Any nihilists in the house?

[Anahita]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

Many people have labeled Nietzsche as a nihilist, but I have to side with many scholars including the foremost scholar on Nietzsche, Walter Kaufman. While Nietzsche is describing nihilism, there is a difference between advocating that and describing it. Furthermore, because nihilism means there are no values, that is not what Nietzsche argued. He did not argue that there are no values, instead to break values and to create new ones, and that there are many values and perspectives.

Seems to me the most important contributions of what some perceive as) nihilist theories like postmodernism, deconstuctionism and cultural relativism are that they can foster critical thinking and question core assumptions. Questioning meaning and values doesn’t mean you need to throw out meaning and values. In other threads we’ve talked about words. For example, I don’t believe ‘words mean what I say they mean’ as Anonymouse quoted earlier (except, maybe in creative arts). I also am aware that people have internal definitions/meaning that can be questioned. Linguistic deconstruction, for example, fosters critical thinking (e.g, with the use of rhetoric or words like ‘democracy’). Deconstructing meaning doesn’t translate to ‘there is no meaning.’ It could be that the meaning is different than thought (or might confirm the meaning.) Similarly, in terms of value/ethical deconstuction, questioning doesn’t mean that there is no right/wrong (for ethical purposes), but might question if certain issues are actually values, and not preferences.

Cultural relativism (in ethics) would, if someone subscribed fully to that idea, would argue that all morals and values are subjective. While this is an important critical thinking tool to argue against cultural imperialism, it cannot be an absolute. I believe it is true that SOME things that are debated as ethical issues are actually preferences, but not all. Some morals are universal (even if contextual). Someone who was a full cultural relativist wouldn’t be able to argue against pollution and destruction of the environment (in other countries), animal cruelty, female genital mutilation practices in Africa, infanticide, human rights, and other moral issues. To a relativist who thinks all morality is subjective, those are all preferences. I do not agree. On the other hand, some issues that I believe are actually preferences are treated as moral issues (and sometimes imposed on others.) A favorite hair style is not a moral issue. However, if someone became convinced that hair styles were morally relevant, they may try to impose the ‘correct’ hair style on others and might even do harm to those with different hair styles. Without questioning the (ethical) assumptions about hair-style values (for example), there wouldn’t be a way to decide that this really is not a moral value, but preference (that could be 'thrown out' as a legitimate 'moral' issue). These tools can help in doing just that.

[jgk3]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

post-modernism... yeah, I consider myself as a post-modernist. Rejecting Descartes' philosophy of "I think, therefore I am" has been an important part of my experience... I have distrust in grand narratives and don't have a solid self image or identity in this world...

I wasn't aware that post-modernism was a nihilistic theory however, but now that you mention it... it fits in so well.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

This makes sense, because I have trouble associating those extremist nihilist values with Neitzsche... He sounded so much better than that because he knew it doesn't help the human state when you destroy all its values and replace them with nothing. It's so easy to doubt the existance of everything, but after I did this long enough, I felt like I was dying, like my body wasn't good enough to contain my mind that was taking self-destructive measures to attain thought processes that humans weren't given the ability to maintain. I must've been going mad. Starving the human mind and soul from faith, even for the existance of the most basic things, is like making the mind declare war against the body. Of course, the body will still continue to eat and drink, but the mind is not at peace with this. It's complete chaos to be a fullfledged nihilist! So self destructive, at least in my case.

That is true. The world is full of values by default. To consider no values and meaning is itself a value and perspective, as Nietzsche would argue.

Extreme nihilism, or nihilism without the creation of new values were things Nietzsche argued heavily against, and he equated that with the same as those blind skeptics who are skeptical of everything in Beyond Good and Evil.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

Seems to me the most important contributions of what some perceive as) nihilist theories like postmodernism, deconstuctionism and cultural relativism are that they can foster critical thinking and question core assumptions. Questioning meaning and values doesn’t mean you need to throw out meaning and values.

Who said that? Nihilism, and those who are self-styled nihilists believe there are no values. Currently, many post-modernists and deconstructionists all over campus' in the Western world hold on to guff like this. However, nihilism is nothing new and is as old as time itself, and which is why Nietzsche stated that nihilism and destroying values in and of themselves is harmful. Essentially, anyone with half a wit can be a "breaker of values", but how many can go "beyond good and evil"?

