nihilism

[iambiguous]

How do I refute nihilism?
from the Quora site.
Matthew Murdoch

This is admittedly only a half-answer, but I think the primary error regarding nihilism is granting right from the get-go that it should be considered the default position...

I see no reason to do that. Nihilism, at very minimum, is highly unempirical. The history of every culture I am aware of attests to that.

Let's be blunt: until we have a far, far more comprehensive understanding of how existence itself came to evolve into us, then practically anything that mere mortals can "think up" might be the default position.

Click of course.

Go ahead, ask some of these folks...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... ideologies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... philosophy

...what we should all be defaulting to. Then I suggest the part where it is often advisable to steer clear of those who tack on "or else".

The question may then fairly be raised 'what then IS the correct view?’ I obviously have thoughts on that. However, the more crucial point here is that NOT being able to answer the second question in no way means the original point is any less crucial.

Actually, from my frame of mind "here and now", what seems far more critical is not how you answer questions about nihilism, but the extent to which you are able to demonstrate why your answers are the correct ones. And not just theoretically either.

I would need a reason TO believe nihilism. It doesn't get a default win by posing reasonable questions.

Here, however, it's important, in my view, to differentiate nihilism deemed pertinent to human interactions in the is/ought world and nihilism deemed pertinent to human knowledge itself. As iwannaplato suggested above...

"There's nihilism about values (morals, aesthetics). Then there's nihilism about knowledge also. I think mostly the thread has been dealing with the former."

Oh, yeah.

On the other hand, how does this make "the Gap" or "Rummy's Rule" go away? Even so-called "complete nihilists" are only accumulating their own collection of assumptions here.

[Belinda]

Reality is what each Dasein creates , and is dynamic :not a fixed thing.

[iambiguous]

How do I refute nihilism?
from the Quora site.
Matthew L Reigada

The defining characteristic of nihilism is the proposition that nothing has meaning or purpose. You can further specify to a category of nihilism and refine the subject matter on which the proposition predicates as well as whether one is specifying innate/objective meaning or subjective meaning, but the general proposition is the same across the category at the logical level of why it is inaddressable.

On the other hand, how exactly would one employ logic in order to determine why something exists instead of nothing at all? Or why this something exists and not something else entirely?

How, logically, does the human condition fit into all of this? Is it logical or illogical that sim worlds or dream worlds exist? Same with God or the multiverse.

Logic would seem to revolve largely -- solely? -- around those who have managed to create a language sophisticated enough to...to need it? In other words, you can't just say anything that pops into your head. Let alone insist that everyone else is obligated to say the same thing.

But: about what?

How about this: actual social, political and economic contexts? For example, is it more or less logical to elect Kamala Harris president of the United States?

The problem is that one must establish either a subjective basis for meaning or an objective basis for meaning. On the subjective basis, if it’s subjective then one cannot be wrong (only wrong to you).

Thus, the need to make a distinction between the either/or and the is/ought world. Subjectively, you might believe that Leprechauns exist, but that God does not. Thus, in my view, the far more crucial component here revolves not around what you believe exists "in your head" [logically or not], but what you can demonstrate exists empirically "in reality"...for everyone?

On the objective basis, there is no objective measure of meaning, ergo even endeavoring to measure an alleged objective purpose or function requires a subjective measure, which could still yet be subjectively rejected.

Yet, as subjective beings, we here on Earth have already created hundreds and hundreds of One True Paths which, while others might reject them subjectively, it doesn't make them any less objectively wrong.

Well, whatever objective means in a universe this staggeringly vast and mysterious.

[iambiguous]

Ethics explainer: Nihilism
From The Ethics Centre website

“If nothing matters, then all the pain and guilt you feel for making nothing of your life goes away.” – Jobu Tupaki, Everything Everywhere All At Once Do our lives matter?

Or, of course, it matters in a very different way if the universe is, well, you tell me.

On the other hand, even if our lives do not matter "ultimately" that hardly makes them not worth living.

Okay, suppose it is determined that human existence really is essentially meaningless. Does that make the food you eat less tasty, the music you listen to less sublime, your orgasms less intense, your relationships less fascinating, your accomplishments less intact.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

The most common branches of nihilism are existential and moral nihilism, though there are many others, including epistemological, political, metaphysical and medical nihilism.

Medical nihilism. Had to Google that one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_nihilism

[Iwannaplato]

Ethics explainer: Nihilism
From The Ethics Centre website

“If nothing matters, then all the pain and guilt you feel for making nothing of your life goes away.” – Jobu Tupaki, Everything Everywhere All At Once Do our lives matter?

