>Philosophical debate
>my opponent is necessarily forced to advocate nihilism as a consequence of his line of argumentation
>acts like this is somehow a victory
heh, every time.
Philosophical debate
Samuel Kelly
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Blake Thompson
It's a victory if you cannot argue against nihilism.
Nietzsche did. You know shit about nihilism nor philosophy.
Nathan Hall
>implying Nietzsche wasn't the first nihilist himself
Nolan Jenkins
t. F. H. Jacobi
David Fisher
I don't even like Nietzsche much but the entire point of his philosophy was anti-nihilism nor was he remotely the "first nihilist".
Jaxson Gonzalez
The entire point of his philosophy was anti-pessimism and in trying to refute pessimism, he came up with this non-standard called "power" which would remain ever elusive because it was only defined as the ultimate teleological principle but since we have no way of determining what principle is the ultimate, its just as well he should be considered an extreme cynic and consequently a nihilist.
Ryder Williams
The entire point of his philosophy was an counter-culture radical explanation of the origin of philosophy and the basic concepts used by philosophers. Jesus, read Genealogy of Morals and you will see how he identifies the ancient concepts used by peoples.
As he BTFO Plato philosophy, he seems to advocate for empiricism, however he rejects the point of view of its supporters. The necessity of objective truth, the interpretation of the concept of truth as omitting the qualia problem, as he addresses such matter more consistently.
He analyzes the origins of philosophy and debunks the constructions made by later philosophers as their concepts have no rigorous basis, and the circumstancial validity they have is BTFO by the criticism against Plato, empiricism, qualia, limitations of language, human reasoning...etc.
I'm not a huge fan of Nietzsche, but if you cannot argue against Nihilism it means you didn't even tried.
Mason Turner
Who says I can't argue against nihilism? If I'm going to argue against nihilism I would think my opponent would have to explicitly advocate nihilism for that discussion to be relevant. Usually you can't even convince them they have advocated nihilism because they fail to realize how their own systems break down under the extreme abstraction they used to scrutinize your own arguments.
Jeremiah Ramirez
Nihilism about what?
Kayden Perez
I'm sure if you've had many philosophical debates someone has tried to invoke something like these. in order to debunk your position.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org