Category Archives: Nihilism

Therapeutic nihilism is a contention that curing people, or societies, of their ills by treatment is impossible.

In medicine, it was connected to the idea that many "cures" do more harm than good, and that one should instead encourage the body to heal itself. Michel de Montaigne espoused this view in his Essais in 1580. This position was later popular, among other places, in France in the 1820s and 1830s, but has mostly faded away in the modern era due to the development of provably effective medicines such as antibiotics, starting with the release of sulfonamide in 1936.

In relation to society, therapeutic nihilism was an idea, with origins in early 20th-century Germany, that nothing can be done to cure society of the problems facing it. Its main proponent was the novelist Joseph Conrad, whose writings reflect its tenets.

In politics, therapeutic nihilism is a defining principle of modern conservatism. The so-called "Father of Conservatism" Edmund Burke's imputation of "unintended consequences" the implicitly inevitable and undesirable results of political engineering, and Peter Viereck's assertion in "But I'm A Conservative!",[1] his also-definitive essay in the April 1940 issue of the Atlantic magazine, that socialists are nave to believe that society can be improved, are two prime examples of conservative arguments for therapeutic nihilism.

The phrase therapeutic nihilism is also included in a modern version of the Hippocratic Oath, traditionally taken by physicians upon graduation. The statement is "I will apply for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism."

Originally posted here:

Therapeutic nihilism - Wikipedia

by Vered Arnon

In the notebook(1) excerpts published as The Will to Power Nietzsche describes nihilism as ambiguous in that it can be symptomatic of either strength or weakness. Nietzsche claims that nihilism is a necessary step in the transition to a revaluation of all values. Passive nihilism is characterised by a weak will, and active nihilism by a strong will. Nietzsche emphasises that nihilism is merely a means to an end, and not an end in itself.

Nihilism, according to Nietzsche, is the most extreme form of pessimism. Put simply, it is the belief that everything is meaningless, but this oversimplifies the concept. Nihilism is a transitional stage that accompanies human development. It arises from weariness. When people feel alienated from values, and have lost the foundation of their value system but have not replaced it with anything, then they become nihilists. They become disappointed with the egoistic nature of truth and morality and so on, but at the same time recognise that what is egoistic is necessary. The notion of free will seems contradictory. Values, though originating from the ego, have been placed in a sphere so far outside and above that they are untouchable. Any attempt to really figure out the truth or posit a true reality has become impossible, thus the world appears meaningless and valueless. The nihilist realises that all criteria by which the real world have been measured are categories that refer to a fictitious, constructed world. This sense of alienation results in exhaustion.

Nihilism would be a good sign, Nietzsche writes in his notebooks. It is a necessary transitional phase, cleansing and clearing away outdated value systems so that something new can rise in their place. He writes about two different forms of nihilism, active nihilism and passive nihilism. Passive nihilism is more the traditional belief that all is meaningless, while active nihilism goes beyond judgement to deed, and destroys values where they seem apparent. Passive nihilism signifies the end of an era, while active nihilism ushers in something new. Nietzsche considers nihilism not as an end, but as a means ultimately to the revaluation of values. He stresses repeatedly that nihilism is a transitional stage.

Passive nihilism is symptomatic of decreased, declined, receded power of the spirit(2). One recognises that all external values are empty and have no true authority. This renders the internal values, the conscience, meaningless as well, resulting in the loss of personal authority. All authority gone, the spirit in hopelessness and with a sense of fatalism strives to rid itself of all responsibility. All trust in society is gone, and the will is weakened. Aims, motives, and goals are gone. The spirit wants something to depend on, but has absolutely nothing that isnt arbitrary. Disintegration of the structured system of values leads one to seek escape in anything that still maintains an outward semblance of authority. These things are hollow escapes though, what Nietzsche calls self-narcotization. The spirit attempts to escape, or at least forget about the emptiness. The weakened will strives to intoxicate itself in resignation, generalisations, petty things, debauchery and fanaticism. The will is weak and seeks escape rather than action. But any attempt to escape nihilism without revaluating values only makes the problem more acute.