Or, of course, it matters in a very different way if the universe is, well, you tell me.

On the other hand, even if our lives do not matter "ultimately" that hardly makes them not worth living.

Okay, suppose it is determined that human existence really is essentially meaningless. Does that make the food you eat less tasty, the music you listen to less sublime, your orgasms less intense, your relationships less fascinating, your accomplishments less intact.

What you quoted was suggesting that one upside to life having no meaning is that one need not blame oneself for not succeeding in accomplishing things. You had some other thoughts not in reaction to that.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

Well, generally, nihilists are saying all of them. I suppose they could make an exhaustive, specific list, though I'm not sure what the benefit would be, given the billions of entries.

[Iwannaplato]

The problem is that one must establish either a subjective basis for meaning or an objective basis for meaning. On the subjective basis, if it’s subjective then one cannot be wrong (only wrong to you).

Thus, the need to make a distinction between the either/or and the is/ought world. Subjectively, you might believe that Leprechauns exist, but that God does not. Thus, in my view, the far more crucial component here revolves not around what you believe exists "in your head" [logically or not], but what you can demonstrate exists empirically "in reality"...for everyone?

OK, so somehow you became convinced that not just the more crucial but far more crucial component here revolves not around what you believe exists "in your head" [logically or not], but what you can demonstrate exists empirically "in reality"...for everyone? Can you support this? What led to this conclusion on your part? If you can't demonstrate it to others, why do you still believe it?

Presumably there was some evidence, for you, that this was the case. It became your view. You convinced yourself or others did or events, perhaps did.

[Fairy]

'' The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph they could become momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. '' - Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot.

[iambiguous]

Ethics explainer: Nihilism
From The Ethics Centre website

Existential nihilism

In popular use, nihilism usually refers to existential nihilism, a precursor to existentialist thought. This is the idea that life has no inherent meaning, value or purpose and it’s also often (because of this) linked with feelings of despair or apathy. Nihilists in media are usually portrayed as moody, brooding or radical types who have decided that we are insignificant specks floating around an infinite universe, and that therefore nothing matters.

On the contrary, as often as not, nihilists are portrayed in the media as those who insist their own ends justify any and all means. It's less the policies they pursue and more the draconian measures some will take in order to sustain that pursuit. All the way to the gulags and the gas chambers and the final solutions.

On the other hand, who can entirely rule out the possibility that we are just insignificant specks floating about in an infinite universe whereby, ultimately, sans God, nothing and no one does really matter.

Next up: an essentially meaningless and purposeless multiverse? How about an essentially meaningless and purposeless God?

Nihilist ideas date as far back as Buddha...

Over and again, as well, I've come across this "spiritual" rendition of nihilism. The part where, in regard to human interactions on this side of the grave, the "self" is deemed an existential construct -- an illusion? -- "somehow" connected to Enlightenment that is "somehow" connected to karma that is "somehow" connected to reincarnation that "somehow" comes back around to Buddha?

...though the beginning of its uprising in western literature appeared in the early 19th century. This shift was largely a response to the diminishing moral authority of the church (and religion at large) and the rise of secularism and rationalism.

Here, of course, some will bring us around to Marx and Engels, or to Freud and Jung, or to Nietzsche and Wittgenstein.

And then cue the postmodernists?

Or [my own personal favorite] Wilhelm Reich.

This rejection led to the view that the universe had no grand design or purpose, that we are all simply cogs in the machine of the existence.

Define cog?

[iambiguous]

Ethics explainer: Nihilism
From The Ethics Centre website

“If nothing matters, then all the pain and guilt you feel for making nothing of your life goes away.” – Jobu Tupaki, Everything Everywhere All At Once Do our lives matter?

Or, of course, it matters in a very different way if the universe is, well, you tell me.

On the other hand, even if our lives do not matter "ultimately" that hardly makes them not worth living.

Okay, suppose it is determined that human existence really is essentially meaningless. Does that make the food you eat less tasty, the music you listen to less sublime, your orgasms less intense, your relationships less fascinating, your accomplishments less intact.

What you quoted was suggesting that one upside to life having no meaning is that one need not blame oneself for not succeeding in accomplishing things. You had some other thoughts not in reaction to that.

Actually, if, at any particular point in your life, you need a way to wiggle out of responsibility for, say, anything and everything that you did, are doing, or will do just remind us that nothing any of us did, do or will do is really of our own volition.

