Is this philosopher unique in his views or who else has claimed the same things i.e Camus or Nietzsche?

Question

A yahoo answers person has made these claimes about the philosopher's books on this site
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/gamahucher_press_catalogue.htm


"Dean has a very strong opinion and believes in nothing but chaos. No good, no evil, no science, no morals, no rational thought, no God.... nothing. If one finds human thought absurd and meaningless why waste time writing a book about his own meaningless human thoughts?"

is this philosopher unique in arging these views -or who else has said the same claims ie CAMUS NIETZSCHE

Answer 1

Judging by the descriptions of the books, which look to be self-published, Dean takes skepticism too far. Yes, there have been other nihilist philosophers. But the American philosopher C.S. Peirce showed that while anything can be doubted (even 2x2 = 4), the argument that establishes the doubt "rests" on assumptions that at that moment are NOT doubted.

Dean is in that philosophical place (a very black one spiritually) of terror and anger at discovering the almost arbitrary nature of our socially constructed world of beliefs. Descartes was there just before "cogito, ergo sum" gave him something to hold on to. A swimmer who panics and drowns is in that place, too. But the water WILL hold you up if you relax and let it. I used to tell my students that if they got over their need for something to hold them up, something to stand on, they'd get to live in the parts of the universe that have no floors.

Look at each philosopher not just for what they refute and deny but also for what they uncritically accept. Look for the ground they stand on while they shake their fists at human irrationality. Sure, most concepts of God are badly confused. Sure, much is still argued in science. But we're all pretty much agreed about floors, and about killing the innocent. Dean could get out of his black hole by shutting up and getting a simple job that interacted with people in some helpful way -- and waiting until someone ASKS him what he thinks. The surprise (to the ego) is that no one will. They're all busy with their own opinions and doubts.

So no, Dean is not unique. Dean is a typical angry young intellectual. When he learns just a little more (and life is sure to teach him, the easy way or the hard), he'll drop all that churning verbiage and get an honest job -- carpenter, policeman, math teacher, whatever. And he'll wear Buddha's gentle, compassionate smile.

Answer 2

First let me say that I haven't read Dean's book(s), so my answer concerns only the passage you quoted.

As far as that passage is concerned, Dean seems to be endorsing an extreme form of nihilism. I cannot imagine that he is unique in making the claims he does (though I do wonder how he argues for them); nihilism has been around at least since the days of the "atheism controversy" in which Jacobi accused Fichte of being a nihilist (1790's - the charge, by the way, was entirely unfounded; Fichte was hardly a nihilist). Dean is far from the only one ever to hold the view that everything is the product of chaos.

As for Camus and Nietzsche, it's easy to see how one might associate each with nihilism, but it seems to me that labelling them nihilists would be a mistake. Camus was an existentialist, and as such, he was a nihilist only about human essence - we are what we do, nothing more. It does not follow from this, however, that Camus was a nihilist simpliciter - he did believe that we exist; he just denied that there is any such thing as human "nature" or "species-being" over and above the actions we take in living life. As far as Nietzsche is concerned, he did believe in the annihilation of values, and he seems (in his middle and late-period works, anyway) to have held that the valuation of truth ultimately devalues itself. However, Nietzsche also noted that the individuals who realize this have a unique opportunity, i.e. they can re-value their world based on their own free will. Thus I would argue (and I'm certainly not original in arguing this) that Nietzsche was not ultimately a nihilist either.

Dean sounds like an interesting character. I hope this answer helps a bit. Happy reading!

Answer 3

smart layout and creationism is the comparable element. that's historical historic previous smart layout have been on condition that's @ss surpassed to it on the Dover trial that became in 2005. Creationists have a concern and that's the 1st modification. you could no longer tutor faith in faculties. This became upheld interior the Edwards trial of 1987. So what creationists have had to do is sanitise their language, to make it much less brazenly non secular. Even the main die no longer difficulty-free smart layout proponent will admit, if pressed, that they suspect that the "fashion designer" is the the god of Abraham.All smart layout is, is bare bones creationism. that's all this is that in case you do not have faith me study choose Jones' ruling that's on the information superhighway that's public record. And he's a conservative choose. Barbara Forrest between the expert witness went to city in this people. there became a creationist textbook titled "Of Pandas and individuals" and until now 1987, they used the be conscious "God". After 1987, it became "fashion designer". somebody had in basic terms went through it with an MS be conscious substitution and adjusted god with fashion designer different than that it became be conscious for be conscious comparable.