Active nihilism is symptomatic of an increased power of the spirit. The will is strengthened and rebellious. This is the form of nihilism that does not stop at judgement, but goes on in action to be destructive towards the remaining vestiges of empty value systems. The strength of the will is tested by whether or not it can recognise all value systems as empty and meaningless, yet admit that these lies arise out of us and serve a purpose. This denial of a truthful world, Nietzsche says, may be a divine way of thinking. The active nihilist recognises that simplification and lies are necessary for life. The value of values becomes their emptiness. Where rationality and reason have clearly failed, the nihilist embraces irrationality and freedom from logic. The will now has an opportunity to assert its strength and power to deny all authority and deny goals and faith to deny the constraints of existence. Nietzsche describes this state as both destructive and ironic.

Active nihilism obviously is not an end, however. It merely opens the stage for the beginning of a revaluation of values. It opens the stage for the will to take power and assert itself. Nihilism is the precursor to revaluation, it does not replace values, it only tears them away. It functions as an essential transition, and must be understood as a means and not an end.

1 This paper is an analysis of notebook passages in an attempt to piece together and summarise Nietzsches ideas on a very small specific topic (His notebook entries often deal with nihilism, morality, pessimism, etc all at once. I am attempting to put together coherently what his views are on nihilism, sorting it out from the rest and leaving the rest alone). For the ease of reading, I will not employ internal citation. All of these ideas and propositions belong to Nietzsche alone, and come from Book One: European Nihilism from The Will To Power, translated and edited by Walter Kaufmann in 1967. 2 Spirit refers to a persons will. Nietzsche does not posit the existence of souls. This word is not used in a religious sense.

Continue reading here:

Nietzsches Analysis of Nihilism | The World Is On Fire

Nihilism holds that there is no meaning or value anywhere. Questions about purpose, ethics, and sacredness are unanswerable because they are meaningless. You might as well ask about the sleep habits of colorless green ideas as about the meaning of life.

Nihilism is a mirror image of eternalismthe stance that everything is meaningful. (For an introduction, see Preview: eternalism and nihilism.) However, the two stances are not simply opposites; they share fundamental metaphysical assumptions.

Eternalism and nihilism both fail to recognize that nebulosity and pattern are inseparable. Therefore they suppose that real meaning would be absolutely patterned: perfectly definite and certain, unchanging and objective. This is their shared metaphysical error.

Eternalism insists that meaning really is like that. That is its second metaphysical error. Nihilism observes, accurately, that no such meaning is possible. This corrects the second error. However, because nihilism shares the first error, it concludes that meaning is impossible, period. This is also wrong; nebulous meanings are real, for any reasonable definition of real.

Nihilism is attractive to those who have explicitly recognized, understood, and rejected eternalisms second error: belief in ultimate meaning. That is not easy. Nihilism is, therefore, the more intelligent stance. Or, at least, its a stance that tends to be adopted more often by more intelligent people. (Its even more dysfunctional than eternalism, so we could also call it less intelligent.)

While most people are committed, however waveringly, to eternalism, only a few commit to nihilism. In denying all meaning, nihilism is wildly implausible. Only a few sociopaths, intellectuals, and depressives try to maintain it.

Well see, though, that almost everyone adopts the nihilistic stance at times, without noticing. When the complete stance is unknown, nihilism seems like the only possible defense against the harmful lies of eternalism. (Just as eternalism seems like the only possible salvation from the harmful lies of nihilism.)

Even if you are relatively immune to nihilism, its important to understand as a prototype. Many other confused stances are modified or limited forms of nihilism. They reject particular types of meanings, rather than rejecting all meaningfulness. That makes their distortions, harms, and emotional dynamics similar to nihilisms.

The first page in this section discusses several obstacles you must overcome to even get to nihilism. The main one is the obviousness of meaning. Even before that, you have to let go of the hope that eternalism can somehow be made to work. There are also strong social and cultural taboos against nihilism. Finally, nihilism has nasty psychological side-effects that make you miserable.

The second page explains briefly what it would mean to accomplish nihilism: a state of total apathy. This would, theoretically, end suffering (which is one reason nihilism is attractive). Its probably impossible, although some religious systems seem to advocate it.

Most of my discussion of nihilism concerns its emotional dynamics. I begin with an analogy: eternalism is like one of those email scams that promises you millions of dollars in exchange for help getting money out of Nigeria. If you fall for that, catastrophic financial loss ensues.

Nihilism entails a similar catastrophic loss: the loss of meaning. The next page gives an overview of our psychological reactions to that loss: rage, intellectual argument, depression, and anxiety. Each gets its own, more detailed page.

