Then came the word, logos, to reveal and direct it; then came logos to conceal and use it to manipulate those not adept with it.
Activity - energy.
Existence is interactivity.
Patterned (order) and non-patterned (chaos) energies, i.e., vibrations/oscillations.
Use any metaphor to describe the same.
In Heideggerean contexts:
Space (chaos) = possibility
Matter/Energy (order) = probability
The nil is more powerful than the one, because it requires minimal effort and awareness to negate, destroy, reject.
People with nothing to live for, nothing to fight for, are left with ego, the lucid part of self, as their last refuge.
People with no investment in the future and no past to be proud of and to draw sustenance from, are left with hedonism to distract them and to find some pride through.
The absence of absolutes makes the Nil powerful.
The individual demands certainty, finality, completion, , omnipotence, and omniscience, and if none are provided then it uses this as an excuse to remain as he/she is.
All is equally possible, without an absolute. Death of God being the metaphor for the demise of this andromorphic absoluteness.
If this concept is not substitutes by a secular version - such as universe that replaces ‘god’s will’ with hard-determinism - then it becomes an excuse to believe in any absurdity.
The negative is an open field where all opinions find parity.
Equality via absolute negativity, replacing parity via absolute positivity - singularity.
Absolute chaos replacing absolute order.
Again, what on Earth, given his actual interactions with others, does this assessment encompass “for all practical purposes”.
In other words, let him take us through his days. And each time he has an experience that embodies this “intellectual contraption” nihilism, he can describe in some detail the behaviors that he and others choose as either more or less nihilistic.
Look, if he’s not embarrassed to keep wiggling out of bringing his intellectual contraptions down to earth, I’m not embarrassed to keep pointing it out.
An “example of how the nil is applied” is simply what he tells us it is. Here, I am the example.
Okay, let’s focus the discussion in on a set of circumstances we might all be familiar with. Then I will attempt to explain the extent to which as a moral nihilist, I differentiate that which appears to me to be true for all of us and that which seems more the embodiment of a personal opinion that others may not share.
He can choose the context.
Or, sure, once again, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle out of it.
The advantage of pure nihilism over ‘positive nihilism’ is that they do not have to construct a viable, seductive, self-consistent ideology to sell to the feeble-minded, they simply apply the ‘power of the nil’ and negate anything that is not absolutely proven, or is, in some way, imperfect and/or incomplete.
Existence lacks absolutes, therefore this will always be easy to achieve.
Monism appeals to the mind because it reflects its own method of interpreting fluidity into wholes - its binary system of translating the fluctuating existent into an abstraction.
To the best of my knowledge, σάτυρος has gotten himself banned again. Still, let intellectual claptrap of this sort be a constant reminder of just how far removed serious philosophers of his ilk are from communicating anything that can actually be made applicable to world we interact in from day to day.
On the other hand, sure, if any of his clique here might be willing, go ahead and try to bring his argument down to earth. Choose a context in which the “power of nil” can be apprehended, explicated and then critiqued with considerably more substance.
