Discussion Are you Nihilist or a Pessimism?

[EmployedHikikomori]

So I heard whispers about this forum for years. One is that this hold the philosophical view of Nihilism, where nothing maters.

I'm personally not a Nihilist, rather I'm a Pessimist. As a Pessimist, I believe there is meaning and purpose in the world, but it doesn't include me.

Unlike Nihilism where I'm free to do what I please and make whatever purpose I can despite it, as a pessimist, I believe nothing I do will amount to anything and could even be used to hurt me.

What between these two, what do you most align with Pessimism or Nihilism?

 

[LostZombie]

I am much more of a nihilist, nothing matters, but that's the magic to me. If nothing matters I can do whatever the hell I want in this short time, it all has no meaning other than what you put on it. Although it al may not matter THAT does not matter to me.

 

[itsgone2]

I think there has to be meaning. I've lived against the teachings of my faith and now I'm suffering. To the point that only suicide seems to save me.
I hurt so much. Their must be some meaning to it all.

 

[UserFromNowhere]

I guess I'd align closer to absurdism, advocated by Albert Camus, as a third position in between nihilism and pessimism. Acknowledging that nothing matters, but we can still revolt against the absurd (that nothing matters) through either suicide, deferring to religion to provide meaning, or recognizing there's no meaning but we can still do things that are meaningful to us or those around us. Except, whereby Camus believes the third option should be taken and preferred over the other two, as though rejecting religious "suicide" or actual suicide, I personally believe that all options are valid. I'm just caught in an eternal internal struggle between the first and the third.

 

[Set Real Goul]

bad choices

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

I am much more of a nihilist, nothing matters, but that's the magic to me. If nothing matters I can do whatever the hell I want in this short time, it all has no meaning other than what you put on it. Although it al may not matter THAT does not matter to me.

This tamps into another philosophical view I have. Do you actually have the freedom to do whatever you want? In addition in being a Pessimist, I'm also a skeptic of free-will. I'm some here between a soft-determinists and a indeterminist, but regardless I don't believe we are actually free. Rather our actions are a result of external forces of our environment, what we call nurture and the internal forces of neural chemistry, genetics, and quantum physics, what we call nature.

I guess I'd align closer to absurdism, advocated by Albert Camus, as a third position in between nihilism and pessimism. Acknowledging that nothing matters, but we can still revolt against the absurd (that nothing matters) through either suicide, deferring to religion to provide meaning, or recognizing there's no meaning but we can still do things that are meaningful to us or those around us. Except, whereby Camus believes the third option should be taken and preferred over the other two, as though rejecting religious "suicide" or actual suicide, I personally believe that all options are valid. I'm just caught in an eternal internal struggle between the first and the third.

To me, Absurdism seems to be a more hipster version of existentialism, a philosophy people mistake for nihilism. Mainly the biggest figure of nihilism, Nietzsche wrote a lot about nihilism. Was was also was heavily influenced by Schopenhauer, which

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

bad choices

What other choices do you purpose, and what are you most aligned with?

 

[Canto XIII]

So I heard whispers about this forum for years. One is that this hold the philosophical view of Nihilism, where nothing maters.

I'm personally not a Nihilist, rather I'm a Pessimist. As a Pessimist, I believe there is meaning and purpose in the world, but it doesn't include me.

Unlike Nihilism where I'm free to do what I please and make whatever purpose I can despite it, as a pessimist, I believe nothing I do will amount to anything and could even be used to hurt me.

What between these two, what do you most align with Pessimism or Nihilism?

I'd say I'm both, but honestly the term nihilism seems to have been juggled around so much as a pejorative for any ontological and existential theory you disagree with that it has lost any real meaning.