In addition, I address the content of nihilistic intellectualization. This is a collection of reasons for rejecting obvious meanings as not really meaningful. They are supposedly the wrong kind of meaning; not ultimate, not objective, not eternal, not inherent, or not higher. So what? These arguments are bogus and nonsensical. They usually conceal a hidden motivation: the issue is not qualitative (the wrong kind of meaning) but quantitative (available meanings seem inadequately compelling). This is a psychological and practical problem, not a philosophical one, so psychological and practical methods may help.

The antidotes to nihilism are partly intellectual: realizing why its incorrect and harmful. Mainly, though, antidotes restore meaningfulness, by making it more powerful, more obvious, more compelling, more enjoyable.

Continued here:

Nihilism | Meaningness

Question: "What is nihilism?"

Answer:

Friedrich Nietzsche, a German philosopher, is usually credited with being the founder of nihilism. In his Will to Power he wrote, Every belief, every consideration of something true, is necessarily false because there is simply no true world. Thus, nihilism is the belief that all values are utterly worthless, that nothing can be known or communicated. The philosophy of nihilism is also associated with extreme pessimism and deep-seated skepticism about life. It has no allegiance to anyone or anything.

Nihilism takes numerous forms. Ethical or moral nihilism rejects the existence of ethical or moral values. That which designates such values as good and evil is seen as indistinct, and values are simply a result of social and emotional pressures. Existential nihilism declares that life has no inherent meaning or purpose. Political nihilism promotes the obliteration of all existing political, social, and religious institutions as a precondition for any and all future advancements in society.

Epistemological nihilism denies any possibility that truth and knowledge even exist. This view is often associated with those who suffer from extreme skepticism. For example, the classic question If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it make a sound? is carried one step further by the nihilist who asks, Did the tree even exist? The nihilist will contend that truth not only cannot be perceived but in fact does not exist and is not real.

By direct contrast, Christians know assuredly that nihilism is a false philosophy and that truth, knowledge, faith, and values most certainly do exist and the source of all of them is God who is the source of all truth and knowledge, who gives faith as a gift to His people, and from whom all values emanate. There is the One who is greater than unbelief, One who has touched mankind: We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is trueeven in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20; see also John 17:3).

As Christians, we have the supreme confidence and conviction that God is who He says He is and will do what He says He will do. The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 'For in him we live and move and have our being . . . We are his offspring (Acts 17:2428).

Read more:

What is nihilism? - gotquestions.org

Paradox of nihilism is the name of several paradoxes.

According to Hegarty, the paradox of nihilism is "that the absence of meaning seems to be some sort of meaning".[1]

Niklas Luhmann construes the paradox as stating "that consequently, only the untrue could be the truth".[2] In a footnote in his PhD thesis, Slocombe equates nihilism with the liar paradox.[3][clarification needed]

Rivas locates the paradox in the "conservative attitude of Roman Catholicism" developed in reaction to Nietzschean nihilism, in that it "betrays a form of nihilism, that is, the forced oblivion of the real ambiguity and the paradox that inform the distinction between the secular and the sacred".[4]

In Critical Legal Studies (CLS) theory, the arguments used to criticize the centrist position also undermine the position of CLS.[5][clarification needed]

According to Jonna Bornemark, "the paradox of nihilism is the choice to continue one's own life while at the same time stating that it is not worth more than any other life".[6] Richard Ian Wright sees relativism as the root of the paradox.[clarification needed][7]

Follow this link:

Paradox of nihilism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Introduction | Types of Nihilism

Nihilism is the philosophical position which argues that Being, especially past and current human existence, is without objective meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. It asserts that there is no reasonable proof of the existence of a higher ruler or creator, that a "true morality" does not exist, and that objective secular ethics are impossible. Therefore life has, in a sense, no truth and no action is objectively preferable to any other.

The term "nihilism" was first popularized by the novelist Ivan Turgenev (1818 - 1883). Art movements such as Dada and Futurism, and philosophical movements like Existentialism, Post-Modernism, Post-Structuralism and Deconstructionism have all been identified by commentators as "nihilistic" at various times in various contexts. Nihilism differs from Skepticism in that Skepticism does not reject claims to truth outright, it only rejects these claims if there is insufficient empirical evidence to support them.

