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

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#31

Post by Avshalom »

samirillian wrote: post #28
Avshalom wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the grand scheme of things every one dies and the universes freezes from entropic heat death, so yeah... That said Nihilism isn't necessarily pessimistic. The French Existentialist were basically weak nihilism and Camus was almost celebratory of the lack of meaning of life. "Nothing Means Anything" can be taken as "fuck it burn it all down" OR it can be taken as "there are no unforgivable sins, there is no eternal…

But you just did that exact same thing! a) Do we know for sure that's what happens to the universe? and b) It doesn't matter anyway. "Everybody dies" is only a fact. What does the fact of heat death have to do with the question of meaning? The implication that "nothing means anything" is just as metaphysical an assumption as "everything means something."

a) math, even if not entropic heat death, a basic grasp of history show that 99.999...% of our lives are meaningless after some cut off.

b)I am specifically claiming that while "nothing means anything" is the--lie that tells the truth--summation of nihilism it, by it's very nature, doesn't imply a course of action. So it doesn't matter how metaphysical of a claim it is.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#32

Post by stcredzero »

Avshalom wrote: post #24
stcredzero wrote: post #8

Nihilists are often guilty of something which many teenagers are guilty of, which I call epistemological narcissism. Basically, they think they know it all, pretty much. The cure for this is to take the extrapolation strategy which PG uses in "What You Can't Say." ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) However, you should instead apply it to "what you can't predict." Would any of our ancestors of 400 or 1000 years ag…

In the grand scheme of things every one dies and the universes freezes from entropic heat death, so yeah... That said Nihilism isn't necessarily pessimistic. The French Existentialist were basically weak nihilism and Camus was almost celebratory of the lack of meaning of life. "Nothing Means Anything" can be taken as "fuck it burn it all down" OR it can be taken as "there are no unforgivable sins, there is no eternal…

In the grand scheme of things every one dies and the universes freezes from entropic heat death, so yeah...

{facepalm}

We don't know what Dark Matter and Dark Energy are. We have no idea what happens if/when the expansion of space itself starts pulling quarks apart.

https://www.quora.com/What-happens-when-you-pull-apart-a-pai...

You only think you know what's going to happen, based on the limited toy understanding of the vast universe which can fit into your present day little ape brain.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#33

Post by white-flame »

stcredzero wrote: post #8

Nihilists are often guilty of something which many teenagers are guilty of, which I call epistemological narcissism. Basically, they think they know it all, pretty much. The cure for this is to take the extrapolation strategy which PG uses in "What You Can't Say." ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) However, you should instead apply it to "what you can't predict." Would any of our ancestors of 400 or 1000 years ag…

> If you don't know the future, how do you know if what you do will or won't matter in the grand scheme of things?

If future understanding of the grand scheme is unpredictable, then that form of decision making seems equally likely to miss the mark as reactionary non-decisions or intentionally tribally inclusive decisions. You don't really gain anything by switching between those perspectives, or by dismissing one of them, by your premise.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#34

Post by Avshalom »

stcredzero wrote: post #32
Avshalom wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the grand scheme of things every one dies and the universes freezes from entropic heat death, so yeah... That said Nihilism isn't necessarily pessimistic. The French Existentialist were basically weak nihilism and Camus was almost celebratory of the lack of meaning of life. "Nothing Means Anything" can be taken as "fuck it burn it all down" OR it can be taken as "there are no unforgivable sins, there is no eternal…

In the grand scheme of things every one dies and the universes freezes from entropic heat death, so yeah... {facepalm} We don't know what Dark Matter and Dark Energy are. We have no idea what happens if/when the expansion of space itself starts pulling quarks apart. https://www.quora.com/What-happens-when-you-pull-apart-a-pai... You only think you know what's going to happen, based on the limited toy understanding of…

The entropic heat death of the universe comes more from the notion that R=1 is implied by the conservation of energy and so while the universe might stop expanding at t=∞ the average energy of any particle at that time will be 0.

if R>1 same thing but faster.

