Moral Nihilism and what it truly means.

[Mike]

btw I view Nihilism as a way to search for truth without being encumbered by morals(THE REASON I R ONE).

Doesn't sound like you're searching very hard. In fact, it sounds like you're very fixed in your resolve. It's almost as if nihilism has become your place of refuge. You're digging your heels in and hunkering down, because you feel "secure" there.

The problem is, you build that trench deeper and deeper, and it becomes harder and harder to see the light. But it's not hard for God to reach you where ever you are. Light always overtakes darkness. I was in my lit-up bedroom and looked into my closet. It was dark in there, but light was piercing into it. When I went in and shut the door, I found it was all dark. But when I opened the door light streamed into the darkness, because that's what light does. Another thing I noticed was that the darkness of the closet didn't effect the lit room. Darkness can't overtake light.

MN, you are in a dark place, and if you're truly searching, you'll keep that door open so the LIGHT can still pierce your darkness. We are called to be His light to the world.

Matthew 5
14 “You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven."

I do pray that you don't let pride be a ever-growing wall between yourself and God. I pray you suck it up and humbly seek the Truth. You have an amazing heart. I hear that in you. This I guarantee... the moment you truly bask in His Light, will be the moment you find the Truth you seek, and your life will never be the same.


I won't chase you around this board begging you to surrender to His Light from now on. That was just one sermon, no charge, on the house.

Now back to our regularly scheduled broadcast.

 

[modernnihilst]

Truth does come in more than one form(ie not just religous) my search it so find(honestly as close as I can) the truth of history and by extension the truth to the human condition. Without morals one can more freely look at the darker side of historical events without prejudging. Take the Nazi's aside from the whole genocide thing they are at least in part responsiable for a large portion of modern inventions like aerospace, defense, weaponry, genetics, ect. If I were encumbered by morality I might not be able to see past the Holocaust and see that even with all the horrors they commited they also did major good.

 

[jasoncran]

Truth does come in more than one form(ie not just religous) my search it so find(honestly as close as I can) the truth of history and by extension the truth to the human condition. Without morals one can more freely look at the darker side of historical events without prejudging. Take the Nazi's aside from the whole genocide thing they are at least in part responsiable for a large portion of modern inventions like aerospace, defense, weaponry, genetics, ect. If I were encumbered by morality I might not be able to see past the Holocaust and see that even with all the horrors they commited they also did major good.

i do that all the time with my christian thiest word view.

i can and have done a thread on why hitler was good for germany. the athiest/agnostic that loves che gueverra got all offended when i did so and called that sick. yet its been told to me that my family has member that were killed in the shoah. go figure.

 

[Drummer4Christ]

Truth does come in more than one form(ie not just religous) my search it so find(honestly as close as I can) the truth of history and by extension the truth to the human condition. Without morals one can more freely look at the darker side of historical events without prejudging. Take the Nazi's aside from the whole genocide thing they are at least in part responsiable for a large portion of modern inventions like aerospace, defense, weaponry, genetics, ect. If I were encumbered by morality I might not be able to see past the Holocaust and see that even with all the horrors they commited they also did major good.

Except, that the sole motivation behind such innovations were to perpetuate war & genocide.

You said you're looking for the "truth". Is this "truth" also subjective? If human life has no objective value than neither should "truth", correct?

How do you ascertain that any of what the Nazi's did was a "major good" or "the horrors they committed" if human life has no objective value to determine what's "good" or "bad" for humanity?

 

[modernnihilst]

Except, that the sole motivation behind such innovations were to perpetuate war & genocide.

You said you're looking for the "truth". Is this "truth" also subjective? If human life has no objective value than neither should "truth", correct?

How do you ascertain that any of what the Nazi's did was a "major good" or "the horrors they committed" if human life has no objective value to determine what's "good" or "bad" for humanity?

You are confusing Moral Nihilism(me) for Existential Nihilism(not me) in regards to lifes inherent value.

In regards to what the Nazi's did as good or bad, I'm sure that by some general research you could find out that a former Nazi scientist and decorated Nazi officer(Wernher von Braun) developed several rockets that eventually led to the creation of the Saturn rocket system. And that of course was the begining of NASA as well as the space program, and by extension also the agency that pushed the development of the computer, and of course teh interwebz so we can enjoy our conversation. As to the point that all the Nazi's wanted to make war better, you will find that most things that we take for granted that make our lives easier today were in some part developed initially for, during, or to assist in the waging of.....yup war. Modern medicine, computers, cell phones, raido, jets, SUV's(dont make it better but they are fun to drive), etc.

 

[modernnihilst]

i do that all the time with my christian thiest word view.

i can and have done a thread on why hitler was good for germany. the athiest/agnostic that loves che gueverra got all offended when i did so and called that sick. yet its been told to me that my family has member that were killed in the shoah. go figure.

One MAY be able to do so with a Thiest world view, however more often that not the eventual truth becomes(however slightly) slanted towards morality, something I'm trying to avoid, this does not mean by any streach that a Thiest person will always be incorrect just more often than not it becomes not just a search for historical truth but a battle between morality and the truth. By that I mean there is a tendency to attempt to put modern standards to historical periods. And by doing so skewing the accuracy of the facts ever so slightly so that sometimes a different "truth" occurs.