Nihilism is most often associated with the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, although he never actually advocated Nihilism as a practical mode of living and was typically quite critical of it. He was, however, one of the first philosophers to study nihilism extensively. Nietzsche's criticism of nihilism was mainly on that grounds that it can become a false belief, and lead individuals to discard any hope of meaning in the world and thus to invent some compensatory alternative measure of significance. He also asserts that Nihilism is a result of valuing "higher", "divine" or "meta-physical" things (such as God), that do not in turn value "base", "human" or "earthly" things, and that any form of Idealism, after being rejected by the idealist, leads to Nihilism. According to Nietzsche, it is only once nihilism is overcome that a culture can have a true foundation upon which to thrive.

Similarly, Jacques Derrida, whose Deconstructionism movement is commonly labelled nihilistic, did not himself make the claims often attributed to him. In fact, Deconstructionism can be seen not as a denial of truth, but as a denial of our ability to know truth (i.e. it makes an epistemological claim as opposed to Nihilism's ontological or metaphysical claim).

Nihilism is one of the few branches of philosophy that allows for the possibility of absolute nothingness. By making three apparently plausible assumptions - that there are a finite number of objects in the world; that each of these objects are contingent (i.e. that although they exist, they might not have existed); and that the objects are independent (i.e. the non-existence of one thing does not necessitate the existence of anything else - then the "subtraction argument" runs that each contingent object can be subtracted from the world, one by one, until absolutely nothing is left. However, it is not clear that the independence assumption is justifiable, and in practice (whether it be in an imaginative thought experiment, or in the hard scientific world of particle physics) subtracting an object from a particular scenario actually does have repercussions, however small, for the world as a whole. Rather, nothingness appears to be a limit or asymptote that can be approached but never quite reached.

Original post:

Nihilism - By Branch / Doctrine - The Basics of Philosophy

people that unrealistic idiots don't understand. its about realising that there is no essential value or purpose to existence or the universe, therefore everything that we do has no real point, and the hype isn't worth it.

I have an idea. Why don't you stop labelling Nihilism as a 'self-defeating philosophy' and actually declare what you think is the validation for existence. then you might have an argument.

Can you define these popular missing words?

One who realizes that all societal and moral values are baseless, and sees no point to anything.

Live in the moment, don't bother dwelling on the past, or hoping for a future... it doesn't matter.

Nihilist - We believe in nothing, Lebowski. Nothing.

Walter: Not fair? Who's the fucking nihilist? ----

Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

Someone who makes decisions based only on an objective perception of reality rather than emotions or personal benefit. A nihilist is not a self-aggrandizing narcissist who beleives that they are above the law. A Nihilist is someone who does not take pleasure from indulgence, therefore serial killers and insane dictators are not nihilists. People try to attach anti-social murderers to nihilism because they do not understand it and therefore fear it, and want everyone to hate it; however trying to manipulate others is a characteristic of anti-social behavior: So when someone tells you that Nihilists are evil, you know 2 things 1# The person telling you this is evil and #2 They are trying to manipulate you (A Nihilist wouldnt tell you this though because a Nihilist wouldnt tell you anything is evil, therefore I am not a Nihilist, its harder to become a Nihilist than a Doctor). Nihilists cannot be manipulated because they create their own beleifs about the world based on their experiences and facts ,influence free. A Nihilist would beleive in God if he met God. True enlightenment. Stage 5 in Maslow's theory, self-actualization and beyond. Sanity.

A Nihilist is not someone who does harm to others. Who is Better? The man who helps others because of a reward of Heaven and a perfect life. or The man who helps others to see their gratitude. or The man who helps others because he chose to and needed no reward.

The first two help others only because it helps them in some way, the last man is the only one good in a righteous sense, A Nihilist, he does not need or want any reward. He simply helps because of his own beleif that he should, mabye jesus wasn't the son of god, just the first Nihilist and he needed to tell you a little fairy tale to get you to co-operate.

We created our institutions and morals. So, they are not real. Read more on this please, it will enlighten you.

The Nihilist obvserved that without good there is no evil.

One that disreguards all that is not inherent to reality, and isn't fearing of death, though does not seek it. Nihilists have a tendency to love nature and detest concrete and plastic.

Death is the only certainty in life, therefore, giving life meaning.

A true nihilist doesn't like to destroy because by doing so he is not gaining anything because there is nothing to gain. So those who try to destroy aren't true nihilists.

I don't believe in god i'm a nihilist.

Read the original:

Urban Dictionary: nihilist

I was going through some of my school notes today and i came across the following lecture notes id taken from a class on religion and illusions when i was still a student. Hence, I figured I introduce you guys to this very interesting topic as most of what we are tought regarding religion in the mainstream media is usually all but the same. Hope you enjoy it and find it interesting. Dont hesitate to leave your opinion at the end.