The other option is that we all die and then the universe collapses... which is just as final for anything hanging around as heat death would be.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#35

Post by Stanleyc23 »

danschumann wrote: post #18

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.…

I get your point but also want to point out that dictators ban religions because it usually tells people there is something more powerful than the dictator.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#36

Post by stcredzero »

Avshalom wrote: post #26
stcredzero wrote: post #8

Nihilists are often guilty of something which many teenagers are guilty of, which I call epistemological narcissism. Basically, they think they know it all, pretty much. The cure for this is to take the extrapolation strategy which PG uses in "What You Can't Say." ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) However, you should instead apply it to "what you can't predict." Would any of our ancestors of 400 or 1000 years ag…

As a side note--and I stole this idea from an essay that I thought was by Asimov called the Scientist and the Sage but: 400 or 1000 years ago there were still basically three possible predictions: the universe will end; the universe is infinite; the universe will cycle. It is then trivial to find philosophers who take one of those notions as a cornerstone of their philosophy and thus absolutely have a conceptual fram…

but: 400 or 1000 years ago there were still basically three possible predictions: the universe will end; the universe is infinite; the universe will cycle.

It is then trivial to find philosophers who take one of those notions as a cornerstone of their philosophy and thus absolutely have a conceptual framework for the right questions.

We now have an inkling that this taxonomy of understanding may well be too limited. For one thing, the notion of a "beginning" might not actually have a concrete meaning. There may simply be no time before "time zero." Also, the universe may well come to a false "end" in a way which completely remixes the laws of physics and possibly remixes the very causal structure of the universe. The universe may well unfold in a series of such incomprehensible remixings in a way analogous to Roger Penrose's 5-way symmetrical tiling, where an infinity may be "covered" by a predetermined non-cyclic pattern which never repeats. That last one is something which our ancestors of 400 and 1000 years ago simply didn't have the "mental furnishing" to conceptualize.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#37

Post by Sohakes »

stcredzero wrote: post #8

Nihilists are often guilty of something which many teenagers are guilty of, which I call epistemological narcissism. Basically, they think they know it all, pretty much. The cure for this is to take the extrapolation strategy which PG uses in "What You Can't Say." ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) However, you should instead apply it to "what you can't predict." Would any of our ancestors of 400 or 1000 years ag…

To me at least, the lack of meaning comes to what we are. If we are just a really complex phenomenon, then why are we more important then other such things? If our consciousness is just emergent behavior of a lot of brain cells communicating, then why are we more important than the particles of air making wind, or ants acting like a being together? Even the concept of self or being is a illusion, our sensation of continuity is just a byproduct of our memories.

And if we are comparable to the wind, why does anything we do is special? Why do something rather than other thing? Why create things and not destroy everything? Why prefer a type of phenomenon instead of other?

I can't grasp it no matter what I read on the subject or on philosophy (but I never really discussed with someone who could point me to good directions). Everything I read seems to base its ideas on some axioms in which I don't think are true, such as that human life is important, or that we should maximize individual or collective happiness, or anything like that.

Yeah, we don't know a lot of things. Maybe consciousness is not only emergent behavior. Maybe we have a soul or something like that. But it's hardly the truth at this point, it looks like just a false hope we can hold onto.

I also don't share the text or video views. I'm quite pessimistic although I don't act like that. I do like to hold onto the hope I'm wrong.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#38

Post by danschumann »

Stanleyc23 wrote: post #35
danschumann wrote: post #18

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.…

I get your point but also want to point out that dictators ban religions because it usually tells people there is something more powerful than the dictator.

Did you know the same regions of the brain light up for self when people think of God? Maybe the dictator doesn't want anyone to think THEY'RE more important than the dictator, like in our society, where every individual is sovereign with rights, every individual is like a king.

Re: Optimistic Nihilism (2017)

#40

Post by ahussain »

undoware wrote: post #16
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

Well, for what it's worth, I thought your point was valid and well made. I think it represents a strong critique of the oft-stereotyped "Silicon Valley tech culture" - it's the same tendency that leads people to try and "optimize" their social relationships, not realizing the optimization is the wrong instinct to have when it comes to dealings with other people.
Post reply on HN