Veeky Forums, when did you grow out of nihilism?

Veeky Forums, when did you grow out of nihilism?

For me it was when I realized it was a tool (used, but not manufactured) to keep the people in total submission.

>"Besides, large-scale general plans : 1) they will seek to break the bonds between earth and heaven, doing their best to spread, on a large scale, atheistic and materialistic theories, degrading the Romanian people, or even just its leaders, to a people separated from God and its dead, they will kill them, not with the spear, but by cutting the roots of their spiritual life ; 2) they will then break the links of the race with the soil, material spring of its wealth, attacking nationalism and any idea of Fatherland and homeland ; determined to succeed, they will seek to seize the press ; 4) they will use any pretext, since in the Romanian people there are dissensions, misunderstandings, and quarrels, to divide them into as many antagonistic parties as possible ; 5) they will seek to monopolise more and more the means of existence of Romanians ; 6) they will systematically drive them to dissoluteness, annihilating family and moral force without forgetting to degrade and daze them through alcoholic drinks and other poisons. And, in truth, anyone who would want to kill and conquer a race could do it by adopting this system."

That's an incredibly interesting take on nihilism.
I grew out of it when I was around 18, it was early on in college. The big thing that set it off for me was the realization that negative meaning in life is still nevertheless meaning.

Isn't nihilism about absence of meaning?

you don't choose nihilism, nihilism choose you
more or less.
we live in a nihilistic epoch so like it or not we have nihilistic views ingrained.
also nihilism is good because is the anticipation of something better to come.
"the torch needs darkness to illuminate"

Yeah, that's exactly my point. It was the conflation of meaninglessness with negative meaning.

Oh look, a 17 year old.

You actually choose it like any ideology or religion, the only reason it feels like you described is because it also breaks your will and energy which makes it seemingly hard to get away from.

i'm not defending nihilism, all i'm saying it's something natural that will occur sooner or later in life.

That statment is false.
The nihilism comes out an interpetation from the lack of divine evidence and lack of scientific evidence from both a metaphysical and mental state about the meaning of life

However, it is still an interpretation, one may choose to believe in spirits if they want to. Nihilism ultimately is a way of thinking, not a way of life

I had a drunk talk with a friend last weekend and sort of came to the conclusion,
that most normalfags don't actually ever go as far as to approach serious nihilism.
They sort of glance at it from a distance and solely when reminded of nothingness by Rick and Morty or Neil DeGass Tyson tier shit.
The reason most think reading philosophy about self improvement is a waste or understanding the necessity of religion in some sense is archaic, is because they are just too brain dead lazy, uninterested, not curious, insular or whatever you can call it.

Really depressing somehow, that some people say: "When I have this car in 5 years I will be happy and I'll know my work has been worth it."

How am I supposed to respect or take advice from someone who never went as far as to have such, I'd assume, natural thoughts and questions about themselves which they would had to find answers to to cope with being?

>How am I supposed to respect or take advice from someone who never went as far as to have such, I'd assume, natural thoughts and questions about themselves which they would had to find answers to to cope with being?

Interesting.

I'm not religious myself but to quote Peter Hitchens when asked if he ever had doubts about his fate he responded with "every day", and remembering my teenage years when I was what you would call today a fedora atheist I never had any doubts or questions about myself or my beliefs.

...

I grew out of nihilism after I realized that it didn't really matter that nothing really matters. AND from an outsiders perspective, nihilism is just an excuse to be horrible to other people because of that stupid Rick Sanchez neckbeard logic.

When I cleaned my room

my back hurts

Finally, a sensible post

I have very bad posture

When I realized that objective morality can be rationally grounded.

Codreanau knew and met Evola and Eliade. Evola also wrote "The Tragedy of the Romanian Iron Guard: Codreanu", interesting.
Was he really that bad compared to the opposition of commies that followed in his wake, mind you i don't know anything about him, but a skimming of the wiki page - not reliable I know.
I've found the aforementiond book, but are there more that go into detail about his life?

i'm reading The Brothers Karamazov for the first time (along with some secondary literature about Dosto/Brothers Karamazov from my local public library) and seeing how nihilism can be bad. i see nihilism everywhere in society since religion has become widely discredited (for some warranted reasons) but the community/good values associated with religious practice could be helpful. i dont think i need to be religious to follow good values. i like the golden rule because i'm too plebeian to develop my own ethos and values