But then back to the part whereby, even if I have absolutely no volition whatsoever, the Pad Thai I'm about to devour, the music I'm now listening to and and biography of John Lennon I'll be spending a few hours with this evening will all seem entirely to be the embodiment of the real deal.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

Well, generally, nihilists are saying all of them. I suppose they could make an exhaustive, specific list, though I'm not sure what the benefit would be, given the billions of entries.

On the other hand, the life we live from day to day either involves conflicting behaviors derived from conflicting goods in a wholly determined universe or we did somehow acquire the capacity to freely choose among conflicting options. Of course, that's when I suggest that the conflicts themselves are derived in turn from conflicting sets of assumptions about the human condition.

[iambiguous]

The problem is that one must establish either a subjective basis for meaning or an objective basis for meaning. On the subjective basis, if it’s subjective then one cannot be wrong (only wrong to you).

Thus, the need to make a distinction between the either/or and the is/ought world. Subjectively, you might believe that Leprechauns exist, but that God does not. Thus, in my view, the far more crucial component here revolves not around what you believe exists "in your head" [logically or not], but what you can demonstrate exists empirically "in reality"...for everyone?

OK, so somehow you became convinced that not just the more crucial but far more crucial component here revolves not around what you believe exists "in your head" [logically or not], but what you can demonstrate exists empirically "in reality"...for everyone? Can you support this? What led to this conclusion on your part? If you can't demonstrate it to others, why do you still believe it?

Support it? Do you mean come up with both arguments and evidence substantiating that my own fractured and fragmented frame of mind in regard to meaning, morality and metaphysics "here and now" is that which all others must accept if they wish to be thought of as rational human beings?

Nope. In fact, given the assumptions I make now about all of this, resolutions themselves may not be possible at all.

Presumably there was some evidence, for you, that this was the case. It became your view. You convinced yourself or others did or events, perhaps did.

We'll need a context, of course.

And a miracle?

[Iwannaplato]

What you quoted was suggesting that one upside to life having no meaning is that one need not blame oneself for not succeeding in accomplishing things. You had some other thoughts not in reaction to that.

Actually, if, at any particular point in your life, you need a way to wiggle out of responsibility for, say, anything and everything that you did, are doing, or will do just remind us that nothing any of us did, do or will do is really of our own volition.

The word 'actually' means that what you are about to say will contradict what I said, but what you wrote does not contradict it. It's another way to do the same thing.

If I say punching your boss is a way to lose your job, responding
'actually, setting fire to the office will lead to you losing your job'
is confused.

My point was what the guy you quoted meant.

Sure, other things are true.

Hawaii is in the Pacific.
Actually, Sri Lanka is in the Indian Ocean.

OK(?)

But then back to the part whereby, even if I have absolutely no volition whatsoever, the Pad Thai I'm about to devour, the music I'm now listening to and and biography of John Lennon I'll be spending a few hours with this evening will all seem entirely to be the embodiment of the real deal.

OK, hey, you wanna talk about determinism. Not sure why you quoted that guy.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

Well, generally, nihilists are saying all of them. I suppose they could make an exhaustive, specific list, though I'm not sure what the benefit would be, given the billions of entries.

On the other hand, the life we live from day to day either involves conflicting behaviors derived from conflicting goods in a wholly determined universe or we did somehow acquire the capacity to freely choose among conflicting options. Of course, that's when I suggest that the conflicts themselves are derived in turn from conflicting sets of assumptions about the human condition.

On the other hand.....?

The nihilists reject all moral positions. What is it you want a nihilist to bring down to earth? The abortion issue? They reject both the right to choose and the babies right to life as objective moral positions. At best they are preferences to a nihilist. What is it you want a nihilist to do here?

[Belinda]

What you quoted was suggesting that one upside to life having no meaning is that one need not blame oneself for not succeeding in accomplishing things. You had some other thoughts not in reaction to that.

Actually, if, at any particular point in your life, you need a way to wiggle out of responsibility for, say, anything and everything that you did, are doing, or will do just remind us that nothing any of us did, do or will do is really of our own volition.

The word 'actually' means that what you are about to say will contradict what I said, but what you wrote does not contradict it. It's another way to do the same thing.

If I say punching your boss is a way to lose your job, responding
'actually, setting fire to the office will lead to you losing your job'
is confused.

My point was what the guy you quoted meant.

Sure, other things are true.

Hawaii is in the Pacific.
Actually, Sri Lanka is in the Indian Ocean.

OK(?)

But then back to the part whereby, even if I have absolutely no volition whatsoever, the Pad Thai I'm about to devour, the music I'm now listening to and and biography of John Lennon I'll be spending a few hours with this evening will all seem entirely to be the embodiment of the real deal.