Nihilism as a philosophy seemed pass by the 1980s. Few talked about it in literature expect to declare it a dead issue. Literally, in the materialist sense, nihilism refers to a truism: from nothing, nothing comes. However, from a philosophical viewpoint, moral nihilism took on a similar connotation. One literally believed in nothing, which is somewhat of an oxymoron since to believe in nothing is to believe in something. A corner was turned in the history of nihilism once 9/11 became a reality. After this major event, religious and social science scholars began to ask whether violence could be attributed tonihilistic thinkingin other words, whether we had lost our way morally by believing in nothing, by rejecting traditional moral foundations. It was feared that an anything goes mentality and a lack of absolute moral foundations could lead to further acts of violence, as the goals forwarded by life-affirmation were being thwarted by the destructive ends of so-called violent nihilists. This position is, however, argumentative.

Extreme beliefs in values such as nationalism, patriotism, statism, secularism, or religion can also lead to violence, as one becomes unsettled by beliefs contrary to the reigning orthodoxy and strikes out violently to protect communal values. Therefore, believing in something can also lead to violence and suffering. To put the argument to rest, its not about whether one believes in something or nothing but howabsolutistthe position is; its the rigidity of values that causes pain and suffering, what Nobel prize winner Amartya Sen calls the illusion of singularity.Since 9/11, nihilism has become a favourite target to criticize and marginalize, yet its history and complexity actually lead to a more nuanced argument. Perhaps we should be looking at ways nihilism complements Western belief systemseven Christian doctrinerather than fear its implementation in ethical and moral discussions.

Brief History of Nihilism To understand why some forms of nihilism are still problematic, it is important to ask how it was used historically and for what motive. Nihilism was first thought synonymous with having no authentic values, no real ends, that ones whole existence is pure nothingness.In its earliest European roots, nihilism was initially used to label groups or ideas asinferior, especially if they were deemed threatening to establishedcommunal ideals. Nihilism as alabelwas its first function.

Nihilism initially functioned as apejorative labeland a term of abuse against modern trends that threatened to destroy either Christian hegemonic principles or tradition in general.During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, modernization in France meant that power shifted from the traditional feudal nobility to a central government filled with well-trained bourgeois professionals. Fearing a loss of influence, the nobility made a claim: If power shifted to responsible government, the nobility claimed that such centralization would lead to death and destructionin other words, anarchy and nothingness. Those upsetting the status quo were deemed nihilistic, a derogatory label requiring no serious burden of proof.Such labelling, however, worked both ways. The old world or tradition was deemed valueless by advocates of modernization and change who viewed the status quo as valueless; whereas, traditionalists pictured a new world, or new life form, as destructive and meaningless in its pursuit of a flawed transformation. Potential changes in power or ideology created a climate of fear, so the importance of defining ones opponent as nihilisticas nothing of valuewas as politically astute as it was reactionary. Those embracing the function of nihilism as a label are attempting to avoid scrutiny of their own values while the values of the opposition are literally annihilated.

Since those advocating communal values may feel threatened by new ideologies, it becomes imperative for the dominant power to present its political, metaphysical, or religious beliefs as eternal, universal, and objective. Typically, traditionalists have a stake in their own normative positions. This is because [t]he absoluteness of [ones] form of life makes [one]feel safe and at home. This means that [perfectionists]have a great interest in the maintenance of their form of life and its absoluteness.The existence of alternative beliefs and values, as well as a demand for intersubjective dialogue, is both a challenge and a threat to the traditionalist because [i]t shows people that their own form of life is not as absolute as they thought it was, and this makes them feel uncertain. . . . However, if one labels the Other as nihilistic without ever entering into a dialogue, one may become myopic, dismissing the relative value of other life forms one chooses not to see. This means that one cant see what they [other cultural groups]are doing, and why they are doing it, why they may be successful . . . Therefore, one misses the dynamics of cultural change.

Through the effect of labelling, the religious-oriented could claim that nihilists, and thus atheists by affiliation, would not feel bound by moral norms, and as a result would lose the sense that life has meaning and therefore tend toward despair and suicide.death of God. Christians argued that if there is no divine lawmaker, moral law would become interpretative, contested, and situational. The end result: [E]ach man will tend to become a law unto himself. If God does not exist to choose for the individual, the individual will assume the former prerogative of God and choose for himself. It was this kind of thinking that led perfectionists to assume that any challenge to the Absolute automatically meant moral indifference, moral relativism, and moral chaos. Put simply,nihilists were the enemy.