>he thinks he grew out of nihilism
cute

For My Legionaries is his autobiography, heartbreaking and beautiful. If what he writes about his actions is 100% factual I would consider him the most honorable man who ever lived.

what are you even talking about

Definitely.Dosto has the best arguments against nihilism, and other popular, let's say worldviews, that we inherently know are detrimental, but perhaps can't explain why. I'm also reading C&P in my public library with secondary literature, btw.
In C&P part 4 chapter IV where Raskolnikov speaks with Sonja about her faith, and the utter futility of her efforts.
She had to begin prostituting herself to support her family -- she's only half-related to it, on her father's side -- and because of this the familiy kicked her out of their home, even though she was giving all her money to keep them alive -- they had 3 kids and the father was, of course, a drunk, and drank her money away. Weekly. Her father dies. There's no money for the funeral, but Raskolnikov's donation. The kids have only one set of clothes each, patched and too small, same for the step-mother. She, the step-mother, has tuberculosis, and won't live much longer. One of the children will quite likely have to prostitute herself too, Sophia. She's 9.
Rasklonikova lays this out for her, and asks her why? in face of all this pointless suffering, she keeps on. The mother will die, the father is dead, the kids will be poor their whole lives, likely die of starvation, illness, violent murder, suicide... in short it will be a terrible life and death, whoring herself out through all of it. Why? There's no point. Why doesn't she kill herself, he asks her? She must be mad -- ill-minded -- is Raskolnikov's conclusion.
He doesn't understand, yet, and neither do I.

What is there besides obviously bullshit religion (*tip) and nihilism. Either there's meaning or there isn't right? My emotions matter to me but that's about it.

>nihilism is an excuse
>implying there's a reason that needs excusing

> having a concert of "negative meaning"
You weren't even a nihilist

This should really stop at the third panel

>objective morality can be rationally grounded

99% of people are no better than animals. Whenever you come across another soul actually capable of critical thinking make yourself known, we're all lonely.

Evolution, ever hear of it?

>dude care about your genes lmao, naturalistic fallacy, more naturalistic shmallacy
Go away Sam harris

>implying the naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy given everything is within nature
retard alert

Ok, I see what's going on now. 5/10

When I grew out of Stirner and adopted Rand's Philosophy

My nig

>late bloomer thinks 17 is the age of nihilism
>he wasn't an edgy depressed emo faggot at 13

I was referring to Kant actually kek

When I was seventeen. It happens naturally. You can't simultaneously believe nothing has value and also think everything must be torn down. That said, I didn't grow out of Stirnerism.
Hey fuck you.

When I was thirteen I was a Machiavelli-worshipping socialist.

Get on my fucking level.

Is this from For my Legionaries?
I still need to read it but my bookstore doesn't have it.

It's an autobiography, of course he's going to show the things he believed in in a good light, no matter what you or I may think. Both him and those retarded communists that followed were equally bad. He just didn't have enough time to fuck things up. The only marginally good thing about his movement was that he didn't destroy an entire social class just because they weren't stupid peasants or workers. Fuck both of them.

>Kant
I disapprove

Anyone in here who thinks they grew out of it is just deluding themselves. The easiest way to see it is to read there reasoning, nobody disproves the notion, they just list bad side effects that arise with its dominance. I wouldn't attempt to disprove a religion by mentioning something bad that is related to it, I would attempt to disprove it by forming an actual argument

t. woke centrist

oh boy another 200 posts about people who have no idea about nihilism

tl;dr nihilism doesn't imply negative meaning, only means lack of meaning - giving yourself the freedom to pursue what you enjoy (doesn't imply hedonism either) without the fear of hubris or social/cultural expectation.

I never went through a nihilist phase. I went through an agnostic phase, but that didn't make me give up on everything.

Does anyone truly live by nihilism though? Aside from some of those who kill themselves? It seems that people turn to hedonism instead. Isn't hedonism different from nihilism?