Edit: typo

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

the only things that matter to me are me avoiding unbearable pain and intolerable suffering then me avoiding other pain and suffering and my suicide asap.

to me none of these things matter : the things they constantly say are so important , meaningful , good , pleasurable etc . for example getting the much glorified romantic relationship, having children, watching sports, watching videos on social media, living , wanting to live, watching the much vaunted sunset or nature, many others. all that crap is meaningless fleeting garbage to me

the only things that matter to me are me avoiding unbearable pain and intolerable suffering then me avoiding other pain and suffering and my suicide asap.

avoiding extreme pain is important to me because i can't stand pain and suffering especiallly excruciating continous unbearable pain.

for example me watching an "entertaining" video, news, sports, social media, does that prevent me unbearable pain or move me toward my suicide a lot? no then it's meaningless useless waste of time.

it's also unimportant what label is put on me as what i am a "Nihillist" or a pessimist. i just wrote a few sentences but i would probably need to write more to fully explain what i mean. i don't care what that is .


i have different beliefs from every human.

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

I'd say I'm both, but honestly the term nihilsm seems to have been juggled around so much as a pejorative for any ontological and existential theory you disagree with that it has lost any real meaning.

I semi-agree with you on the term nihilism not being very clear. This is because the term nihilism was coined as a response to the Enlightenment era, were religious and evangelical beliefs were challenged, debunked, or explained away with reason, science, and new philosophies at the time. No need for god or collectives beliefs would leave a void in people to act out as they like. Godlessness or the belief in nothing what inspired the term nihilism.

I personally believe that nihilism means there's not inherit meaning to anything. And while I can see why someone would believe this to be true on a societal level, I don't see how this can be true on the cosmic or atomic level.

 

[Canto XIII]

I don't see how this can be true on the cosmic or atomic level

Can you elaborate?

 

[Set Real Goul]

What other choices do you purpose, and what are you most aligned with?

I'm a moral realist, so nihilism is not my choice.

In my view, every human being has an innate, biologically grounded capacity for morality, much like our capacity for language. However, having a capacity does not guarantee that it will be developed. Just as a feral child may never acquire language, a person may never find themselves in circumstances that foster the development of strong ethical qualities.

I think that, while nihilism may be psychologically useful for those who profess it, it is not a particularly honest position. To me, such people are like the pigeon that knocks over the chess pieces during a game and then flies away. What matters most to me in ethics is practice and consistency between one's beliefs and actions. A genuine nihilist would not participate in moral or ethical debates, and would truly do whatever they wanted—and were capable of doing—in every situation. People who actually live this way tend to fall somewhere on the antisocial spectrum: psychopaths, sociopaths, narcissists, and so on.

I also subscribe to pragmatism and the pragmatic theory of truth, and I find meliorism appealing. For that reason, pessimism is not my choice either.
That's more or less how I see it.

I don't think these are the kind of views that are typical on this forum.

 

[0dysseus]

I'm sorry to ruin the party, but does this truly belongs to this sub-forum?

 

[Canto XIII]

I'm sorry to ruin the party, but is it truly belongs to this sub-forum?

The real question is: for a true nihilist does the distinction between sub-forums even hold any value?

 

[Secro]

I believe I am nihilism.

 

[0dysseus]

The real question is: for a true nihilist does the distinction between sub-forums even hold any value?

I'm a Biological Naturalist, almost everythings stems from biological urges and needs, like Dawkins famously said that we are the "survival machines" for our genomes to keep replicate in.

Now take this somewhere else next time.

 

[Canto XIII]

I'm a Biological Naturalist, almost everythings stems from biological urges and needs, like Dawkins famously said that we are the "survival machines" for our genomes to keep replicate in.

Now take this somewhere else next time.

I was just joking (I'm not OP). I'm sorry if I ended up upsetting you.

 

[CrawlingInMySkin]

Proud nihilist, mate. We're all only here because a couple asteroids collided at the right times.

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

I'm sorry to ruin the party, but does this truly belongs to this sub-forum?

I'm the OP, and yes this does belong here.

Reason being that I want to see how the question of suicide can be tackled with philosophically.
Suicide as a philosophical question was brought up to be by Albert Camus.

To boil all do, if you're a Nihilist would you commit suicide because it doesn't matter anyway. And if it doesn't matter, than why not continue living?

I myself am a Pessimist, in that everything is every against or indifferent to most of us. So why not opt-out and escape from life?

Question I have for you, the biological naturalist, what reasons would you hold to can justify CBT? Remember this sub-forum is on suicide discussion.

Can you elaborate?