Nihilists were accused of rejecting ultimate values, embracing instead an all values are equal mentalitybasically, anything goes. And like Islam today, nihilists would become easy scapegoats.

Late 19th 20th Century;Nietzsche and the Death of God

Friedrich Nietzsche is still the most prestigious theorist of nihilism. Influenced by Christianitys dominant orthodoxy in the nineteenth century, Nietzsche believed that the Christian religion was nihilism incarnate. Since Christian theology involved a metaphysical reversal of temporal reality and a belief in God that came from nothing, the Christian God became the deification of nothingness, the will to nothingness pronounced holy. Nietzsche claimed that Christian metaphysics became an impediment to life-affirmation. Nietzsche explains: If one shifts the centre of gravity of life out of life into the Beyondinto nothingnessone has deprived life of its centre of gravity . . . So to live that there is no longer any meaning in living:that now becomes the meaning of life.What Nietzsche rejected more was the belief that one could create a totalizing system to explain all truths. In other words, he repudiated any religion or dogma that attempted to show how the entire body of knowledge [could]be derived from a small set of fundamental, self-evident propositions(i.e., stewardship). Nietzsche felt that we do not have the slightest right to posit a beyond or an it-self of things that is divine or the embodiment of morality.

Without God as a foundation for absolute values, all absolute values are deemed suspect (hence the birth of postmodernism). For Nietzsche, this literally meant that the belief in the Christian god ha[d]become unworthy of belief.This transition from the highest values to the death of God was not going to be a quick one; in fact, the comfort provided by an absolute divinity could potentially sustain its existence for millennia. Nietzsche elaborates: God is dead; but given the way of men, there may still be caves for thousands of years in which his shadow will be shown.And wewe still have to vanquish his shadow too.

We are left then with a dilemma: Either we abandon our reverences for the highest values and subsist, or we maintain our dependency on absolutes at the cost of our own non-absolutist reality. For Nietzsche, the second option was pure nothingness: So we can abolish either our reverences or ourselves. The latter constitutes nihilism. All one is left with are contested, situational value judgements, and these are resolved in the human arena.

One can still embrace pessimism, believing that without some form of an absolute, our existence in this world will take a turn for the worse. To avoid the trappings of pessimism and passivity, Nietzsche sought a solution to such nihilistic despair through the re-evaluation of the dominant, life-negating values. This makes Nietzsche an perspectivism a philosophy of resolution in the form of life-affirmation. It moves past despair toward a transformative stage in which new values are posited to replace the old table of values. As Reginster acknowledges, one should regard the affirmation of life as Nietzsches defining philosophical achievement. What this implies is a substantive demand to live according to a constant re-evaluation of values. By taking full responsibility for this task, humankind engages in the eternal recurrence, a recurrence of life-affirming values based on acceptance of becoming and the impermanence of values. Value formation is both fluid and cyclical.

Late-20th Century 21st Century;The Pessimism of the Post-9/11 Era

Since the events of September 11, 2001, nihilism has returned with a vengeance to scholarly literature; however, it is being discussed in almost exclusively negative terms. The labelling origin of nihilism has taken on new life in a context of suicide bombings, Islamophobia, and neoconservative rhetoric. For instance, Canadian Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff described different shades of negative nihilismtragic, cynical, and fanaticalin his bookThe Lesser Evil.Tragic nihilism begins from a foundation of noble, political intentions, but eventually this ethic of restraint spirals toward violence as the only end(i.e., Vietnam). Two sides of an armed struggle may begin with high ideals and place limitations on their means to achieve viable political goals, but such noble ends eventually become lost in all the carnage. Agents of a democratic state may find themselves driven by the horror of terror to torture, to assassinate, to kill innocent civilians, all in the name of rights and democracy. As Ignateiff states, they slip from the lesser evil [legitimate use of force]to the greater [violence as an end in itself].

However,cynical nihilism is even more narcissistic. In this case, violence does not begin as a means to noble goals. Instead, [i]t is used, from the beginning, in the service of cynical or self-serving [ends]. The term denotes narcissistic prejudice because it justifies the commission of violence for the sake of personal aggrandizement, immortality, fame, or power rather than as a means to a genuinely political end, like revolution [for social justice]or the liberation of a people.Cynical nihilists were never threatened in any legitimate way. Their own vanity, ego, greed, or need to control others drove them to commit violence against innocent civilians (e.g., Saddam Hussein in Kuwait or Bush in Iraq).

