Live data from Hacker News

A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

meltingasphalt.com

111–120 of 261 posts

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. > Christians believe that for folks who don't know Jesus, > nihilism is essentially true And folks who don't give a rat ass about what Christians believe do know that nobody has monopoly on meaning and don't see the need to reduce everything else to nihilism. It would be much nicer if religious people would only use…

>One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. Care to elaborate on this? I'm an atheist myself and I've been struggling with this a lot.

Aesthetics is one possibility. When someone straitens a picture frame they don't need that to last past the heat death of the universe for it to be worth it. Expanding this to say a painting or poem which also has a finite lifespan and you can even learn to appreciate a Mandala. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandala

Keep going in that direction and a life well lived is it's own reward. And by well lived I mean occasional cliff diving not devoting oneself to charitable giving.

There is a lot of pressure for 'success' but I suspect many people are happier with a career in dog grooming than they would be as CEO of IBM. High status can be fun, or endless drudgery.

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#112

Really enjoyed this. I love how practical, humble, and respectful (even of religions, which I really appreciate) uncompromising nihilists tend to be. I happen to be a Christian, so I could go on all day about meaning, but if I could say one thing, it's this: We all die, and it's more than likely even humanity will die out as well (even if it's at the heat death of the universe). You've pretty much rejected the possib…

One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. > Christians believe that for folks who don't know Jesus, > nihilism is essentially true And folks who don't give a rat ass about what Christians believe do know that nobody has monopoly on meaning and don't see the need to reduce everything else to nihilism. It would be much nicer if religious people would only use…

That's rather hypocritical though, right? Athiests measure religious people with their conceptions of science and reason, why can't it go the other way?

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#114

> Science taught me that it's all just atoms and the void, so there can't be any deeper point or purpose to the whole thing; the kind of meaning most people yearn for — Ultimate Meaning — simply doesn't exist. I don't think that is something science can teach you. Science can give you the scientific method, but answering the question "Is the scientific method the only valid means of knowledge?" is philosophy not scie…

It's like saying that it's all just pixels, therefore these words you read don't have any meaning.

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#115

> Science taught me that it's all just atoms and the void, so there can't be any deeper point or purpose to the whole thing; the kind of meaning most people yearn for — Ultimate Meaning — simply doesn't exist. I don't think that is something science can teach you. Science can give you the scientific method, but answering the question "Is the scientific method the only valid means of knowledge?" is philosophy not scie…

>It seems the author is trying to smuggle in a particular philosophy under the guise of science. I couldn't agree more. Further, I'll add another reason why one might find trouble with that statement: It seems that because of the usefulness of the scientific method, as far as I can tell the effect on human psychology appears to be such that we are in a time and place where we are buying into the idea that the ratio o…

In what sense can something be said to exist if it's "outside our observable universe, or even outside our universe entirely"?

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#116
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny to apply evolutionary principles to a critique of religion ;) But I do think you're making the incorrect assumption that religion hasn't already undergone that sort of strenuous debate. Jesus is probably the most discussed/doubted/critiqued figure in history - certainly we've had more time to find out his flaws and the flaws of his followers than we have of science. And yet he hasn't been relegated to the dust…

> Jesus is probably the most discussed/doubted/critiqued figure in history - certainly we've had more time to find out his flaws and the flaws of his followers than we have of science. And yet he hasn't been relegated to the dust heap of history like Baal and Thor. Well, to be fair, Jesus was the central figure of the religion of the people you're talking about and for a long time outing yourself as a non-believer wa…

> Well, to be fair, Jesus was the central figure of the religion of the people you're talking about and for a long time outing yourself as a non-believer was "problematic" for your well-being and status in society.

Not before many, including the earliest Christian leaders, were killed for their belief in Jesus. Christianity has proven to be a determined startup.

