Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

tinyclouds.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 87 posts

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#11

Post by undoware »

This is a fantastic sample of the sort of romantic philosophizing that animates the technosphere.

It elides from some reasonable, nineteenth-century claims about atheism and materialsm to full-on AI worship without a moment's hesitation or reflection. It uses ecological and physiological fragility to justify the headlong embrace of more durable, synthetic minds -- as though all that were valuable about the human experience is intelligence. The value of embodied experience itself -- of being mortal, of having flesh, of eating food and sleeping and fucking and laughing, is never mentioned; presumably it just sort of falls out of the main thing. Gotta get those mind-MIPS up.

It wraps with the bromide that, because empathy is a form of intelligence, a superintelligence would be super-empathetic. Because of all the sociopaths drooling in the corner.

Sorry, I would like to return my kool-aid, is there a refund

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#12

Post by knuththetruth »

ahussain wrote: post #9

With a title like this I was expecting a little more from this piece. The best responses I've heard to nihilism are from Ernst Becker's Denial of Death [1] which argues that the best way to overcome nihilism is to stop thinking so hard. Another way to phrase this is that you need to move away from the abstract and towards the concrete. As you focus on a more specific set of experiences, the bigger existential questio…

Let’s please not conflate someone like Becker with the Disney Movie Conspiracy Theory Alt-Right philosopher king.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#13

Post by loupeabody »

knuththetruth wrote: post #12
ahussain wrote: post #9

With a title like this I was expecting a little more from this piece. The best responses I've heard to nihilism are from Ernst Becker's Denial of Death [1] which argues that the best way to overcome nihilism is to stop thinking so hard. Another way to phrase this is that you need to move away from the abstract and towards the concrete. As you focus on a more specific set of experiences, the bigger existential questio…

Let’s please not conflate someone like Becker with the Disney Movie Conspiracy Theory Alt-Right philosopher king.

Peterson's arguments against Nihilism are substantive and deeply involved with his thesis about individual responsibility. Your description of him is merely hand-waving, uncharitable, and reactionary.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#14

Post by lemagedurage »

If i were to abstract the entire universe to one formula with perfect soundness it would not be some model of society or physics, but 0=0. This formula is not debatable, it's perfect in its simplicity, and it has 0 real world value.

I feel the same about nihilism. "If we abstract everything away then we end up with nothing", and then claims are made based upon that ("so live for yourself"), but that's not valid reasoning. You can't prove anything with an empty premise.

The entirety of morality (doing things for yourself vs doing things for the group) isn't restricted by accepting nihilism while people often (including this article) make it out to be the answer of it.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#15

Post by knuththetruth »

loupeabody wrote: post #13
knuththetruth wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s please not conflate someone like Becker with the Disney Movie Conspiracy Theory Alt-Right philosopher king.

Peterson's arguments against Nihilism are substantive and deeply involved with his thesis about individual responsibility. Your description of him is merely hand-waving, uncharitable, and reactionary.

Peterson is a con artist who appeals to desperate and impressionable men that can’t be bothered to read the Nietzsche and Jung that he only skims for sound bites.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#16

Post by undoware »

undoware wrote: post #11

This is a fantastic sample of the sort of romantic philosophizing that animates the technosphere. It elides from some reasonable, nineteenth-century claims about atheism and materialsm to full-on AI worship without a moment's hesitation or reflection. It uses ecological and physiological fragility to justify the headlong embrace of more durable, synthetic minds -- as though all that were valuable about the human expe…

Watching everyone downvote me without an argument is also hilarous. Thanks, I can see I'm not welcome in this church, I'll see myself out

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#17

Post by lemagedurage »

CryoLogic wrote: post #4
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #2

>It's clear that in our modern era, with our extremely robust theories of physics, backed by extremely precise observations of the universe, that the religious explanations of existence are false. I think that's up for debate still.

I'd agree. I think it would be better to say: "Now that we have developed tools and processes for validating truths against falsehoods which seem to be accurate across all applications thus far - for a religion to exist it must violate one or more of the rules that are true elsewhere or bypass these rules entirely." So "false" vs "unprovable".

Well they're not hiding it. "Miracles" inherently bypass those rules.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#18

Post by danschumann »

Check out Jordan Petersons biblical series: the psychological significance of the bible stories.

The bible tells a deep story about the workings of the human mind. To discard them because you don't believe them to be historically accurate is missing the point. There is a reason people have kept those stories alive for thousands of years, and why functional societies have them, and why dictatorships tend to ban them. They teach thought!

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#19

Post by __s »

I was trying to meditate on this topic a few months ago, https://serprex.github.io/w/My%20Thesis

Didn't come together very coherently. It's coming from someone who's both stoic & hedonist. Mostly trying to find explanation for causality of behavior

Written somewhat while gasping from the end of a noose, so not as optimistic as this article, but the call to action ends up the same (where action is deemed voluntary)

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#20

Post by [deleted] »

kreutz wrote: post #3
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #2

>It's clear that in our modern era, with our extremely robust theories of physics, backed by extremely precise observations of the universe, that the religious explanations of existence are false. I think that's up for debate still.

What is the basis for debate? We have observable, testable, repeatable, data backed hypotheses on one hand and stories on the other.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN