In defense of nihilism

That simply isn't true. You keep equating no absolute code with no personal code. Just because it is personal does not make it less important to that person, or able to flap around depending on which way the wind is blowing.There is also the matter of taste... which to me underlies most ethics anyway, but one can find some things allowed or virtuous within an ethic but still found undesirable by a person.I have a pretty set personal ethical system and certainly would NOT support oppression, both for ethical and aesthetic reasons. I find your off hand claim that people like me would is pretty offensive. But the "written code" (as if nihilists couldn't have written down their own codes) has not prevented Xians from violating them and being oppressive! From the moment Xians reached power they were a malevolent oppressive force.You may claim that the first in power were not true Xians but then that still does not help your position one bit. Whatever they were they certainly were not nihilists. They were theists and held the same written code you did.The difference is that they interpreted the codes differently. Indeed that's what all people with absolute codes do when they desire to achieve and end using a means that their code does not allow... reinterpret. Lying is against your written code, and yet here you appear to be doing just that. Thanks for providing such a quick and easy example.Still waiting for any fundie to point out where the Bible suggests democracy as a desirable form of govt, with freedom of speech and religion. See I knew you'd say that, and not even realize how ridiculous your charge is. You give an example of theists violating there own code and use that to criticize nihilists? How can that be a criticism of another group which does not use a written code when it inherently show how little power a written code has over its followers? How can society suffer any worse under nihilists than it did under Xians violating their own codes at will during the dark ages? Or how about during the missionizing of the Americas and Orient?All you have shown is that anyone and everyone is capable of cruelty, and if they want to be oppressive, will be oppressive regardless of written law. It is the tautology funkaloyd expressed quite appropriately.I do agree there should be some strong legal codes in writing for the people to know and use to protect themselves against the machinations of others. Unfortunately they will still only be as strong as those willing to abide by those laws, and defend the laws when they are broken.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

But then your understanding is incorrect. There is no unified nihilist code, though any particular nihilist might have a very strict code. It might even be written down. But what difference does it make if it is written when it can be interpreted in different ways? And indeed how objective could it be if it has so many different interpretations?How did the protestants make the world a better place? I seem to remember quite a number of horrible things under protestants as well. You would be wrong. I disagree with this concept and feel very sorry that you feel it is a good thing. It is a recipe for oppression and dictatorships. Cultures yes, religions no. I understand what you are driving at though. They are more about self control and virtues than domination/submission to set laws. ??? Salem witch trials, slavery, oppression of native americans and other minorities... Can I point out that the first immigrants and many others over the course of our nation's history have been Xian? I'm not sure that there are more coming from nihilist societies than Xian ones. I might also note that they came here to enjoy a higher standard of living in a more prosperous nation that promised they could live according to their own values, and not that they had to become Xians. Uh, I said the first ones in power. The ones being persecuted by the Romans were not the first ones in power. By definition they would not be in power. Very cheesy to say "nihilized" the code. Looks to me like they Xianized it to me.In any case, the point is that an objective written code did not stop them from changing the rules to something else... right? If an objective written code could not due that, then how was that any better than not having any specified code in the first place? Actually I didn't call you a liar. I said it appeared you were lying. This is what you said... The founders, though mostly of Xian descent, had vastly different value systems and some heavily disputed Xian dogma. Though many local "early govts" within the US had religious components, the founders specifically worked to remove this from the govt they created to remove the problems such components had caused.They never established a land of the "blessed". And they definitely did not use the Bible to form any of the govt structures, Their code book? Jefferson chopped up the Bible to create his own and Paine renounced it altogether while Washington refused some of the most common customs and dogma.You have been made aware of this before. Yet you continue to state such things as above as if they have not been challenged with factual evidence. Do you not remember the challenges?Can you tell me what factual basis you have for any of those claims? ???????? What is the first commandment?If freedom of religion and treating others as self is so important then how come fundies are so against churches allowing gays, as well as gay marriage? So people who follow an objective written code can "nihilize" them? How is that possible, and how does that not make the original code any better than no code? Its the good folks of any kind of moral code who fight for real freedom, desire to work, desire free enterprise, and work toward prosperity which create that in our nation. I have seen those who follow the Bible fight these things as much as support them. Those that support them have received my (a nihilist's) support. You are attempting to discredit me and people like me.If your argument is that there have been more Xians than nihilists involved with these good works within this nation, I might agree. I don't know for sure, but that seems likely given the demographics of our nation. That does not suggest that more Xians as a percentage of Xians than nihilists as nihilists do good work. And those subscribing to a biblical moral code NOT proven to be good for society, do NOT benefit society.That is why it is a tautology. They have also come from nations ruled by Xian tyrants or other religious oppressors. They come to a nation where the majority HAPPEN to be influenced by biblical precepts, though of many different natures. They come to a nation where the govt is not influenced by any religious precepts and (theoretically) commited to supporting their own.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Hate to do this to you... First of all there really is extremely little anyone can call "universal" in human feeling. Second, just because it is a common feeling in no way would suggest it is a sense or faculty. Finally, the concept "works better" is a judgement call.Unless there is a universal set of laws, which nihilism should be undercutting, they can only be said to be working "similarly", not "better".The desire to kill one's rival is pretty close to universal... does that make it "better"? That suggests there is some moral "quality" or "quantity" that exists in the world to be sensed. What would those be? Why is it not better thought of as sensing relations of internal subjective beliefs, rather than external realities? There is indeed one very good one... taste.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Yet we are not to believe what we see in it, according to Xians because it defies what is read in their book. Yet this book was unquestionably written down by men and altered by men over millenia. This book is in competition with other, similar books written by other men claiming the same thing you just did. And for some reason on top of having men handle his book, decided to write things that did not jive with what he made the world look like. And each person's conscience tells them different things. If they didn't we'd have no need for laws, and a question if there were moral absolutes. Nature involves many consciences and both must be ignored to believe his word. That cuts in all directions. You have no more reason to assert this than anyone else.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Uh, that certainly is only because God made it that way. No one else made the universe right? He could have stopped it. He didn't have to make a world where that was possible. Even if Adam sinned, it was God's world. Adam did not have a choice about THAT.God's fault.By the way did hell exist before adam or was it only made for adam after the fall? If before, didn't that make God a pretty sick twist, readily acknowledging he knew where his world was going to lead? If he did it afterward, didn't that make God a pretty sick twist, making one of his creations suffer eternal torture for ONE temporarily simple error?Couldn't he have simply created a sort of supernatural rehab center for people that make bad choices?And why did he make it that sin was passed down the line like disease or other PHYSICAL issues you described. Just because my father is brilliant or highly moral will not be passed on. You'd think sin, if it was caused by judgement and relates to moral judgement would transfer like that and not like physical disease. He creates people, he alienates them, he makes them enemies, then he sends his son to die a gruesome death to save them?Unfathomable? Yes. Deep? Deep something, yes.Otherwise it is rather simple minded antics.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