Finally,fanatical nihilism does not suffer from a belief in nothing. In actuality, this type of nihilism is dangerous because one believes in too much. What fanatical nihilism does involve is a form of conviction so intense, a devotion so blind, that it becomes impossible to see that violence necessarily betrays the ends that conviction seeks to achieve. The fanatical use of ideology to justify atrocity negates any consideration of the human cost of such fundamentalism. As a result, nihilism becomes willed indifference to the human agents sacrificed on the alter of principle. . . . Here nihilism is not a belief in nothing at all; it is, rather, the belief that nothing about particular groups of human beings matters enough to require minimizing harm to them.Fanatical nihilism is also important to understand because many of the justifications are religious. States Ignatieff:

From a human rights standpoint, the claim that such inhumanity can be divinely inspired is a piece of nihilism, an inhuman devaluation of the respect owed to all persons, and moreover a piece of hubris, since, by definition, human beings have no access to divine intentions, whatever they may be.

Positive Nihilism In the twenty-first century, humankind is searching for a philosophy to counter destructive, non-pragmatic forms of nihilism. As a middle path,positive nihilism accentuates life-affirmation through a widening of dialogue. Positively stated: [The Philosopher] . . ., having rejected the currently dominant values, must raise other values, by virtue of which life and the universe cannot only be justified but also become endearing and valuable. Rejecting any unworkable table of values, humankind now erects another table with a new ranking of values and new ideals of humanity, society, and state.Positive nihilismin both its rejection of absolute truths and its acceptance of contextual truthsis life-affirming since small-t truths are the best mere mortals can hope to accomplish. Human beings can reach for higher truths; they just do not have the totalizing knowledge required for Absolute Truth. In other words, we are not God, but we are still attempting to be God on a good day. We still need valuesin other words, we are not moral nihilists or absolutistsbut we realize that the human condition is malleable. Values come and go, and we have to be ready to bend them in the right direction in the moment moral courage requires it.

Nihilism does not have to be a dangerous or negative philosophy; it can be a philosophy of freedom. Basically, the entire purpose of positive nihilism is to transform values that no longer work and replace them with values that do. By aiding in a process that finds meaningful values through negotiation,positive nihilism prevents the exclusionary effect of perfectionism, the deceit of nihilistic labelling, as well as the senseless violence of fanatical nihilism. It is at this point that nihilism can enter its life-affirming stage and become a compliment to pluralism, multiculturalism, and the roots of religion, those being love, charity, and compassion.

Source; Professor Stuart Chambers.

@RasMutabaruka

93% Amazing

Replacing meaningful content with placeholder text allows viewers to focus on graphic aspects such as font, typography, and page layout without being distracted by the content.

Desgin 98 %

Development 91 %

Features 93 %

Awsome 90 %

Read this article:

Religion and Nihilism - The African Perspective Magazine

By Austin Cline

Updated September 04, 2015.

What is Nihilism?

The term nihilism comes from the Latin word nihil which literally means nothing. Many believe that it was originally coined by Russian novelist Ivan Turgenev in his novel Fathers and Sons (1862) , but it probably first appeared several decades earlier. Nevertheless, Turgenevs use of the word to describe the views he attributed to young intellectual critics of feudal society generally and the Tsarist regime in particular gave the word its widespread popularity. Read More...

Important Books on Nihilism:

Fathers and Sons, by Ivan Turgenev Brothers Karamazov, by Dostoyevsky Man Without Qualities, by Robert Musil The Trial, by Franz Kafka Being and Nothingness, by Jean-Paul Sartre

Important Philosophers of Nihilism:

Dmitri Pisarev Nikolai Dobrolyubov Nikolai Chernyshevski Friedrich Nietzsche

Origins of Nihilism:

The basic principles which underlie nihilism existed long before there was a term that attempted to describe them as a coherent whole.

Most of the basic principles can be found in the development of ancient skepticism among the ancient Greeks. Perhaps the original nihilist was Gorgias (483-378 BCE) who is famous for having said: Nothing exists. If anything did exist it could not be known. If it was known, the knowledge of it would be incommunicable. Read More...

Is Nihilism a Violent Philosophy?

