Printable View
First of all, you make the (incorrect) assumption that positive progress is made only by atheists. Secondly, what interest do you have in "advancing" if (as I know you are) you are an atheist? It seems to me that you would be more interested in your own self... I'm asking a question here, I'm not being facetious. Could you explain your reasons?Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperborean
I'm guessing your not familiar with economics. Having a progressive economy depends upon a population being self-interested. Having a population competitive to achieve their own ends makes everyone better off, this is the foundation to modern day living. Life today would be far less 'advanced' if this truth weren't in action.Quote:
Originally Posted by weepingforloman
I'm not quite sure that's what hyperborean meant when he spoke of "progress..." I get the picture more of a moral/social advancement.
Philosophy is more a statement about human nature than an antidote for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperborean
To try and summarise Nihilism, i believe it's generally understood to there being no purposive truth truth to anything. So from the angle of meaning, everything is on the same level as having none.
Nihilism is also commonly applied only in an ethical sense. If something is nihilistic it can generally mean that nothing should be done, because there is no purpose to anything.
As for Nietzsche and nihilism, he was no nihilist. He was very concerned that the world would reach a point where nothing could be regarded as having true purpose or meaning, which is why he set about writing a 'revaluation of all values'.
He believed that no value remained a virtue for very long. He also developed the concept of the Ubermensch (anyone know how to type an umlaut?), which was then used (and distorted) by the Nazis.
"...the rest is silence," as someone once wrote.
However, here's the whole (Well, 99% of) orb of
monoesters, hydrocarbons, hydroxy monoesters, diesters, hydroxy polyesters, free acids, triesters, acid polyesters, acid esters, free alcohols and 6% ?
summed as parody.
Or is that, parodied some?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8pdL0snjUs
Stay on (Or don't) Groovin' Safari,
:eek2: Tor Hershman :eek2:
"If you say there are no absolute truths, aren't you saying there's only one?"
I'm not even going to get into that paradox; it's insolvable.
However, just because I think there are no absolute truths, doesn't mean that I'm right or that I think/know I'm right.
Let's think upon that for awhile...
If you think a thought, you think you are right. Why would you think something you thought was wrong?
I think religion is wrong and faith is misplaced; doesn't necessarily mean I'm right. But then, if I have that self-doubt about my ideas on religion and faith, I can't be completely certain of myself, can I?
Just because I think something's wrong, or right, doesn't mean I have to stop thinking altogether. If people never doubted their beliefs, we'd all still be going to church every Sunday because we'd be too scared of being accused of practising witchcraft.
Or maybe I just don't trust myself, any belief, ideal or person. Would that be the same as nihilism, in any sense of the word?
It may be the mindset behind nihilism, but not necessarily a Platonic ideal of nihilism.
What's wrong with going to church?
Nothing is wrong with going to church! It was just an example. Don't get me wrong, I'm not pretentious enough to claim that my opinions should be law. After all, they're only opinions.
There is something wrong with not being able to express your own opinions on the matter, though.
I, personally, don't really care about whether a God exists, or what His will may be. I think that, if there is a God, His will and general existence are far beyond our ability to comprehend. The only part of religion I despise is the extremist side.
I see no point in arguing about religion, though. If somebody has faith in something like that, there's no way you'll be able to change their mind, nor would I want to, to be honest.
"All paradoxes are solvable." -Joseph CampbellQuote:
Originally Posted by Endymion
I don't believe it's a paradox. And thanks for reading it and replying.
I believe it's a true idea though. It's kind of hard to explain. I guess it's that one statement is true and all others are false. The statement is not that ALL statements are false. That would be a parodox. But an adaptation of that is to say that all other statements are false. Then you get the different levels of truth, because the others aren't false, per se, they can be true, just so long as they don't contradict the first statement, and so on. I haven't worked it all out yet, but that's the basic idea. And as far as absolute truth goes in any other instance, I agree with Pascal when he said, "There's no such thing as absolute truth. Everything here is partly true and partly false."
the thing about nihilism is that it does not take very much to achieve...
;)
Pardon me if I'm being stupid, but isn't this one of the reasons people mock followers of one religion or other? I mean someone like me, who believes that Christ (or, for example, Allah, or Yahweh) is the only truth. We are attacked for "close-mindedness," but this is essentially the same thing. Only this statement is true... all others are wrong. Sorry if I'm just being thick-headed.Quote:
Originally Posted by NikolaiI
Grace and Peace.