 

[jasoncran]

then eliminate any human endeavor to study truth and allow robots to think and tell us what is true . that is why a higher being to tell us what the truth is must exist as we all have a bias.

lovely, you may coerce me to do another thread. but i will get sicker when i do this time.

hmm why the shoah had to occur so that man had to advance.

we all have that bias. its called revionism, and dont think athiests and so forth dont do it.

 

[modernnihilst]

then eliminate any human endeavor to study truth and allow robots to think and tell us what is true . that is why a higher being to tell us what the truth is must exist as we all have a bias.

lovely, you may coerce me to do another thread. but i will get sicker when i do this time.

hmm why the shoah had to occur so that man had to advance.

we all have that bias. its called revionism, and dont think athiests and so forth dont do it.

You lost me on the first two parts.
The reason I dont follow morality is to avoid(as much as possiable) bias when revewing history's darker parts. There are other reasons for my being Nihilistic but those are rather private. In terms of why Shoah "had to occur so that man could advance", I have no honest answer. Someday I hope to be able to have one, but that seems unlikely.

 

[jasoncran]

theres always been sad parts of history that also had some benefits to that but with your view of nothing right or wrong as theres no absolute truth and man is dumb and is only moral because of pain.

ok that all happened by chance? death and flukes and somehow we get where we are?

im fully aware of history and often by choice here i dont say much until i choose to.im jaded in that part of mans history. i dont see us getting better and better moraly.

as a vet i know you have that jadeness of why? america is very vain and our society is all about me.

i will put this way. we soldiers go to die and in harms way so that american here who havent a clue in what we do or the reality of what is over there can simply be so well vain.

you know the grey that is out there when we serve and how its well difficult at times to do the right thing.

and yet i could in all sadistic say that wars are good as death of our friends and injuries of the has advanced medical science. we have learned more about prosthetics from the current wars and also traumatic brain injuries and burns.

but well theres that all those that i know that died and didnt make it.its them that i dont forget and those that did return and took their lives

in honor them and the most recent sgt prestridge.

so war even ww2 if it could be avoided should have been but theres no choice looking back but i wont say that we were totally innocent. theres some attrocities we did do.

 

[modernnihilst]

theres always been sad parts of history that also had some benefits to that but with your view of nothing right or wrong as theres no absolute truth and man is dumb and is only moral because of pain.

ok that all happened by chance? death and flukes and somehow we get where we are?

im fully aware of history and often by choice here i dont say much until i choose to.im jaded in that part of mans history. i dont see us getting better and better moraly.

as a vet i know you have that jadeness of why? america is very vain and our society is all about me.

i will put this way. we soldiers go to die and in harms way so that american here who havent a clue in what we do or the reality of what is over there can simply be so well vain.

you know the grey that is out there when we serve and how its well difficult at times to do the right thing.

and yet i could in all sadistic say that wars are good as death of our friends and injuries of the has advanced medical science. we have learned more about prosthetics from the current wars and also traumatic brain injuries and burns.

but well theres that all those that i know that died and didnt make it.its them that i dont forget and those that did return and took their lives

in honor them and the most recent sgt prestridge.

so war even ww2 if it could be avoided should have been but theres no choice looking back but i wont say that we were totally innocent. theres some attrocities we did do.

In regards to the first point. True there is always sadness with war. In regards to my beliefs....... Yet again I simply dont believe in morals as being absolute, NOT that right or wrong dont exist, they are simply points of view and frankly I couldnt care about what is right or wrong in regards to historical study. Because what is right today may not be right tomorrow. Absolute truth... I dont believe anyone alive could offer you that. At least not honestly. Why look for it then? To better understand humanity.

Did all the past conflicts, death, suffering, strife, and pain occur randomly? Dunno. I refuse to make assumptions.

Is man "getting better and better moraly."? Again I dont know. Frankly morality is not a concern of mine.

Am I jaded? In what way do you refer to being jaded? Are you refering to taking anothers life? Are you refering to losing several good friends in that sandbox? Am I jaded? ....You bet your sweet (3 explitives deleted).

Do I forget those lost in this and previous wars? Dont ever accuse me of that.

Could wars in the past been avoided? Unlikely. It seems that the only constant in history is those in power desire to destroy those that dont agree with them.
Are there advances made in socitiey because of that desire? One can not argue that point. Is the price to high? You decide.

 

[Mike]

Because what is right today may not be right tomorrow.

This is one of the worst lies, and it has lead to the degradation of civilization.

 

[modernnihilst]

This is one of the worst lies, and it has lead to the degradation of civilization.

In the 1800's in the U.S. it was right to own slaves. Am I mistaken or is that now not right?

 

[Mike]

In the 1800's in the U.S. it was legal to own slaves. Am I mistaken or is that now not right?

Now, work with that, and explain the relevance, if you would.

 

[modernnihilst]

Now, work with that, and explain the relevance, if you would.