To over simplify, on the atomic scale change is constant and truly random. And yet it still finds away to have it parts collaborate and emerge new substances. Stings become quarks, quarks become particles, particles become atoms, atoms become elements, ect..

The same is true for the cosmic, celestial bodies collaborate and interact with each other to produce repeating patterns and structures. Planets and stars make up solar systems, solar systems make up galaxies, galaxies make up galaxy groups, ect...

Unless I'm mistaken, when a clear pattern emerges from random chaos, that's called Entropy.

Entropy is what also causes us to move forward in time and decay. Of course Entropy is a term in thermal dynamics to describe transfer of energy, not a necessarily a philosophical principle. But it is enough to compel me away from nihilism.

 

[bagel12]

To over simplify, on the atomic scale change is constant and truly random. And yet it still finds away to have it parts collaborate and emerge new substances. Stings become quarks, quarks become particles, particles become atoms, atoms become elements, ect..

The same is true for the cosmic, celestial bodies collaborate and interact with each other to produce repeating patterns and structures. Planets and stars make up solar systems, solar systems make up galaxies, galaxies make up galaxy groups, ect...

Unless I'm mistaken, when a clear pattern emerges from random chaos, that's called Entropy.

Entropy is what also causes us to move forward in time and decay. Of course Entropy is a term in thermal dynamics to describe transfer of energy, not a necessarily a philosophical principle. But it is enough to compel me away from nihilism.

it sounds to me like you're mixing up the concept of emergence with entropy. emergence is very cool! and scientists don't fully understand it. here's a good approach of emergence from a philosophical standpoint.

but i do want to clarify about entropy. entropy is not when "a pattern emerges from chaos," it's more like the opposite. a low entropy state is less statistically likely--this is where energy is more "ordered" or concentrated. as time passes, the system will tend towards the most statistically likely configuration, which is considered a high entropy state: a system where energy is more "disordered" and dispersed. basically, there are only a few ways for a system to have order, but many more ways for a system to have disorder.

for example, think about all of the possible ways that a billion grains of sand could be configured. something like a sandcastle is statistically unlikely, there are only a few possible ways to achieve that. so that's a low entropy state. as time goes on, those billion grains of sand will tend towards a more statistically likely configuration (that is, a higher entropy state): for example, a pile of sand. if you have a pile of sand and a sand castle, and a gust of wind comes by, what is more likely to happen: the wind makes the pile of sand become a sandcastle? or the wind makes the sandcastle become a pile of sand?

because the universe is young, the universe is currently in a low entropy state. matter and energy is concentrated in certain areas of the universe: this is why planets and stars exist. and this low entropy state makes life possible: without the earth, the sun, or the solar system, life would not exist. as time passes, most physicists believe that matter and energy will become more and more evenly distributed throughout the universe, because this is the more statistically likely configuration. this would eventually make life physically impossible to sustain in the universe. imo the concept of entropy would make most people feel more nihilistic, not less.

personally, i don't believe in a higher power or any intentional being creating the universe, so i don't see how or why there would be inherent meaning or purpose to life. i do believe people can come up with their own sense of meaning or purpose, but that's a solely human creation. this puts me more in the camp of nihilists, existentialists, and absurdists.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Absurdism makes more sense to me. As in- we're unlikely to all agree on a set meaning to life but, we can follow our own paths/ beliefs as a coping mechanism.

I'm not convinced even nihilists are actually nihilists. We are all subjects of cause and effect. If you offered a nihilist the choice of a Carolina Reaper Chilli or a peppermint to eat- are they really going to say- 'It doesn't matter'?

Even if things don't officially matter. Even if we believe all rules are manmade, some things surely do still matter to them. They must still have preferences. I expect the majority of us try to avoid pain- unless it serves a function. Self harm etc.

I'd say I was more of a pessimist though. More of a cynicist maybe- rather than a nihilist. I agree that most rules are manmade. I think they do matter though. Sometimes they benefit us. I think rape and murder should be illegal for instance. There again, I think a lot of rules benefit the already rich and powerful. So, I feel both pessimism and cynicism towards a lot of things.

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

this low entropy state makes life possible: without the earth, the sun, or the solar system, life would not exist. as time passes, most physicists believe that matter and energy will become more and more evenly distributed throughout the universe, because this is the more statistically likely configuration. this would eventually make life physically impossible to sustain in the universe. imo the concept of entropy would make most people feel more nihilistic, not less.

