After reading more about Nihilism,
I realize that the dictionary descriptions of Nihilism that I have read, are simply describing the fatamist form of nihilism, which is not what I consider to be true Nihilism.
Please tell me…
What is true Nihilism?
Is true Nihilism just a form of pragmatism,
and is false Nihilism just a form of fatalism?
whats the difference between someones philosophy and a type of philosophy?
just because you know the dictionary definition of a philosophy doesn’t mean
you understand that philosophy. philosophy comes from people. if you want to know what “true nihilism” is read up on some"nihilistic philosophers"
whats the difference? content, premises, conclusions, insight
when you’re reading anyones work and they talk about a skeptic and you don’t know what they are, that is when the dictionary becomes a useful tool more or less, when you are not familiar with the word you’re reading. how could you understand a philosophy if you don’t understand the words the author used.
Take a peek on this:
Friedrich Nietzsche: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzshe
“For Nietzsche, nihilism is the outcome of repeated frustrations in the search for meaning.”
i’m just finishing nietzsce’s beyon good and evil and i’d say that i think he is himself nihilistic in the religious, ethical sense , meaning that he rejects the moralizing of philosophy, but i woulden’t call him a skeptic by any means. i think he trys to propose a new type of philosopher, the midpoint between skepticism and dogmatism.
no, in nietzsche’s mind the christian is the nihilist
-Imp
Faith in the categories of reason is the cause of nihilism - WTP (more or less what Imp said if you’ve got the time to understand the conflation of Christianity with the categories of reason)
Well, the Nihilism that I liked so much – antil the last 30% of the writing, was here:
anus.com/zine/nihilism/
But what the good version of the word nihilism means to me, in my mind, is this:
…Even when we fully know reality and fact, all of our belief, memories and understanding, is in the form of thought, therefor, nothing inside of us is absolutely real, and the only truth is a pragmatic and healthy application of all things that we know or are capable of.
Saying “that’s good” or “that’s bad” … only applies to the current situation, and good can become bad, or vice versa, all depending on the method, time and area of application…
Therefor, remove all dogma, decency, and civilized ideals from the mind, and re-rout all of this belief/desire into your will to maintain personal health and improve the self.
All of your solid expectations of justice and equality – are forms of unnatural adamance that will lead you into frustration and suffering.
If it’s not healthy for you, or if it weakens you, then it’s not right.
It’s like, kissing Satan’s ass would be good – if it was healthy and preserved/inhanced our physical system, despite the loss of our foolish dreams of dignity.
So many modern values are useless once all of the appeal is removed.
A mundane pleasure and excitement cycle is using up untold amounts of resources in all areas of life. Why!?
There are things in society that are done, which feel good for us, though they are bad for the future and the collective species [and/or its environment].
I believe in anti-idealism, anti-culture, anti-civilization, in a practical sense only…
I want people to find something that is morally and logically better then “good” and “decent”, and ignore the illusions that it is supposedly evil.
In life, most of our knowledge is givin to us – in combination with opinion. Instead of trying not to form an opinion, which leads to un-biased, deeper sanity, – what we have in our society is a constant crap pile of useless, half-baked opinion, and then we form our belief, and try to play a roll instead of being ourself.
There are forms of sub-conscious slavery, which I call conformity, and ridicule at school from peers, is just once example of people being shit on – and this causes compliance.
etc, etc, blabla. Stop believing in everyone’s views, to liborate self.
Dan,
That’s not nihilism, that’s ‘satanism’ or whatever other ‘ism’ tag you want to put on ‘conform to rebellion’…
This site presents a very positive definition of nihilism:
deny metaphysics
deny god
deny the possibily of something which couldn’t be explained as originated by material conditions/circumstances
deny a purpose and a meaning to human existence outside mere personal perspectives.
you’re a nihilist.
even if you don’t recognize or accept that.
why would nietzsche think that a christan was nihilistic?
there skeptical of lifes value so they “need” the conception of a god to make life worth living? there weak,so rather than try to succeed and surpass their common existance, they “need” equality of men before some all seeing judge, that justifies thier existance. in turn, weak and religious people are living life for a good death rather than a good life?
No way, because I don’t like that carnal shit either.
I don’t like nature or civilization or God. Their all bitches! But they have their good points… 
I’ll sum up my core beliefs:
What matters most is existence and health, and anything we think, feel or do is less important then this.
Being alive means we can act, but no action is better then being alive.
I’m not hard to please. All I want is to be alive, and not die. I think that all thought, feeling and action is a tool that should be used by and for the whole system that created it. [NOt God damnit! Self & species!]
And the ultimate question is fighting/work vs faith/submission.
But don’t start with the clustered judgment.
There are strong and weak Christians.
Those crusader basters were so “strong” because of some kind of physical agression shit? What ever, don’t call believers weak, because that just makes you feel strong and hides your deserved attention to your own incomprehendable weakness.
That isn’t nihilism either…
Well, not according to Nietzsche, who is the philosopher I happen to favour on this sort of subject…
Pragmatic is the only label I’ve really found for myself.
Health and existence based pragmatism.
If I get too Nihilistic, I will stop fueling the good parts of idealism.
We see big bad shits around us, but we have a hard time disecting it, because its always expected to be swallowed whole.
Religion has good in it, and bad, just like almost everything that you’ll ever see or do.
It’s not about hating this and loving that.
It’s not about believing or disbelieving…
It’s really about reason and understanding long term value of anything.
That’s how I feel.
I don’t like when people say how bad society is, though I say it to, but once I understand both sides of the story, each time I say one thing without defending its existent opposite, am I hypocritical, non-holistic, or do I just realize how impossible it is to be absolute in describing any little thing that was ever important on earth?
And I cannot stop the process known as misunderstanding, that is a natural risk/happening of all communication about things that are big and improtant or complicated.
So → Don’t take me seriously. I’m full of shit!!
I didn’t read the rest, what did you say?
i see he has a disclaimer attached to him now. i wonder if all philosophers should have one?
(post#2): i thought the one known as ‘nihilistic’ would have something to say about this thread?
If you’re not my kind of person, then what I say will not farther your own cause/will.
Just go think that you’re right, and be done with it. That’s what everyone does.
no,
there is nihlism as “concept” in philosophy, and nihilism as a philosphy itself.
so…
would mean that there is no inherent, innate value “in reality” - that it is applied by the “self”.
the difference is that nietszche considers man has a innate will to power, and this informs his “self” as a valuator of reality.
so, it’s the starting point of no value. so, it’s pragmatic AFTER we begin to make value assessments - which can only happen after we make some other argument or assumption that creates the context for value statements.
as for “true nihilism” - it is chaos. as a philosophy in itself it’s pure scpeticism and a worthless paradox, imho.
philosophically, i consider nihilsm only as a concept or definition - likely a a starting point - and not as a method or an “ends”.
so, “true nihilism” to me is just a term for chaos, or moral chaos. that’s not a goal, that is something that a being or self that seeks order - or has purpose - would likely avoid.
to seek order from chaos does not mean one can deny the chaos, either.
anyways, i come from the school of thought that the concept of nihilism is akin to the concept of the deluded and suffering self in eastern religious philosophy.
No, what some other people do is argue with themselves using 2 identities on an internet philosophy site…