Nihilism has been unjustly regarded as a violent and even terroristic philosophy, but it is true that nihilism has been used in support of violence and many early nihilists were violent revolutionaries. Russian Nihilists, for example, rejected that traditional political, ethical, and religious norms had any validity or binding force on them. They were too few in number to pose a threat to the stability of society, but their violence was a threat to the lives of those in power. Read More...

Are Nihilists all Atheists?

Atheism has long been closely associated with nihilism, both for good and for bad reasons, but usually for bad reasons in the writings of critics of both. It is alleged that atheism necessarily leads to nihilism because atheism necessarily results in materialism, scientism, ethical relativism, and a sense of despair that must lead to feelings of suicide. All of these tend to be basic characteristics of nihilistic philosophies. Read More...

Where does Nihilism lead?

Many of the most common responses to the basic premises of nihilism come down to despair: despair over the loss of God, despair over the loss of objective and absolute values, and/or despair over the postmodern condition of alienation and dehumanization. That does not, however, exhaust all of the possible responses just as with early Russian Nihilism, there are those who embrace this perspective and rely upon it as a means for further development. Read More...

Was Nietzsche a Nihilist?

There is a common misconception that the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was a nihilist. You can find this assertion in both popular and academic literature, yet as widespread as it it, it isnt an accurate portrayal of his work. Nietzsche wrote a great deal about nihilism, it is true, but that was because he was concerned about the effects of nihilism on society and culture, not because he advocated nihilism. Read More...

Read the original here:

What Is Nihilism? History, Profile, Philosophy and Philosophers

Why Nihilism, A Practical Definition

As research probes further into the complexities of the human mind, it becomes clear that the mind is far from being a composite thing which is an actor upon its world through thoughts; rather, thoughts compose the mind, in the form of connections and associations wired into the tissue of the brain, creating circuitry for future associations of like stimulus. The schematic of this intellectual machine builds separate routing for situations it is likely to encounter, based on grouped similarities in events or objects. In this view of our computing resources, it is foolish to allow pre-processing to intervene, as it creates vast amounts of wiring which serve extremely similar purposes, thus restricting the range of passive association (broad-mindedness) or active association (creativity) possible within the switching mechanism of the brain as a whole. As here we are devout materialists, the brain and mind are seen as equatable terms.

The positive effects of nihilism on the mind of a human being are many. Like the quieting of distraction and distortion within the mind brought about by meditative focus, nihilism pushes aside preconception and brings the mind to focus within the time of the present. Influences which could radically skew our perceptions emotions, nervousness, paranoia, or upset, to name a few fade into the background and the mind becomes more open to the task at hand without becoming spread across contemplations of potential actions occurring at different levels of scale regarding the current task. Many human errors originate in perceiving an event to be either more important than it is, or to be symbolically indicative of relevance on a greater scale than the localized context which it affects, usually because of a conditioned preference for the scale of eventiture existing before the symbolic event.

Nihilism as a philosophical doctrine must not be confused with a political doctrine such as anarchism; political doctrines (as religions are) remain fundamentally teleological in their natures and thus deal with conclusions derived from evidence, where nihilism as a deontological process functions at the level of the start of perception, causing less of a focus on abstracting a token ruleset defining the implications of events than a rigorous concentration on the significance of the events as they are immediately effecting the situation surrounding them. For example, a nihilistic fighter does not bother to assess whether his opponent is a better fighter or not that the perceiving agency, but fights to his best ability (something evolution would reward, as the best fighter does not win every fight, only most of them). As a result of this conditioning, nihilism separates the incidence of events/perceptions from causal understanding by removing expectations of causal origins and implications to ongoing eventiture.

Understanding nihilism requires one drop the pretense of nihilistic philosophy being an endpoint, and acceptance of it being a doorway. Nihilism self-reduces; the instant one proclaims There is no value! a value has been created. Nihilism strips away conditiong at the unconscious and anticipatory levels of structure in the mind, allowing for a greater range of possiblity and quicker action. Further, it creates a powerful tool to use against depression or anxiety, neurosis and social stigma. Since it is a concept necessarily in flux, as it provides a starting point for analysis in any situation but no preconditioned conclusions, it is post-deconstructive in that it both removes the unnecessary and creates new space for intellectual development at the same time.

Text quoted from S.R. Prozaks Nihilism at the American Nihilist Underground Society.

Read this article:

Nihilism Nihilism