Cultural relativism (in ethics) would, if someone subscribed fully to that idea, would argue that all morals and values are subjective. While this is an important critical thinking tool to argue against cultural imperialism, it cannot be an absolute. I believe it is true that SOME things that are debated as ethical issues are actually preferences, but not all. Some morals are universal (even if contextual). Someone who was a full cultural relativist wouldn’t be able to argue against pollution and destruction of the environment (in other countries), animal cruelty, female genital mutilation practices in Africa, infanticide, human rights, and other moral issues. To a relativist who thinks all morality is subjective, those are all preferences. I do not agree. On the other hand, some issues that I believe are actually preferences are treated as moral issues (and sometimes imposed on others.) A favorite hair style is not a moral issue. However, if someone became convinced that hair styles were morally relevant, they may try to impose the ‘correct’ hair style on others and might even do harm to those with different hair styles. Without questioning the (ethical) assumptions about hair-style values (for example), there wouldn’t be a way to decide that this really is not a moral value, but preference (that could be 'thrown out' as a legitimate 'moral' issue). These tools can help in doing just that.

If any deconstructionist states that "Morality is subjective", you can deconstruct the deconstructionist by pointing out that he just made an objective statement.

[parthiapride]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

You're all a figment of my imagination.

So am I.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

You're all a figment of my imagination.

So am I.

Can you imagine me throwing buckets of poop at you?

That is the ultimate test to knwo if you're really real.

[Anahita]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

post-modernism... yeah, I consider myself as a post-modernist. Rejecting Descartes' philosophy of "I think, therefore I am" has been an important part of my experience... I have distrust in grand narratives and don't have a solid self image or identity in this world...

I wasn't aware that post-modernism was a nihilistic theory however, but now that you mention it... it fits in so well.

My 'meta-narrative' is a partly responsive and changing one... Let’s pretend that a meta-narrative is like you. Every seven years or so, your body is made of completely new cells. You age and learn and grow and change your mind. But, you are still a cohesive you (though you are different than before in many ways.)

Who said that? Nihilism, and those who are self-styled nihilists believe there are no values. Currently, many post-modernists and deconstructionists all over campus' in the Western world hold on to guff like this. However, nihilism is nothing new and is as old as time itself, and which is why Nietzsche stated that nihilism and destroying values in and of themselves is harmful. Essentially, anyone with half a wit can be a "breaker of values", but how many can go "beyond good and evil"?


If any deconstructionist states that "Morality is subjective", you can deconstruct the deconstructionist by pointing out that he just made an objective statement.

I use bold and italic here so that people can skim a few points, or for clarity. I said 'some perceive as' nihilist for those theories because that issue is topics of multiple dissertations alone.

Beyond good and evil... that's and interesting tangent (and why I said "even if contextual"... e.g., Tao.)

I certainly understand your last point. I've discussed that issue Ad nauseam (well, not quite that much, but anyway) with postmodern scholars. A weakness of any 'absolute' relativist argument is that is knows no limits and seems to logically defeat itself.

[jgk3]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

My 'meta-narrative' is a partly responsive and changing one... Let’s pretend that a meta-narrative is like you. Every seven years or so, your body is made of completely new cells. You age and learn and grow and change your mind. But, you are still a cohesive you (though you are different than before in many ways.)

Yeah, I can agree with that concept... I know my ways of thinking will change with the passing of each "phase" I go through... I embrace this, it's the best I can do when dealing with inevitable change.

But what is a meta-narrative exactly?

[Anahita]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

Yeah, I can agree with that concept... I know my ways of thinking will change with the passing of each "phase" I go through... I embrace this, it's the best I can do when dealing with inevitable change.

But what is a meta-narrative exactly?

Not the best definition I've seen, but what I can quickly give you...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-narrative

"A metanarrative can include any grand, all-encompassing story, classic text, or archetypal account of the historical record. They can also provide a framework upon which an individual's own experiences and thoughts may be ordered. These grand, all-encompassing stories are typically characterised by some form of 'transcendent and universal truth' in addition to an evolutionary tale of human existence (a story with a beginning, middle and an end)."

[jgk3]

Re: Any nihilists in the house?

ah, I see... Well, in my case, the frame work of such a meta-narrative is very loose, as I do not care to bring order to all my ideas and experiences (at least for the time being).