Comments on: Wanted: A Few Good Nihilists

By: Justin H

Justin H — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Be careful, Dude, or zuh nihilists ofer at zat ozer blog vill cut off somesing of yours.

By: Ann

Ann — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I think people who insist that meaning only comes through transcendance fear the idea of “not being.”

By: Ann

Ann — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Of course, even though you wrote it eight or nine times, I would spell transcendence wrong... It was because I was so excited about having a post of Dave's to reply to!

By: RoastedTomatoes

RoastedTomatoes — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I think part of the game in the transcendence post Dave links to is this: raising the bar on the existence of meaning. In the real world, people routinely manage to find meaning in fiction–narratives that are not only often not transcendent, but not even materially existing. If people can find meaning in “Friends,” why should we suppose that they will be unable to find meaning in life–regardless of their philosophical perspective?

That connects with a second aspect of the strategy on the original post–to inflate the practical importance of abstract theology and philosophy for people’s beliefs and life experiences. It may be the case that, for some definition of transcendence and some definition of meaning, an absense of one logically precludes the existence of the other. But, in actual fact, we people really just muddle by constructing meaning out of what we can get our hands on.

In other words, I think the original post here priviledges philosophy at the expense of psychology and culture–the place we should probably look if we want to understand how and when people are able to construct meaning out of a particular worldview.

By: Kaimi

Kaimi — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

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

By: Mega Eagle

Mega Eagle — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Wanted: a few good discussion topics!

By: Mega Dave

Mega Dave — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Wanted: a few good comments!

By: DKL

DKL — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I think your arguments are cogent, David. I go further, though. Transcendence strikes me as an utterly unintelligible notion in the first place. Nothing could possibly count as evidence for or against transcendence. Thus, even if things were “transcendent” in some sense, we’d cannot possibly determine that this is the case.

Once one realizes the poverty of this concept of transcendence, if the best he can come up with is nihilism, then that’s a problem of an entirely different order.

On a side note, I once tried to imagine a world populated with people just like myself, and boy, what a mess! Mostly, everyone was arguing, “I’m a nihilist!” — “No. I’m a nihilist!”

By: Jim F

Jim F — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I have to wonder whether Dave read the entirety of the post he references, especially since the post itself recognizes that Mormons are materialists and, in the last paragraph, rejects the idea that materialism precludes transcendence.

First, my claim was not that materialism entails nihilism. It was that many philosohers have assumed that materialism entails nihilism. In addition, the question is not whether card-carrying materialists claim to be nihilists. The question is whether nihilism is implied by their understanding of the world, regardless of what they believe. People often have contradictory beliefs.

Finally, Dave and DKL seem to assume that “transcendence” must mean what it means (or is intended to mean) in traditional theology. I, too, think that usage is probably meaningless, as my second paragraph suggests.

I don’t claim that the post was absolutely clear. Indeed, I tried to clarify it a couple of times. But I think it was fairly obvious that the question was, by asking the question of the kinds of substance there are, also a question of what transcendence means rather than a claim about what it means.

I have no problem with objections, but if you’re going to object, at least get right the position you’re objecting to.