One doesn't "grow out of" nihilism in the sense of: being wiser, having a more accurate understanding of the world, "being right with the world", etc. Instead, what happens is that adults wish to participate in the world and so are deluded by this process into projecting meaning onto things (having kids is the most surefire way to project meaning into the world where none exists). I personally refer to this as /the delusion of the productive adult/.

this, once nihilism strikes it never leaves, the burning questions just becomes less important in the menial and responsibility heavy mind of an adult. The people who truly embrace it instead of forgetting it are easy to spot

Make a good argument against nihilism that isn't purely 'but the pragmatic effects of nihilism is bad'

>For me it was when I realized it was a tool (used, but not manufactured) to keep the people in total submission.

Your late 20s to mid 30s are going to be rough

And how do you spot them user?

Out of any -ism under the sun; nihilism is the simplest to undercut and discard. Hell the very word is a contradiction in terms; by it's very nature it possessing its suffix of "ism" isn't valid.
Nihilism is a pseudointellectual act of mental annihilation. It's even a part of the word: 'nihil'

Nihilism is the rejection of philosophy outright, because nihilism is the claim that no answers are possible. That precludes any philosophical development. Once you have decided that no answers are possible, philosophy has become a waste of time. But further, if no moral values are possible, neither is life. So the only consistent nihilists are those who commit suicide. Nihilism has no answer to the axiom that life is an end in itself. Nihilism cannot defend the axiom that it implicitly purports; that life doesn't mean anything. It is mental destruction for sake of destruction. Hatred of the good for being the good.
Nihilists like to prattle that it, by it's very nature is impossible to refute,but nihilsim doesn't even need to be "refuted" because all it needs is and indentification of what it actually is: an anti-concept.
/discussion for all time

>Nihilism is the rejection of philosophy outright

[citation needed]

>no answers are possible

Only in regards to whether there is innate meaning in human existence, because there isn't one - it doesn't deny science or your own quest for personal meaning.

seriously yours is one of the most pseudo intellectual responses I've seen.

It's not an end; it's a starting point. You haven't thought about nearly enough if you haven't even realized that.

>When did I grow out of nihilism
When I realize anti-natalism was for pussies. Life > death

"The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it [...] The question is, how far an opinion is life-furthering, life- preserving, species-preserving, perhaps species-rearing"

Nihilism isn't something that can be disproven, it is only something that can be refrained from or accepted. The only argument against the claim that life is meaningless is that life has meaning, and I can't personally provide any evidence for either of those claims.

>It's not an end; it's a starting point. You haven't thought about nearly enough if you haven't even realized that.
well descartes got past it in like an hour

> if no moral values are possible, neither is life.
You gotta explain the logic in here, user.

> axiom that life is an end in itself
Big claim, bucko. What's your evidence that it is more than an emerging dynamic pattern. Do you even know the definition of axiom...

> anticoncept
> a refutation shouldn't need to be refuted because it is a refutation
Really makes you think...

When you niggas talk about the "meaning of life" that supposedly is non-existent or whatever I have no idea what you're talking about

can you elaborate?

if it means "what should i do" the answer may be hard but it's definitely out there, and possibly objective (e.g. if you're thirsty you should drink and so on)

What a brainlet in that quote

>Nihilism isn't something that can be disproven, it is only something that can be refrained from or accepted.
This. Nihilism is so worthless a notion that it and all concepts derived from it can be discarded without evidence. No discernable or useful conclusions can be derived from a nihilist base.
See above. Nihilism precludes such concrete notions such as citations.
---
The following is meant as a rebuke on you and that 'elaboration' for you :

There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not: it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible; it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil. Only a living entity can have goals or can originate them. And it is only a living organism that has the capacity for self-generated, goal-directed action. The goal of that action, the ultimate value which, to be kept, must be gained through its every moment, is the organism’s life.

Nihilsim is so worthless as to be trashed immediately but if one were to provide a hard-refutation this^ is what it would look like.

I'm interested in exacty what you meant with this reply to the previous post (which I did not write).

I'm also interested in whether you personally have lived through your late 20s and/or your mid 30s.

Not sure why you're being shit on. Modern Man is living in a state of meaninglessness and nihilism as consequence of abandoning the traditional archetypes of the Archaic Man.

These people need to read "The Myth of the Eternal Return" by Eliade

Exactly, we live in Kali Yuga, eventually this world will be destroyed and a better one will rise. Nihilism is a symptom of the final stage of the cycle.

A failure of introspection is not nihilism

>bullshit religion

Oh transcend, the meaning you seek lies in spiritual freedom from the cycle of time.

The repetition of divine gestures is the key to meaning.