I read this as the meaning of life is death. I mean we're all going to end, right? Not just us as humanity, but the universe itself. All of our influences, creations, and marks we left on the world will end.

The meaning of the universe is to decay, to end, to dissipate. This all points towards pessimism than to nihilism.

I will concede that I'm mixed up emergence, entropy, and the study of thermal dynamics. However reading what you wrote and glancing at what you posted, didn't really change my view.

 

[Canto XIII]

it sounds to me like you're mixing up the concept of emergence with entropy. emergence is very cool! and scientists don't fully understand it. here's a good approach of emergence from a philosophical standpoint.

but i do want to clarify about entropy. entropy is not when "a pattern emerges from chaos," it's more like the opposite. a low entropy state is less statistically likely--this is where energy is more "ordered" or concentrated. as time passes, the system will tend towards the most statistically likely configuration, which is considered a high entropy state: a system where energy is more "disordered" and dispersed. basically, there are only a few ways for a system to have order, but many more ways for a system to have disorder.

for example, think about all of the possible ways that a billion grains of sand could be configured. something like a sandcastle is statistically unlikely, there are only a few possible ways to achieve that. so that's a low entropy state. as time goes on, those billion grains of sand will tend towards a more statistically likely configuration (that is, a higher entropy state): for example, a pile of sand. if you have a pile of sand and a sand castle, and a gust of wind comes by, what is more likely to happen: the wind makes the pile of sand become a sandcastle? or the wind makes the sandcastle become a pile of sand?

because the universe is young, the universe is currently in a low entropy state. matter and energy is concentrated in certain areas of the universe: this is why planets and stars exist. and this low entropy state makes life possible: without the earth, the sun, or the solar system, life would not exist. as time passes, most physicists believe that matter and energy will become more and more evenly distributed throughout the universe, because this is the more statistically likely configuration. this would eventually make life physically impossible to sustain in the universe. imo the concept of entropy would make most people feel more nihilistic, not less.

personally, i don't believe in a higher power or any intentional being creating the universe, so i don't see how or why there would be inherent meaning or purpose to life. i do believe people can come up with their own sense of meaning or purpose, but that's a solely human creation. this puts me more in the camp of nihilists, existentialists, and absurdists.

Argh, how I hate that I can't understand hard science! But it's too late for me.

So sorry for my ignorance, but how did complex, ordinated structures originate in the first place if that's the least probable configuration. Sand castles don't exist by themselves just to turn into sand piles over time, they come into existence as we willingly forge sand into an improbable configuration. Or is this the "emergence" you were talking about?

 

[3rdworldsadness]

I believe in more antinatalism philosophy. And nihilism seems a good philosophy where everything includes the universe and the existence itself has no meaning and someday everything will return to nothingness. So I will choose nihilism in that. It's freeing.

 

[Canto XIII]

I believe in more antinatalism philosophy. And nihilism seems a good philosophy where everything includes the universe and the existence itself has no meaning and someday everything will return to nothingness. So I will choose nihilism in that. It's freeing.

I don't think you should choose your worldview based on what you find the most appealing.

 

[EmployedHikikomori]

Argh, how I hate that I can't understand hard science! But it's too late for me.

So sorry for my ignorance, but how did complex, ordinated structures originate in the first place if that's the least probable configuration. Sand castles don't exist by themselves just to turn into sand piles over time, they come into existence as we willingly forge sand into an improbable configuration. Or is this the "emergence" you were talking about?

It's emergence. Here's a video to help understand.

 

[Canto XIII]

It's emergence. Here's a video to help understand.

Thanks.

 

[3rdworldsadness]

I don't think you should choose your worldview based on what you find the most appealing

Just said what I think is more logical to me. As antinatalism is very reasonable to me.

 

[Lucifer’s Son]

Neither. I think life and consciousness are an incredible act of magic, it just so happens that my own life sucks.

 

[Canto XIII]

Just said what I think is more logical to me. As antinatalism is very reasonable to me.

Alright, I respect your opinion, even if I don't agree with it.