Nihilism

[Falco]

Opinions?

[TwisterCat]

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

I do not concur! You took Nietzsche's "god is dead" quote, and took it literally, word for word,
when I didn't even have anything to work off of, because his statement was philosophical, not literal

Saying that disproves it is like saying infomercials die when I turn off the television!

No, I explained it as symbolism. I didn't take it literally. See post #286

Symbolism doesn't work to disprove logical fallacies, however.

Hold on guys, I'm going to go kill Billy Mays for the 56th time this week, he keeps coming back to life every time I turn on my television late at night.

[Holografix]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

No, I explained it as symbolism. I didn't take it literally. See post #286

Symbolism doesn't work to disprove logical fallacies, however.

Hold on guys, I'm going to go kill Billy Mays for the 56th time this week, he keeps coming back to life every time I turn on my television late at night.

I didn't use symbolism to disprove a logical fallacy, because there wasn't a logical fallacy to begin with. I just posted how the term is understood within the larger framework of philosophy.

[TwisterCat]

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Symbolism doesn't work to disprove logical fallacies, however.

Hold on guys, I'm going to go kill Billy Mays for the 56th time this week, he keeps coming back to life every time I turn on my television late at night.

I didn't use symbolism to disprove a logical fallacy, because there wasn't a logical fallacy to begin with. I just posted how the term is understood within the larger framework of philosophy.

A possible condition that would make nihilist beliefs invalid, is probably something I'd consider a logical fallacy, as they directly state their beliefs are definitive, with absolutely no chance of them being invalid. The fallacy is that there, by their own philosophy, state that there is a chance.

[Holografix]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

I didn't use symbolism to disprove a logical fallacy, because there wasn't a logical fallacy to begin with. I just posted how the term is understood within the larger framework of philosophy.

A possible condition that would make nihilist beliefs invalid, is probably something I'd consider a logical fallacy, as they directly state their beliefs are definitive, with absolutely no chance of them being invalid. The fallacy is that there, by their own philosophy, state that there is a chance.

So your whole point is that you would like that Nihilism would have a "maybe" attached to it? So you're arguing with me that Nihilism should have a "maybe?" Seems like your point is merely semantic, instead of an actual fallacy. i mean, you yourself didn't need the "maybe" at all to post your angst about Nihilism.

[Grynn]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

I didn't use symbolism to disprove a logical fallacy, because there wasn't a logical fallacy to begin with. I just posted how the term is understood within the larger framework of philosophy.

A possible condition that would make nihilist beliefs invalid, is probably something I'd consider a logical fallacy, as they directly state their beliefs are definitive, with absolutely no chance of them being invalid. The fallacy is that there, by their own philosophy, state that there is a chance.

I have to stop you here. It's more about an absence of belief rather than a "nihilists beliefs" being invalid.

[Volfogg]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

I didn't use symbolism to disprove a logical fallacy, because there wasn't a logical fallacy to begin with. I just posted how the term is understood within the larger framework of philosophy.

A possible condition that would make nihilist beliefs invalid, is probably something I'd consider a logical fallacy, as they directly state their beliefs are definitive, with absolutely no chance of them being invalid. The fallacy is that there, by their own philosophy, state that there is a chance.

So... uhh... They are guilty of circular reasoning and such simple concepts as dice are incomprehensible to them? And I thought I'm the one thinking in machine-like fashion. Hmm... Don't like the odds in which direction this discussion may go.

[Holografix]

Publicado originalmente por Fred Durst:

Publicado originalmente por Volfogg:

Sigh... People should stop already this about nihilism. Do something productive. Get a job maybe... while they still can. That whole... re-wiring of brain processes is hella time-inefficient. Eventually no amount of meds will heal that scar on a mind.

Nihilists remind me of those types of people who go to school to get degrees or doctorates in the social sciences and then end up getting a job stocking shelves or cleaning toilets or whatever.

