A Catholic Drawn to Nihilism

[nwrickert (Neil Rickert)]

Your whole viewpoint on how we relate to reality, is what surprises me.

[PdotdQ]

@nwrickert

Your whole viewpoint on how we relate to reality, is what surprises me.

Although I don’t subscribe to everything he said, my views are similar to that of Ecclesiastes, which is my favorite book of the bible.

[Mung]

@T_aquaticus

Morality is based on what humans want and need. Morality is based on what we care about.

What if claims such as this arise from nihilism about morality?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism#Moral

[nwrickert (Neil Rickert)]

@PdotdQ

…, my views are similar to that of Ecclesiastes, …

Ah, okay. Yes, there is something nihilistic about Ecclesiastes.

[Intjer (Jacob)]

@T_aquaticus

Hitler’s followers would not want to be wiped out as part of a genocidal pogrom. Therefore, they already believe that genocide is wrong.

There is a distinction between those who believe genocide is wrong, universally wrong, and those who believe that genocide against an “enemy” tribe is okay, even a duty, but genocide against their own tribe is wrong.

[T_aquaticus]

@PdotdQ

What about whether white supremacy is right or wrong?

I doubt that white supremacists would want their rights taken away because of the color of their skin.

@PdotdQ

I never claim that morality is physical, just that if the human mind is wrong on many physical things, what makes it right in non-physical things (e.g. morality). Morality is “What we choose it to be” is an axiom - e.g. a Christian will not agree to it.

Christians chose to be Christians and chose to follow the morality found in Christian theology. People of other religions chose those moral codes as well.

@PdotdQ

I can’t see that this is true. Human society is just a collection of atoms - I find it difficult to attribute values inherent in such society unless I axiomatically impose that this is true.

I view it more as an observable fact. Humans say they have values. Humans act on those values. I have values. The epistemology I use starts with facts.

@PdotdQ

Let me put it this way: In saying that nihilism is wrong, and that its “wrongness” is not based on your own axiomatic view of values and morality, you are making a huge claim. As existential nihilism is an active field of research in philosophy, you are going against the grain here. As we discussed before: The Paradox of Scientific Consensus this should not be done lightly.

There are philosophers who reject nihilism, so there are plenty of others out on the branch with me. Accepting nihilism is just as big of a claim as rejecting it, at least from what I can see.

[Mung]

I was considering starting a Christian Nihilism movement but then I came across this article. How wrong is that?

But see also:

https://networks.h-net.org/node/6873/pages/77410/nihilism-existentialism-and-christianity

[PdotdQ]

@T_aquaticus

I doubt that white supremacists would want their rights taken away because of the color of their skin.

But they would claim that there is truth in white supremacy, and therefore it is okay to take away the rights of those who belong to what they think is “lesser race”. In this way the symmetry is broken.

@T_aquaticus

Christians chose to be Christians and chose to follow the morality found in Christian theology. People of other religions chose those moral codes as well.

Exactly! So you agree with me that one’s morals depends on the one’s moral axioms. Therefore, it is impossible to say that nihilism is wrong without evaluating them with your own moral framework.

@T_aquaticus

I view it more as an observable fact. Humans say they have values. Humans act on those values. I have values. The epistemology I use starts with facts.

I disagree with this. Just because someone says that they have values does not mean that they actually have values. This is a deep rabbit hole that I don’t know if we want to enter, so I will just agree to disagree on this point.

@T_aquaticus

There are philosophers who reject nihilism, so there are plenty of others out on the branch with me. Accepting nihilism is just as big of a claim as rejecting it, at least from what I can see.

The difference is that you say that the wrongness of nihilism is absolute - it is independent of your own views and morals that you hold axiomatically. This is the crux of my disagreement, as I mentioned before

@PdotdQ

The crux of the issue is that I cannot see how you can say that: “atheist nihilists are wrong” without evaluating them with your own views of values and morality, which are things that they do not share.

[T_aquaticus]

@PdotdQ

But they would claim that there is truth in white supremacy, and therefore it is okay to take away the rights of those who belong to what they think is “lesser race”. In this way the symmetry is broken.

They would not want their rights taken away by a group who proclaimed that whites were the lesser race.

@PdotdQ

Exactly! So you agree with me that one’s morals depends on the one’s moral axioms. Therefore, it is impossible to say that nihilism is wrong without evaluating them with your own moral framework.

Nihilism is wrong when it says that morals have no meaning because humans do attach meaning to the morals they choose.

@PdotdQ

I disagree with this. Just because someone says that they have values does not mean that they actually have values. This is a deep rabbit hole that I don’t know if we want to enter, so I will just agree to disagree on this point.

Where we may disagree is in how we define values. I see them as an emergent property of being human. In the same way, water is wet and the sky is blue. The product of human neurobiology and psychology is something we call values. I sense that you are looking for something more foundational and axiomic, but I tend to lean towards an operational definition.

@PdotdQ

The difference is that you say that the wrongness of nihilism is absolute - it is independent of your own views and morals that you hold axiomatically. This is the crux of my disagreement, as I mentioned before

I believe nihilism is wrong just as others believe it is right. I don’t see how one belief takes precedent over the other.

[PdotdQ]

@T_aquaticus

They would not want their rights taken away by a group who proclaimed that whites were the lesser race.

Of course! But white supremacists do not have a general moral statement such as: “Genocide is wrong” but rather a race-specific moral statement saying: “Genocide against whites is wrong”. There is no symmetry in race here.

@T_aquaticus

Nihilism is wrong when it says that morals have no meaning because humans do attach meaning to the morals they choose.

Again, this is based on one’s moral axiom: that the morals human attach is actually real and true. The only way nihilism can be shown to be wrong is if it is somehow logically inconsistent. You have not proven this.

@T_aquaticus

I sense that you are looking for something more foundational and axiomic, but I tend to lean towards an operational definition.

Yes, I do want a foundational and axiomatic definition of morals. Anything else runs afoul of the fact-value distinction and your proposal of reading morality from human civilization in particular runs afoul of the is-ought gap.

@T_aquaticus

I believe nihilism is wrong just as others believe it is right. I don’t see how one belief takes precedent over the other.

Again, there is nothing wrong or not mainstream about not believing in nihilism. What goes against mainstream position is your claim that the wrongness of nihilism is not subject to your own axiomatically held values and morals, and that your views can be shown to be true through the inconsistency of nihilism with observation of the world. This runs afoul of the fact-value distinction and the is-ought gap, which are both mainstream positions. This is what I mean by saying that your views goes “against the grain”.

[T_aquaticus]

@PdotQ

Thanks for your replies!! I think I will leave the conversation where it is at and let it ruminate for a while. Your points have all been well made and are certainly worth considering.

[PdotdQ]

@T_aquaticus

Thanks for your replies!! I think I will leave the conversation where it is at and let it ruminate for a while. Your points have all been well made and are certainly worth considering.

It was interesting to hear your thoughts from the other side too!

[PdotdQ]

@Mung

I was considering starting a Christian Nihilism movement but then I came across this article . How wrong is that?

I don’t know about Christian nihilism, but given how wide-ranging the word “Christian” can be applied to nowadays, I won’t be surprised if someone can come up with a flavor of nihilism whose tenets can still be called Christian by some definition.

I know for certain that one cannot be Catholic and nihilist.