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. > Christians believe that for folks who don't know Jesus, > nihilism is essentially true And folks who don't give a rat ass about what Christians believe do know that nobody has monopoly on meaning and don't see the need to reduce everything else to nihilism. It would be much nicer if religious people would only use…

That's rather hypocritical though, right? Athiests measure religious people with their conceptions of science and reason, why can't it go the other way?

Speaking entirely for myself here as an atheist, I think most of us just want to be left alone to believe what we believe without having religious people constantly approaching us with "Well, you don't know Jesus, that's why you believe X,Y, Z." As if they're somehow certain that a God exists and that we simply aren't enlightened enough to see it.

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. > Christians believe that for folks who don't know Jesus, > nihilism is essentially true And folks who don't give a rat ass about what Christians believe do know that nobody has monopoly on meaning and don't see the need to reduce everything else to nihilism. It would be much nicer if religious people would only use…

>One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. Care to elaborate on this? I'm an atheist myself and I've been struggling with this a lot.

Philosophy has many different shades and colors (Philosophy of language, science, mathematics), and there is also a "branch" asking questions related to the meaning of life.

I can't tell you where you could/should start, because I feel like I would already influence you too much by taking some sort of choice away from you.

I will link a few essays I could find that are available for free and are not too long. I'm already influencing you a little bit by making this selection, but I urge you to do your own research: If you like one of the stories, try to find out who was influenced by whom (e.g. Kafka doesn't directly address meaning but influenced Camus; Nietzsche was influenced by Schopenhauer), and consider reading things challenging the author.

[1] The Last Question - Isaac Asimov (http://www.physics.princeton.edu/ph115/LQ.pdf)

[2] Metamorphosis - Franz Kafka (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5200)

[3] A Clean, Well-Lighted Place - Ernest Hemingway (http://www.url-der.org/a_clean_well_lighted_place.pdf)

[4] On Truth and Lies in an Extra-Moral Sense - Friedrich Nietzsche (http://www.jpcatholic.com/NCUpdf/Nietzsche.pdf)

I've often see people link the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, so I'm gonna do it as well: http://plato.stanford.edu/index.html

While I'm writing this gutenberg.org seems to have some problems, but just search for "Metamorphosis Kafka", and you should find plenty of other sources.

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. > Christians believe that for folks who don't know Jesus, > nihilism is essentially true And folks who don't give a rat ass about what Christians believe do know that nobody has monopoly on meaning and don't see the need to reduce everything else to nihilism. It would be much nicer if religious people would only use…

That's rather hypocritical though, right? Athiests measure religious people with their conceptions of science and reason, why can't it go the other way?

Hitchen's Razor - "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: A Nihilist's Guide to Meaning

#120
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>One can find much more objective meaning to existence without outsorcing it to some imaginable friend. Care to elaborate on this? I'm an atheist myself and I've been struggling with this a lot.

Aesthetics is one possibility. When someone straitens a picture frame they don't need that to last past the heat death of the universe for it to be worth it. Expanding this to say a painting or poem which also has a finite lifespan and you can even learn to appreciate a Mandala. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandala Keep going in that direction and a life well lived is it's own reward. And by well lived I mean occasi…

The issue is defining what it is to be "well lived". With out a sky daddy, you're pretty much unable to declare anything good or bad.

Some men want to watch the world burn. Tell me why that is wrong? You will say that human life has value. I will ask, honestly, why? From a purely reductionist perspective it doesn't. It's all just atoms. I kill cockroaches without a negative thought. There is no reason to not have the same view of people in a purely materialistic worldview.

Again, if one's aesthetics is gruesome, but enjoyable to that person, you cannot tell them they are wrong. You cannot interfere with them from an ethics perspective. They want to kill, steal and rape, you have to let them. Otherwise you're forcing an external model that you deem good onto them. We've already established that there is no actual good model.

The result is that we must accept hypocrisy. We must all realize that might makes right. The most powerful, flawed group of people are correct. They are the law.

Post reply on HN