Just like philosophy. Like with a philosophy degree, the only thing you can aspire to doing with it, is teaching philosophy. But I mean, it's not like you're providing an incredibly useful service to humanity. Anybody can pick up a philosophy book, and anybody can write philosophy as a hobby. Like, you can sit there and question everything all day long, yeah it's cool to think about when you are bored, but at some point someone has to put food on the table for people. Philosophy isn't feeding the hungry, clothing he naked or providing shelter for anyone. It's actually kinda a selfish endeavour in a lot of ways. Like, your only job is to form what you think are meaningful opinions? Guess what, I can do that while actually contributing to society and providing things to other people that they actually need. Does it really require a degree? Especially when you notice a lot of the so called philosophers even here are more concerned with their own opinions, and not very accepting of alternative viewpoints, it's pretty hilarious to watch.

Seems kinda contradictory, on one hand saying "hmm, indeed! one must remain sceptical at all times and question everything, neet neet!". While then also providing a rigid definition of what "real" nihilism or philosophy is and proceeding to criticise others for not meeting such strenuous criteria. Laughable at best.

Not surprised you're an anti-intellectual, Durst. This discussion probably isn't for you, tbh.

[Volfogg]

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

Publicado originalmente por Fred Durst:

Nihilists remind me of those types of people who go to school to get degrees or doctorates in the social sciences and then end up getting a job stocking shelves or cleaning toilets or whatever.

Just like philosophy. Like with a philosophy degree, the only thing you can aspire to doing with it, is teaching philosophy. But I mean, it's not like you're providing an incredibly useful service to humanity. Anybody can pick up a philosophy book, and anybody can write philosophy as a hobby. Like, you can sit there and question everything all day long, yeah it's cool to think about when you are bored, but at some point someone has to put food on the table for people. Philosophy isn't feeding the hungry, clothing he naked or providing shelter for anyone. It's actually kinda a selfish endeavour in a lot of ways. Like, your only job is to form what you think are meaningful opinions? Guess what, I can do that while actually contributing to society and providing things to other people that they actually need. Does it really require a degree? Especially when you notice a lot of the so called philosophers even here are more concerned with their own opinions, and not very accepting of alternative viewpoints, it's pretty hilarious to watch.

Seems kinda contradictory, on one hand saying "hmm, indeed! one must remain sceptical at all times and question everything, neet neet!". While then also providing a rigid definition of what "real" nihilism or philosophy is and proceeding to criticise others for not meeting such strenuous criteria. Laughable at best.

Not surprised you're an anti-intellectualist Durst. This discussion probably isn't for you, tbh.

Unwarranted rudeness. Poor attempt at sick-burn. Straight answer, though. I'd rate it 1.5/10.

[Holografix]

Publicado originalmente por Volfogg:

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

Not surprised you're an anti-intellectualist Durst. This discussion probably isn't for you, tbh.

Unwarranted rudeness. Poor attempt at sick-burn. Straight answer, though. I'd rate it 1.5/10.

I wasn't being rude. They wrote a long paragraph about how intellectual pursuits are ridiculous and not worthwhile and not socially important. Why are they on this thread, then?

[Grynn]

Publicado originalmente por Fred Durst:

Publicado originalmente por Volfogg:

Sigh... People should stop already this about nihilism. Do something productive. Get a job maybe... while they still can. That whole... re-wiring of brain processes is hella time-inefficient. Eventually no amount of meds will heal that scar on a mind.

Nihilists remind me of those types of people who go to school to get degrees or doctorates in the social sciences and then end up getting a job stocking shelves or cleaning toilets or whatever.

Just like philosophy. Like with a philosophy degree, the only thing you can aspire to doing with it, is teaching philosophy. But I mean, it's not like you're providing an incredibly useful service to humanity. Anybody can pick up a philosophy book, and anybody can write philosophy as a hobby. Like, you can sit there and question everything all day long, yeah it's cool to think about when you are bored, but at some point someone has to put food on the table for people. Philosophy isn't feeding the hungry, clothing he naked or providing shelter for anyone. It's actually kinda a selfish endeavour in a lot of ways. Like, your only job is to form what you think are meaningful opinions? Guess what, I can do that while actually contributing to society and providing things to other people that they actually need. Does it really require a degree? Especially when you notice a lot of the so called philosophers even here are more concerned with their own opinions, and not very accepting of alternative viewpoints, it's pretty hilarious to watch.