OK, hey, you wanna talk about determinism. Not sure why you quoted that guy.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

Well, generally, nihilists are saying all of them. I suppose they could make an exhaustive, specific list, though I'm not sure what the benefit would be, given the billions of entries.

On the other hand, the life we live from day to day either involves conflicting behaviors derived from conflicting goods in a wholly determined universe or we did somehow acquire the capacity to freely choose among conflicting options. Of course, that's when I suggest that the conflicts themselves are derived in turn from conflicting sets of assumptions about the human condition.

On the other hand.....?

The nihilists reject all moral positions. What is it you want a nihilist to bring down to earth? The abortion issue? They reject both the right to choose and the babies right to life as objective moral positions. At best they are preferences to a nihilist. What is it you want a nihilist to do here?

I expect an honest nihilist to make up his own mind as to how to live a good and a happy life. An honest nihilist has no recourse to God or nature to decide how he or she ought to act.

There exists no essential meaning : meanings are created by social consensus, and social consensus is created from subjective opinions.
Looking to God or any other authority to obtain your meanings is dishonest. If you decide to hit your boss you may be doing so from good intentions. Some bosses should be hit. Some accepted ideas should be incinerated as having passed their sell by date.

[Jack Daydream]

What you quoted was suggesting that one upside to life having no meaning is that one need not blame oneself for not succeeding in accomplishing things. You had some other thoughts not in reaction to that.

Actually, if, at any particular point in your life, you need a way to wiggle out of responsibility for, say, anything and everything that you did, are doing, or will do just remind us that nothing any of us did, do or will do is really of our own volition.

The word 'actually' means that what you are about to say will contradict what I said, but what you wrote does not contradict it. It's another way to do the same thing.

If I say punching your boss is a way to lose your job, responding
'actually, setting fire to the office will lead to you losing your job'
is confused.

My point was what the guy you quoted meant.

Sure, other things are true.

Hawaii is in the Pacific.
Actually, Sri Lanka is in the Indian Ocean.

OK(?)

But then back to the part whereby, even if I have absolutely no volition whatsoever, the Pad Thai I'm about to devour, the music I'm now listening to and and biography of John Lennon I'll be spending a few hours with this evening will all seem entirely to be the embodiment of the real deal.

OK, hey, you wanna talk about determinism. Not sure why you quoted that guy.

Nihilism is a school of philosophical thought proposing that our existence fundamentally lacks inherent meaning. It rejects various aspects of human existence that are generally accepted and considered fundamental, like objective truth, moral truth and the value and purpose of life. Its origin is the Latin word ‘nihil’, which means ‘nothing’.

On the other hand, if nihilism is just one more school of philosophical thought, to what extent then are those who call themselves nihilists able to bring those thoughts down to Earth? In other words, what particular objective truth? what particular moral truth? what particular value and purpose of life?

Well, generally, nihilists are saying all of them. I suppose they could make an exhaustive, specific list, though I'm not sure what the benefit would be, given the billions of entries.

On the other hand, the life we live from day to day either involves conflicting behaviors derived from conflicting goods in a wholly determined universe or we did somehow acquire the capacity to freely choose among conflicting options. Of course, that's when I suggest that the conflicts themselves are derived in turn from conflicting sets of assumptions about the human condition.

On the other hand.....?

The nihilists reject all moral positions. What is it you want a nihilist to bring down to earth? The abortion issue? They reject both the right to choose and the babies right to life as objective moral positions. At best they are preferences to a nihilist. What is it you want a nihilist to do here?

I expect an honest nihilist to make up his own mind as to how to live a good and a happy life. An honest nihilist has no recourse to God or nature to decide how he or she ought to act.

There exists no essential meaning : meanings are created by social consensus, and social consensus is created from subjective opinions.
Looking to God or any other authority to obtain your meanings is dishonest. If you decide to hit your boss you may be doing so from good intentions. Some bosses should be hit. Some accepted ideas should be incinerated as having passed their sell by date.

Hello, I am presuming you are Belinda who I have interacted with previously!

The idea of a happy nihilist is interesting and I have come across a few. However, I find nihilism very depressing. That doesn't mean that I see authority as having the correct ideas and I find authoritarian religious as depressing as nihilism. The idea of too much prescriptive meaning within religion or complete absence of it in nihilism can be dark tunnels and with rigid walls.

With the happy nihilists I have come across it has seemed to me that their happiness is not due to their nihilism itself. They seem comfortable with nihilism because their life circumstances are favourable. There are also some very unhappy nihilists too, with bad life situations, verging on suicidal despair.

