Bible = subversive.

Whenever an idea threatened ecclesiastical control over knowledge or implied the divine could be reached without the Church’s mediation, or suggested the cosmos operated independently of revelation, it crossed into mortal danger.

That’s why those who died, from Porete to Bruno, were usually visionaries or rationalists who placed divine truth within reason, conscience, or nature itself, rather than in the institutional Church.

1 Like
15

Facts are not ideas Bob…

You can’t cancel out the attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force interactions NN,NS,SN,SS that exist between all spinning objects and particles that make up all matter in the cosmos.ALL MATTER IS MADE UP NOTHING BUT SPINNING ELECTROMAGNETS WITH N AND S POLES AT BOTH THE MACRO AND MICRO LEVELS.

It’s impossible to cancel out attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes and yet cognitively biased atheistic scientists claim that these equal but opposite force ABSOLUTES do cancel out.

That is a LIE whether intentional or not.

There is no point in these atheistic scientists continually waffling on about the electromagnetic field of a single object to try and explain away attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes because it has got nothing whatsoever to do with a single object or its electromagnetic field.

These force absolutes exist between two objects or more.

If you can find a scientist anywhere in the world that dares to challenge this then find one.

Atheistic science is total nonsense therefore.

300+ years of completely wasted effort and don’t they know it.

The reality is, science is in total crisis because it has been initiated and led by atheistic scientists who have let their religiously biased cognitive beliefs corrupt it.