If its s so, then you are NOT a Nihilist, since you relate to world, as it IS, in a positive way, or a neutral way… objectively.
I’ve divided Nihilism into two forms, each corresponding to the sexes, and their attitude, and how they relate to world and other.
Negative, or pure/authentic/honest, Nihilism ([size=85]Feminine[/size]) = seductive to male psychologies. Total negation of world.
This, also, appeals to the beta emasculated males, as a method of erasing what he finds himself at the bottom of, in the hope that what replaces it will be more appealing - Anarchy, bridging the two types by playing both sides at once.
A pure Nihilist, like Weininger, and Heisman, ha only one option, if he wishes to remain true to his own positions - integrity.
Positive Nihilism, or dishonest, lying, pretentious, seductive ([size=85]Masculine[/size]) = pretentious Nihilism offering a negating alternative, a positive absolute to the absolute negation = Paradise, Utopia, a redefinition of past/nature.
These are the Judeo-Christian/Islamic types.
They negate the real, with an idea(l). The idea(l) existing in some “beyond” or some “immanent future”, but never present.
It is a way of exploiting human stupidity, by charlatans and snake-oil salesman, manipulating words - words easily manipulated when they are detached from a restricting/determining, past/nature ([size=85]precedent[/size]), and from the apparent ([size=85]presence[/size]).
Absolutely. Unfortunately between them Christianity and Islam account for half the global population. So the validity of belief seems in part at least to
be determined by popularity rather than evidence. But how popular something is has no bearing on its truth value. The truly honest position as you say
is agnosticism. Now I only describe myself as an atheist since there is zero evidence for the God hypothesis. Though I know that absence of evidence is
not evidence of absence hence why I am an agnostic atheist not a gnostic one. But as I have already said I am also an apatheist. Regardless of whether
he exists or not it is beyond my control and so does not matter to me
Well i googled it, it said that some atoms are completely symmetrical depending on their eigenvalue. More interesting though, is the idea that if it were true, how would that affect our philosophy?
Would you say that the DnA machine is nihilism or no. I’d say its realist philosophy, heaven on earth kind of deal, not suicide punch, its evolution in our own hands. Im not promising heaven when you die, or death by koolaid, but heaven when you live, and the best genetics the machine can build. Soon I am going to make it a certified religion. In fact I believe that this is what the bible prophecied, the DNA machine can heal the sick and heal the blind, and improve anyone’s mind.
Show me an image of this “perfectly spherical” and, perhaps, indivisible, atom.
Is symmetrical the same as spherical?
You’re lost, aren’t ya?
Going for the wishy-washy, it’s 50/50 indecisiveness… postponing judgment 'till you receive a miraculous epiphany, from the church of google.
I’m sure it will be an emotional event.
Keep me posted.
I think that it would be more accurate to describe myself as an objective or neutral nihilist. But I have also described myself as an existential nihilist in order to differentiate it from moral nihilist which I am not. I think though I shall continue to describe myself as a nihilist even if I am not one according to the dictionary definition. I know what I mean when I describe myself as one and that is ultimately what matters because I can always elaborate my position if I am required to
I am all for the freedom to express ideas regardless of how they may be received. So it is both ironic and sad that
the left who used to believe in free speech are now actively denying the voices of those they do not want to hear
Here is a video of the atoms. youtube.com/watch?v=oSCX78-8-q0
The thing I was getting at though, is it’s more a less perfect circle UNTIL we zoom in, then it ceases to be a perfect circle, or even a circle but a set of loosely related segments. But in our minds eye, it is a perfect circle, until it becomes something else which is not a circle, a zoomed in series of shapes. The mind has a inherent blurring feature, similar to schiophrenic delusions. For instance, I have a mirror that I always thought was rectangular, but realized that it was actually square. So, we more or less see things as perfect circles. But i wouldn’t bet on this, its 50/50.
I am talking about a shape to the human eye, not zoomed in. Was that what he was talking about? He said circles and squares do not naturally exist in nature, that we made them up as constructs for language/math. I think that’s non sense and naive, to say nature doesnt have shapes, in the billions of years the universe has existed the odds of there not being those shapes is less than 0.1%.
An eye itself seems to be a perfect circle, that is nature… Circles represent eternity. As long as the shape is circular with no points and edges while being closed, it’s a circle and eternal.
The issue is human sensual limitations, compensating with these abstractions, trying to represent a fluctuating process, as a static model.
The particles are not “things”, they are vibrations, dynamic patterns…not substance in the way you, and many others can imagine them.
Read String Theory.
Eliminate the vibration - pattern - and you are left with nothing…there is no “string” vibrating, there is only vibration at a frequency.
This vibrating is what the mind interprets as an abstraction.
String is an abstraction, a method of simplifying/generalizing, so as to process.
We can conceptualize this phenomenon as a thing, a string, because we need to.
The string, or the particle as a perfect sphere, is an artistic device, a metaphor, a noumenon.
Roundness is the extend of its repulsion/attraction, emanating from a shifting center.
Why speed up evolution when you can negate time/change period… I don’t see the point. If you speed up evolution it would have a higher chance of creating an imbalance, mutation, etc… Patience with knowledge is better than rushing it. If we renewed our organs and body we would have all the time in the world to evolve, so why rush it…
But I would say it’s not empty space, its got colors and vibrations.
When all vibrations are in sync, or in phase, the shape pattern is no illusion.
But due to pile up, or stacking, (lack of buffer clearing the mind’s eye) even when they are out of phase, they pile up and blur, and spiritually, when looking at a circle, one could argue it is so wonderfully, even sexually, round. No imperfections can be discerned.
Do we let the blind be blind? Should we not develop Marie’s Curie because evolution runs it’s course? Do we not craft walking sticks for cripples? We make tools, it is what we do. If a population was ugly, stupid, and even cruel, who would say “let evolution takes its course, let them live with their ugliness and cruelty”? No man of science or medicine would say such a thing.
