Secret Santa 2024
Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
I think that's a really good point, a practical truth like that works very well. But what makes it a truth?

In this sense it's a "truth" because it works and therefore is "true enough." Functionalism.

This is not my understanding of nihilism though. Although Nihilists say there are no objective truths and therefore no objective meaning to reality, they still privilege objectivity as the ideal type of truth or meaning. Thus they see culturally relative or individually subjective truths/norms/conventions as less valid or real than the idealized but nonexistent (according to them) objective truths that they apparently yearn for.

I say this because of all the "woe is me" "God is dead" whining associated with nihilism - the realization that meaning is created, not discovered, should be a cause for celebration, not despair. It means what we do matters.
Originally Posted by Logic View Post
I say this because of all the "woe is me" "God is dead" whining associated with nihilism - the realization that meaning is created, not discovered, should be a cause for celebration, not despair. It means what we do matters.

Meaning being created is leaning more towards Existentialism. An Existentialist believes you can create meaning, but a Nihilist would disagree, denying that someone can create meaning.
And here is the Wikipedia article on Existentialism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism
Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.
Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
Well would there be an absolute value in a human life? When someone devalues human life, the great majority views them as a monster. If only a very small minority disagrees, does that make it fact. It may be a matter of opinion, but how many people does it take for an opinion to be considered the standard moral view or truth. If a view or moral transcends cultures and extends through humanity as a whole, is that enough?
The basic question is, is it even possible for a moral truth to exist, even one created by humanity?

EDIT: Also, The death of God would lead to a rejection that is supposed to be overcome. The idea was some would go to Nihilism, and some would fight to make their own meaning and morals.

No, there would not be an absolute value in human life. What makes human life that much more important? I would say there is some sort of value in functional rational agents, but that's about it. Even that I would say is my personal opinion, maybe not objective truth.
Using the functionality argument, there wouldn't be a set number one can refer to.

Nihilism has the option to adopt morals of others if they are functional or beneficial.

Originally Posted by Odlov View Post
Well, objective (ie independent of us) moral truths could exist, but I don't believe there is any good reason to believe they do exist (and even less reason to believe some old silly book reveals them). Assuming they don't....I think moral truths can still exist, but only as practical, provisional truths. Just like our concept of "healthy" is a practical truth.

Agreed. Pretty much what I'm wanting to say but without the need of typing it out.
-- Jet -- Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. --
[Secret]AikidoKP

Cogito ergo sum. I think therefor I exist.

I know it's true because it says so right here in this signature.
Originally Posted by AikidoKP View Post
Nihilism has the option to adopt morals of others if they are functional or beneficial.

Adopting others morals is never a good idea in my mind. Too many people nowadays adopt and copy the moral standings of others without really thinking about it. I've always hated that...
Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.
Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
Adopting others morals is never a good idea in my mind. Too many people nowadays adopt and copy the moral standings of others without really thinking about it. I've always hated that...

Everybody (including yourself) does that all the time. Your parents/guardians, teachers, friends etc. all imparted their own values onto you, most likely without you or them realising it. Your morals are the result of your interactions with others during your life.
Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
Meaning being created is leaning more towards Existentialism. An Existentialist believes you can create meaning, but a Nihilist would disagree, denying that someone can create meaning.
And here is the Wikipedia article on Existentialism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism

That's what I'm saying. The realization that meaning is not objective should lead to the existentialist position that meaning is therefore created. Nihilism is an error in thought, because it's impossible to actually deny that there is meaning in life. You can take this position abstractly, but living in reality contradicts this. Nihilists still have to act, and to choose an action, it must be prioritized over other possible actions. To prioritize an action is to rank it over others, thereby giving it value. The value has meaning.
Originally Posted by Dalliance View Post
Everybody (including yourself) does that all the time. Your parents/guardians, teachers, friends etc. all imparted their own values onto you, most likely without you or them realising it. Your morals are the result of your interactions with others during your life.

Oh i know, but I try to really consider the morals and values I have and understand why i believe in them. I guess I'll rephrase, It's not adopting morals that i dislike, its blind faith and a lack of knowledge about your beliefs. And I've noticed most people have that blind faith when they default to their parents or friends values without thinking.

Originally Posted by Logic View Post
That's what I'm saying. The realization that meaning is not objective should lead to the existentialist position that meaning is therefore created. Nihilism is an error in thought, because it's impossible to actually deny that there is meaning in life. You can take this position abstractly, but living in reality contradicts this. Nihilists still have to act, and to choose an action, it must be prioritized over other possible actions. To prioritize an action is to rank it over others, thereby giving it value. The value has meaning.

It may be impossible to deny that there is meaning but it is impossible to prove it too. Since meaning isn't objective its existence becomes a person to person issue, and yet another stance to have in life. Also, while i see your point about prioritizing and value, a Nihilist would deny that simply prioritizing gives something meaning, without an intrinsic value the human race is meaningless, and any meaning we create is an artificial construct from insignificant beings.
Last edited by Thatguyzeke; Apr 28, 2011 at 12:26 AM. Reason: Misspelled a word and it changed the meaning of a sentence
Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.
Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
Adopting others morals is never a good idea in my mind. Too many people nowadays adopt and copy the moral standings of others without really thinking about it. I've always hated that...

It's already been addressed, but also, since you quoted me, I'll respond.
When I say adopt a system, it means that the individual would have to weigh that system against others to see if it would be more or less functional, taking the best on in that sense. It would not be blind faith or taking it without thinking.

Originally Posted by Logic View Post
That's what I'm saying. The realization that meaning is not objective should lead to the existentialist position that meaning is therefore created. Nihilism is an error in thought, because it's impossible to actually deny that there is meaning in life. You can take this position abstractly, but living in reality contradicts this. Nihilists still have to act, and to choose an action, it must be prioritized over other possible actions. To prioritize an action is to rank it over others, thereby giving it value. The value has meaning.

Originally Posted by Thatguyzeke View Post
It may be impossible to deny that there is meaning but it is impossible to prove it too. Since meaning isn't objective its existence becomes a person to person issue, and yet another stance to have in life. Also, while i see your point about prioritizing and value, a Nihilist would deny that simply prioritizing gives something meaning, without an intrinsic value the human race is meaningless, and any meaning we create is an artificial construct from insignificant beings.

^^^
That.

Also, just because something has value, doesn't give it meaning.
Zeke has given a good example, but since I assume you'd like a real world example, I'd say money. A $50 bill has value, that is obvious, but it does not have meaning. You can even prioritize it over, say a $20 bill. I would say the same goes with actions, the system I have adopted is Utilitarianism, so creating pleasure would have a higher priority than other things, but this does not give life or pleasure an objective "meaning".
-- Jet -- Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. --
[Secret]AikidoKP

Cogito ergo sum. I think therefor I exist.

I know it's true because it says so right here in this signature.
when the cat is away the mouses dances on the table,when he people think god is away they will dance on a table,religion,police and moral is something like control,it bewares you from doing terrible things
god dose exist everyone shall see when the earth is no more and the heaven are shown then everyone shall have to meet there maker
salt will always survive