Simple in the american south it was concidered both legal and a sign of status to own slaves to work your plantation. In fact it was concidered a point of pride to be able to afford them. As there was no opposition to the practice(initially) one could state that it was not only legal and a point of pride one could also argue that it was socialy acceptable.
Good enough?

 

[Drummer4Christ]

You are confusing Moral Nihilism(me) for Existential Nihilism(not me) in regards to lifes inherent value.

Unless I am mistaken, you do not believe that human life has objective value.

In regards to what the Nazi's did as good or bad, I'm sure that by some general research you could find out that a former Nazi scientist and decorated Nazi officer(Wernher von Braun) developed several rockets that eventually led to the creation of the Saturn rocket system. And that of course was the begining of NASA as well as the space program, and by extension also the agency that pushed the development of the computer, and of course teh interwebz so we can enjoy our conversation. As to the point that all the Nazi's wanted to make war better, you will find that most things that we take for granted that make our lives easier today were in some part developed initially for, during, or to assist in the waging of.....yup war. Modern medicine, computers, cell phones, raido, jets, SUV's(dont make it better but they are fun to drive), etc.

How can you objectively say such things have made life "better" since life itself has no objective value?

Again, how can you say the Nazi's did anything objectively "good" or "bad" since life and, the moral standard that governs it, is not objective?

 

[Mike]

Simple in the american south it was concidered both legal and a sign of status to own slaves to work your plantation. In fact it was concidered a point of pride to be able to afford them. As there was no opposition to the practice(initially) one could state that it was not only legal and a point of pride one could also argue that it was socialy acceptable.
Good enough?

This might have been true in parts of America, but even in those parts there were those who rejected it. The southern states at the time were desperate for increased revenue from labor-intensive cotton production. (Cotton was the real reason for the war.) The union that they were members of had a federal constitution that had prohibited states that didn't already have legalized slavery from adopting it. But, the country for the most part already realized that it was wrong.

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/alincoln.html

Lincoln "was losing interest in politics" when the Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed by Congress in 1854. This legislation opened lands previously closed to slavery to the possibility of its spread by local option (popular sovereignty); Lincoln viewed the provisions of the act as immoral. Although he was not an abolitionist and thought slavery unassailably protected by the Constitution in states where it already existed, Lincoln also thought that America's founders had put slavery on the way to "ultimate extinction" by preventing its spread to new territories. He saw this act, which had been sponsored by Democratic Senator Stephen A. Douglas, as a new and alarming development.

This isn't really consistent with the point you were trying to make. You said...

In the 1800's in the U.S. it was right to own slaves.

It wasn't "the U.S.", and the U.S. didn't believe it was right.

Morality cannot be determined by each person or changed over time, and it doesn't. People's values might change, but morality doesn't.

 

[modernnihilst]

This might have been true in parts of America, but even in those parts there were those who rejected it. The southern states at the time were desperate for increased revenue from labor-intensive cotton production. (Cotton was the real reason for the war.) The union that they were members of had a federal constitution that had prohibited states that didn't already have legalized slavery from adopting it. But, the country for the most part already realized that it was wrong.

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/alincoln.html



This isn't really consistent with the point you were trying to make. You said...



It wasn't "the U.S.", and the U.S. didn't believe it was right.

Morality cannot be determined by each person or changed over time, and it doesn't. People's values might change, but morality doesn't.

Well put.
I must therefore withdraw that argument. That period of history isnt a strong suit of mine I'm more Greco/Roman(at least thats what my BA is in)

 

[modernnihilst]

Unless I am mistaken, you do not believe that human life has objective value.

You are, I beleive life does not AUTOMATICALLY have value. One must do something with it. Using my crystal ball I see the next question going to be asked, "who determines the value?" The answer is anyone can determine value for themselves. It's not my job(nor is it my place) to tell people what they must do for thier life to be worth while.

I'm going to reuse an example I've previously used(because its a really good one). My fiance's engagement ring used to belong to my grandmother. To me its value far exceeds just its worth as a ring. Would you automatically pay what I believe the ring to be worth or would you want to pay the price as determined by fair market value?

 

[modernnihilst]

This might have been true in parts of America, but even in those parts there were those who rejected it. The southern states at the time were desperate for increased revenue from labor-intensive cotton production. (Cotton was the real reason for the war.) The union that they were members of had a federal constitution that had prohibited states that didn't already have legalized slavery from adopting it. But, the country for the most part already realized that it was wrong.

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/alincoln.html



This isn't really consistent with the point you were trying to make. You said...



It wasn't "the U.S.", and the U.S. didn't believe it was right.

Morality cannot be determined by each person or changed over time, and it doesn't. People's values might change, but morality doesn't.

However Greece shared no such revulsions, most of the population owned slaves and those that didnt couldnt(not land owners). AND THIS TIME I CHECKED.

 

[jasoncran]

so you assign value to them friends when they have no real value if theres no real moral abirter reason besides your feelings

so by that reason war is good and the loss of the weak and poor for the benefit of man cant be really denied by thinkers such as yourself. you wouldnt say that but your position to deny that fact is weak if said fact was to be allowed to be the fact.