Seems kinda contradictory, on one hand saying "hmm, indeed! one must remain sceptical at all times and question everything, neet neet!". While then also providing a rigid definition of what "real" nihilism or philosophy is and proceeding to criticise others for not meeting such strenuous criteria. Laughable at best.

You don't have to be into philosophy to be a nihilist. I've met a few that didn't even know what nihilism meant.

Though I do find it kinda odd you gauge people's worth based on what job they have.

[TwisterCat]

Publicado originalmente por Grynn:

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

A possible condition that would make nihilist beliefs invalid, is probably something I'd consider a logical fallacy, as they directly state their beliefs are definitive, with absolutely no chance of them being invalid. The fallacy is that there, by their own philosophy, state that there is a chance.

I have to stop you here. It's more about an absence of belief rather than a "nihilists beliefs" being invalid.

In multiple dictionaries, I find definitions that contradict that statement. They believe that moral principles are unfounded, and religion is unfounded, yet nihilism is the statement that nothing is certain, no knowledge is certain. It's a logical fallacy, they don't know that, by their own admittance!

[the vampire of time and memory]

Publicado originalmente por Fred Durst:

Publicado originalmente por Volfogg:

Sigh... People should stop already this about nihilism. Do something productive. Get a job maybe... while they still can. That whole... re-wiring of brain processes is hella time-inefficient. Eventually no amount of meds will heal that scar on a mind.

Nihilists remind me of those types of people who go to school to get degrees or doctorates in the social sciences and then end up getting a job stocking shelves or cleaning toilets or whatever.

Just like philosophy. Like with a philosophy degree, the only thing you can aspire to doing with it, is teaching philosophy. But I mean, it's not like you're providing an incredibly useful service to humanity. Anybody can pick up a philosophy book, and anybody can write philosophy as a hobby. Like, you can sit there and question everything all day long, yeah it's cool to think about when you are bored, but at some point someone has to put food on the table for people. Philosophy isn't feeding the hungry, clothing he naked or providing shelter for anyone. It's actually kinda a selfish endeavour in a lot of ways. Like, your only job is to form what you think are meaningful opinions? Guess what, I can do that while actually contributing to society and providing things to other people that they actually need. Does it really require a degree? Especially when you notice a lot of the so called philosophers even here are more concerned with their own opinions, and not very accepting of alternative viewpoints, it's pretty hilarious to watch.

Seems kinda contradictory, on one hand saying "hmm, indeed! one must remain sceptical at all times and question everything, neet neet!". While then also providing a rigid definition of what "real" nihilism or philosophy is and proceeding to criticise others for not meeting such strenuous criteria. Laughable at best.

you say you can "form meaningful opinions" while also contributing to society, yet your post just illustrates how you are incapable of thought, curious

[Holografix]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Grynn:

I have to stop you here. It's more about an absence of belief rather than a "nihilists beliefs" being invalid.

In multiple dictionaries, I find definitions that contradict that statement. They believe that moral principles are unfounded, and religion is unfounded, yet nihilism is the statement that nothing is certain, no knowledge is certain. It's a logical fallacy, they don't know that, by their own admittance!

Read it this way:

Nihilism states that "Nothing IS Certain.",

[Grynn]

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

Publicado originalmente por Grynn:

I have to stop you here. It's more about an absence of belief rather than a "nihilists beliefs" being invalid.

In multiple dictionaries, I find definitions that contradict that statement. They believe that moral principles are unfounded, and religion is unfounded, yet nihilism is the statement that nothing is certain, no knowledge is certain. It's a logical fallacy, they don't know that, by their own admittance!

And they're right, nothing is certain. We might not even be having this conversation since we can't prove the existence of reality itself.

But it's not about nihilists looking at meaning, turning their backs to it and saying "no!", they don't see meaning at all.

[Volfogg]

Publicado originalmente por Holografix:

Publicado originalmente por TwisterCat:

In multiple dictionaries, I find definitions that contradict that statement. They believe that moral principles are unfounded, and religion is unfounded, yet nihilism is the statement that nothing is certain, no knowledge is certain. It's a logical fallacy, they don't know that, by their own admittance!

Read it this way:

Nihilism states that "Nothing IS Certain.",

The only certain Nothing is Death. I have yet to see someone eager to dismantle this concept...