1) God made the diseases, but he didn't have to.
2) God never set down rules for sex until wayyyyyyy later in the story.
3) Sexually transmitted diseases are like all other kinds. You don't have to break any rules to catch pneumonia or the black plague (back then) and more people die and suffer from those than STDs. Everyone reaps death. The unfairness would be God sending a lion to eat you because your greatgrandfather made a wrong choice. No he didn't. If God is incapable of all choice, then how could mortals be? And what's worse is he doesn't have to suffer for chosing to do things that he cannot help but choose because of his nature, yet humans are. And worst of all I have no choice in anything because some guy at the beginning of time was given a choice and did something wrong. Uh, we certainly can argue that it is then NOT Adam's fault, which is what you argued. You can wipe away whether we have the power to declare right or wrong, but not who is ultimately to be held responsible.If God said to me "don't blame me, Adam did it", that would be pretty lame. I'm still basking in the image of a world free of ignorance, intolerance, and religious fundamentalism.In any case you didn't answer my question. Making a lesser creature suffer eternally for a temporal mistake seems a bit extreme. Jesus didn't come till later, and he did not replace hell. Lamarkian genetics are out. If you compared Adam's physical genes to spiritual genes, then everyone would be free of sin at birth. Unless you are claiming God made Adam sinful from creation? Take a deep breath and think about this very carefully. Your argument suggests that I should blame you... and I would.God blames not just you, but yamaha, and the woman and the baby, and any great great great great great great grandchildren you may have.Heheheh... yes, who do YOU blame? Unless it is yamaha and everyone else, deep down you have an idea how unfair God is being.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Yamaha would have to have built the man and the bike in order for this analogy to work. Indeed yamaha would have to have made rust and other corrosion which could result in break down of bikes.And in that case, yes it is Yamaha's fault. This did not deal with my point. No, actually I won't allow that to be left aside. I get that a bigger picture may present a different picture, but that does not change the fact that a guy stuck with the little picture then may act according to it.If God can't give us a break on this same question, then it makes about 0 sense for us to give him a break. What if my entire conscience told me fundie Xian beliefs are wrong, I should avoid practicing their tenets because it would be unhealthy, and have advice along those same lines from others?Remember this world is made up of more than Xians, or followers of Abrahamic monotheism. You can get advice contrary to Xian moralisms.By the way you'll have to point out the antismoking ordinances in the Bible. Yeah, and so if he chose and then gained sin, he could not pass it on. You said it was like a spiritual gene. A person can only pass on genes they start with. 1) Adam and Eve were not formed in wombs. I might note that this means that Eve at the very least could not have had an eternal character, she was an afterthought.
2) Whether we have a spirit that is eternal or not, does not change the fact that the ERROR was temporal. I was talking about the nature of the mistake, not the person. At which we come full circle back to my criticism. Why could he not have created a hell at all, and simply created a rehab. Even for those that don't go with Jesus, eternal torment seems a bit much for temporal error. Lamarck was a guy that said traits acquired during life can be passed on to children. That is not how physical genes actually work. You compared spiritual genes to physical genes, thus Adam was either born with sin or not. Well then that's something different.Actually this whole eternal thing and spirit genes makes less sense the more you talk about. If we are all eternal then we existed before or in conjunction with the creation. In that case I existed before Adam got his chance at a temporal life as a separate spiritual entity.How could it be fair to blame souls in heaven waiting for a chance to get their chot on earth, for Adam's mistake? How could he "pass on" spiritual genes to a spiritual creature that was already alive before he made his mistake? Wrong! I agree with free choice. Your setup (or God's) is that I have had no choice whatsoever. I am guilty for A&E's error. That gives me no choice whatsoever.You are not going to dodge the implications of your own analogy that easy.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)