Have you no empathy for your brother? Were you once not too, lost?

Is he not correct in a slight sense though? Modern Man killed God and we have to live the painful consequences of that? Are we not all in search of meaning?

When I had a kid, someone I would kill and die for.

Losing the validity of God does not mean losing meaning to a rational man.

I'm sorry, but I think your post is an argument for Nihilism, an explanation, rather than a refutation of it.

See how often you used the word "can" in your last few sentences.
Yes,
>It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible.
It makes it possible, that we all can agree upon, but that doesn't mean that "Life" has any objective intrinsic "Value" in it, or exists before it for that matter. It only means we can create it.
That IS nihilism. The lack of intrinsic Value in Life; and the realization than all Values are synthetically made.

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting you, would you care to refute me?

>quoting a anti-Semitic nationalist
/pol/ spotted. the only reason you made this thread is because you think Christianity and fascism is the solution to "the Jewish problem" which you believe Nihilism is a result of.

I suppose I don't understand then, if God isn't the root of meaning, aside for arguments of Art or Nature, then does "rational man" have meaning? Or it just the relativist slip'n'slide to nihilism. Are you talking about "create your own meaning"?

see . You're just deluded because now you're fully locked into adult participation for the rest of your life. This literally prevents you from entertaining truth.

That post meant fuck all.

You grew out of it because you were never a nihilist. Just a depressed idiot. Maybe actually read up and fully understand nihilism first. Baka.

Best post in thread.

Not him.but the the semantics of his usage of "can" is irrelevant, here is arguing that there is a biological determinant that goes into life being seen as inherently valuable that exists on an instinctual level.

Here is a challenge for you, buy a gun and point it at your head with a round chambered. See how hard it is to pull the trigger. Now go point it at someone on the street and see how hard it is to pull the trigger.

Now question yourself, if life has no intrinsic value then why is it difficult for me to kill myself or others?

Except nihilism on either the emotional level or intellectualized level is retarded
>Durr fuck religion and morality
>There is no disconnect between me, my actions, my concept of self, and my thoughts that is leading me to believe I have no moral code that exists on modal level with other people
>anything that isn't based on empiricism is false, because empiricism is axiomatically perfect

Life, living it, and living it well. It really just that simple. Faux-complexity to the answer is unnecessary and ultimately worthless.

Because we are wired like that in the head through evolution. It's the same reason it's hard to not eat when you are hungry or not go to the toilet or not sleep when you are tired. That doesn't mean there is intrinsic value in life.

>Just because I can't destroy life willy nilly doesnt mean I see some sort of inherent value in life tho
How many layers of dissonance are you on, bro? If life is meaningless and has not value whatsoever then destroying it should be as simple as tossing trash into the bin.
>Uses examples of instinctual life preserving behaviors mankind to prove that life has not value
Wut

It is as simple as tossing trash into a bin.
The reason it's hard to pull the trigger is because if you kill someone your freedom and life is instantly threatened. You have a survival instinct wired into you. If there was no penalty for murder you bet your ass people would start pulling triggers like tossing trash into the bin.
Back before 'war' and real penalty people were being killed all the time.

>One half of the people found in a Nubian cemetery dating to as early as 12,000 years ago had died of violence. The Yellowknives tribe in Canada was effectively obliterated by massacres committed by Dogrib Indians, and disappeared from history shortly thereafter.[3] Similar massacres occurred among the Eskimos, the Crow Indians, and countless others. These mass killings occurred well before any contact with the West.

>Back before 'war' and real penalty people were being killed all the time.
As part of ethnic conflicts which continue today, and which doesn't automatically mean that ancient people were fine with killing?

Lmao, so because
>Dude war existed in the past
Meant that taking a life was easy?
>Your freedom and life is insanely threatened
Don't forget you're a nihilist. Say
>Your nothing and nothing is immediately threatened
:D

Just because you have a survival instrict doesn't mean there is meaning to life.
You could be accidentally killed too at any moment.
And taking life through out history has been easy. You think Hannibal slept badly because his army killed 100 men a minute in Battle of Cannae?
>Your nothing and nothing is immediately threatened.
Why would the words change? What are you talking about?

Well, I always took it to mean the lack of an intrinsic meaning to things left the burden on us to find meaning. Unfortunately this also happens to be the philosophy of larping.

