Wouldn't it be self-defeating, or am i misunderstanding the concept?
2006-07-18 07:39:00 · 8 answers · asked by Jerusalem Delivered 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Yes, it is self-defeating - or rather, self-contradicting.
Nihilists make the claim that there are no objective truths. They make this claim, as all claims are made, in the belief that it is true. If it is true, as they claim, then it has to be objectively true. It has to be objectively true because the concept of subjective truth makes no sense. If something is true, it is true for everyone - that is part of what truth means.
Consider, if someone says, "That might be true for you, but it isn't true for me", all they can be saying is that they don't *believe* it (whatever it is) to be true. They can't be saying it's true where you are but not true where they are.
There is only one way things are. There are lots of different *beliefs* about the way things are, but if any two of them are true beliefs they are the same beliefs.
Belief is subjective, truth is objective.
2006-07-18 18:55:36 · answer #1 · answered by brucebirdfield 4 · 8⤊ 1⤋
Nihilism is the position that nothing has objective meaning, purpose, or value. Stated like that, it is itself a universal, but a good nihilist can find ways to convey the thought without allusion to universals. A lot of people confuse nihilism and fatalism. They aren't the same.
I can't think of any argument against such a position, which I suppose is why I'm a nihilist.
But nihilism does not imply some type of gray and depressing life. Instead, it allows for the freedom for the individual to assign relative meaning, purpose, and value, which is what we all do anyway even when we think otherwise.
To claim there is objective purpose is really simply to create a relative purpose for yourself that is aligned with your concept of the objective purpose.
2006-07-18 16:30:04 · answer #2 · answered by lenny 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To the extent that nihilism is simply a form of existentialism, I do think that you can "argue against" nihilism. You can discuss the validity of the the existential epistemic framework primarily. However, the reality is that most self-avowed nihilists tend to reach that conclusion based more on emotion than well-reasoned philosophical conclusion. So, can you argue against nihilism: yes; can you argue against a nihilist, probably no.
2006-07-18 15:09:11 · answer #3 · answered by Josh 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Depends what you mean by "arguing."
Trying to disprove it would be impossible, I think. Since no claims are made, there are no claims to disprove.
As for proposing a better philosophy of life, the only approach I see is a purely pragmatic one: providing an alternative for convenience.
Arguing against a well-educated Nihilist is an arduous task.
2006-07-18 14:45:06 · answer #4 · answered by tlakkamond 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can argue but it's unlikely you can convince a nihilist that you are right since a nihilist by definition says all is meaningless, including your arguments. It's kind of like asking if there is another word for thesaurus.
2006-07-18 14:50:28 · answer #5 · answered by PDY 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not impossible, just pointless.
Best course would be suggesting methods of suicide for the nihilist. If nothing is what they're looking for...that's as close as they're going to get.
2006-07-18 14:51:00 · answer #6 · answered by kaththea s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, nihilism is a waste of thought that will depress you.
Load of crap.
2006-07-18 15:32:12 · answer #7 · answered by eireblood2 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
indeed.
2006-07-18 15:32:51 · answer #8 · answered by Solveiga 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