Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   In defense of nihilism
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6504 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 54 of 306 (264012)
11-29-2005 5:33 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by iano
11-29-2005 5:12 AM


Re: Proof of God
quote:
He could just as easily play both sides of the coin in relation to a belief in God. He could 'believe' there is a God and have all the benefits that would come with that (in that he is free to design a God that suits him - just as with he can with morals).
This is no different from believers. Each one chooses to believe in a version of god that suits them...they even have different churches with radically different beliefs (protestants, catholics, mormons etc.)..and each group chooses the "morals" they wish to follow so that you have Xians who say peace is moral, war is moral, slavery is moral, slavery is immoral. It is completely arbitrary...it is certainly a more arrogant stance than nihlism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:12 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:46 AM Mammuthus has replied

Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6504 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 57 of 306 (264019)
11-29-2005 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by iano
11-29-2005 5:46 AM


Re: Proof of God
quote:
As I pointed out to Robin (Robinihilism anybody?), a nihilist cannot live as if there are no objective morals
Of course a nihlist can do this. Every major religions does this..they merely proclaim they possess objective morals and then proceed to arbitrarily and non-objectively define them...and redefine them..and change them..yet call them "absolute" nonetheless.
quote:
Robin agreed with this. And he would I think, agree that the nihilist is completely free to chose whatever value system he likes for himself
As does every religious system..they choose whatever value system serves them..and are completely free to...though it usually involves killing off those who disagree with them, but that is a different issue.
quote:
I don't see how one differs from the other in that sense.
One requires positive evidence, the other does not.
quote:
My point was that the one offered at least hope of an afterlife. So if one was going to chose when there is no concrete evidence apparent to the person, why chose the hopeless option?
Besides failing to see the appeal of an afterlife for which there is no evidence (and the waste of time dreaming about it when one should probably enjoy the life they DO have), why is lack of an afterlife a hopeless option? It is also incumbent on those who say there is an afterlife to convince me that there is one. There is no evidence for one and I choose not believe in fantasies, and I am far from feeling hopeless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:46 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:03 AM Mammuthus has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024