>The presence of a survival instinct is proof of higher purpose
Full pseud

>Just because you have a survival instrict doesn't mean there is meaning to life.
It literally does by default, otherwise there would be no instinct
>You could die at any minute
That's not a refutation of the value of life, that just means life can be lost easily.
>Hannibal
Understood the value of life and sacrifice of war, which is why he was forced to leave Rome Alone after Rome invaded Carthage under the threat that Rome would massacre the civilian population of Carthage.

Warriors sacrifice themselves to war and conflict, it's not something you ever get used to it's just something you learn to deal with over time. No one understands the value of life more than a soldier.
>Why would the word change
Because life is nothing and freedom is nothing, they are based on morality and axiomatic assertions of meaning.

>I don't value life at all!
>Gets scared when facing death
>Can't obliterate life as though it were nothing
>Cringes when he is confronted with the thought of death
Please, nothing it more bourgie and pseud than nihilism.

>It literally does by default, otherwise there would be no instinct.
Why do you think this? And what about the people WHO do kill themselves?

Certainly
>Values are synthetically made
And what exactly is WRONG with them being "synthetically made"? You don't reveal why such a thing is bad or undesirable just that it is.

>It makes it possible, that we all can agree upon, but that doesn't mean that "Life" has any objective intrinsic "Value"
And this is the criterion you are regarding things by that wrecks the whole of your structure.
There are, in essence, three schools of thought on the nature of the good and value: the intrinsic, the subjective, and the objective. Only the third is true. The intrinsic theory holds that the good is inherent in certain things or actions as such, regardless of their context and consequences, regardless of any benefit or injury they may cause to the actors and subjects involved. It is a theory that divorces the concept of “good” from beneficiaries, and the concept of “value” from valuer and purpose, claiming that the good is good in, by, and of itself.
The subjective theory holds that the good bears no relation to the facts of reality, that it is the product of a man’s consciousness, created by his feelings, desires, “intuitions,” or whims, and that it is merely an “arbitrary postulate” or an “emotional commitment.”
The intrinsic theory holds that the good resides in some sort of reality, independent of man’s consciousness; the subjectivist theory holds that the good resides in man’s consciousness, independent of reality.

The objective theory holds that the good is neither an attribute of “things in themselves” nor of man’s emotional states, but an evaluation of the facts of reality by man’s consciousness according to a rational standard of value. (Rational, in this context, means: derived from the facts of reality and validated by a process of reason.) The objective theory holds that the good is an aspect of reality in relation to man, and that it must be discovered, not invented, by man. Fundamental to an objective theory of values is the question: Of value to whom and for what? An objective theory does not permit "context-dropping" or “concept-stealing”; it does not permit the separation of “value” from “purpose,” of the good from beneficiaries, and of man’s actions from reason.

You are merely taking Nihilism that there is no intrinsic values, blanking out that it isn't the intrinsic theory you should even be opperating by.

>Why do I think this
Because it's true
>What about the people who kill themselves
>Implying killing yourself is easy
All of my keks

It's not true at all. Explain to me why having a survival instinct means there is inherent meaning to life.
>Implying killing yourself is easy.
What? There are mental patients who gouge their own eyes out and pull their hair out and hurt themselves without blinking an eye. There are mass murderers who kill school children then themselves without too much thought. It might be easy for you, but not for some people. You are going through hoops trying to justify this.

>You are merely taking Nihilism that
*You are merely taking Nihilism to mean that

What is reality is bad question.
This post tells us fuck all.

>Explain to me why having a survival instinct means there is inherent meaning to life.
Because if life wasn't valuable or meaningful you would sit in a chair and slowly starve yourself to avoid existence
>The existence of schizophrenia and psychopathy "mental illness" means that life as a whole means nothing
Nice nadir fallacy you placed on all of humanity tho. Psychopaths aren't human, and the severely mentally disabled aren't sane.

>Fuck all
How? Did you read the rest of the post?
The objective theory of value hard-refutes nihilism and not in my opinion either.

Remember friend; don't opperate on his intrinsic premises when wrecking nihilism. This is not the approach to take.

>The existence of schizophrenia and psychopathy "mental illness" means that life as a whole means nothing
I didn't say that. You said a survival instict must mean there is inherent value to life when not all people have a survival instict only healthy humans.