In times of difficulties, many do turn to religious beliefs in God as a straw to cling to. However, it does not work for all, especially if one is within religious circles which try to impose strict rules and beliefs, which seem to prevent philosophical awareness and questioning. There are probably different dispositions, including people who would rather be told what to think rather than thinking for themselves.

[Belinda]

The word 'actually' means that what you are about to say will contradict what I said, but what you wrote does not contradict it. It's another way to do the same thing.

If I say punching your boss is a way to lose your job, responding
'actually, setting fire to the office will lead to you losing your job'
is confused.

My point was what the guy you quoted meant.

Sure, other things are true.

Hawaii is in the Pacific.
Actually, Sri Lanka is in the Indian Ocean.

OK(?)

OK, hey, you wanna talk about determinism. Not sure why you quoted that guy.









On the other hand.....?

The nihilists reject all moral positions. What is it you want a nihilist to bring down to earth? The abortion issue? They reject both the right to choose and the babies right to life as objective moral positions. At best they are preferences to a nihilist. What is it you want a nihilist to do here?

I expect an honest nihilist to make up his own mind as to how to live a good and a happy life. An honest nihilist has no recourse to God or nature to decide how he or she ought to act.

There exists no essential meaning : meanings are created by social consensus, and social consensus is created from subjective opinions.
Looking to God or any other authority to obtain your meanings is dishonest. If you decide to hit your boss you may be doing so from good intentions. Some bosses should be hit. Some accepted ideas should be incinerated as having passed their sell by date.

Hello, I am presuming you are Belinda who I have interacted with previously!

The idea of a happy nihilist is interesting and I have come across a few. However, I find nihilism very depressing. That doesn't mean that I see authority as having the correct ideas and I find authoritarian religious as depressing as nihilism. The idea of too much prescriptive meaning within religion or complete absence of it in nihilism can be dark tunnels and with rigid walls.

With the happy nihilists I have come across it has seemed to me that their happiness is not due to their nihilism itself. They seem comfortable with nihilism because their life circumstances are favourable. There are also some very unhappy nihilists too, with bad life situations, verging on suicidal despair.

In times of difficulties, many do turn to religious beliefs in God as a straw to cling to. However, it does not work for all, especially if one is within religious circles which try to impose strict rules and beliefs, which seem to prevent philosophical awareness and questioning. There are probably different dispositions, including people who would rather be told what to think rather than thinking for themselves.

I agree nihilism is uncomfortable. However if intellectual dishonesty is the refuge then I imagine mental disorder could result. It's possible to believe in God and be intellectually honest , but only if you are traditional and conservative or else superstitious enough to believe in miracles.

[Jack Daydream]

I expect an honest nihilist to make up his own mind as to how to live a good and a happy life. An honest nihilist has no recourse to God or nature to decide how he or she ought to act.

There exists no essential meaning : meanings are created by social consensus, and social consensus is created from subjective opinions.
Looking to God or any other authority to obtain your meanings is dishonest. If you decide to hit your boss you may be doing so from good intentions. Some bosses should be hit. Some accepted ideas should be incinerated as having passed their sell by date.

Hello, I am presuming you are Belinda who I have interacted with previously!

The idea of a happy nihilist is interesting and I have come across a few. However, I find nihilism very depressing. That doesn't mean that I see authority as having the correct ideas and I find authoritarian religious as depressing as nihilism. The idea of too much prescriptive meaning within religion or complete absence of it in nihilism can be dark tunnels and with rigid walls.

With the happy nihilists I have come across it has seemed to me that their happiness is not due to their nihilism itself. They seem comfortable with nihilism because their life circumstances are favourable. There are also some very unhappy nihilists too, with bad life situations, verging on suicidal despair.

In times of difficulties, many do turn to religious beliefs in God as a straw to cling to. However, it does not work for all, especially if one is within religious circles which try to impose strict rules and beliefs, which seem to prevent philosophical awareness and questioning. There are probably different dispositions, including people who would rather be told what to think rather than thinking for themselves.

I agree nihilism is uncomfortable. However if intellectual dishonesty is the refuge then I imagine mental disorder could result. It's possible to believe in God and be intellectually honest , but only if you are traditional and conservative or else superstitious enough to believe in miracles.

I definitely agree that dishonest refuge in belief in God can result in mental disorder. This is partly true when people are told that it is wrong to question and one should accept all in the Bible as literal. I can remember going to a Christian group where people tried to impose their views on me and even tell me that the books I was reading for my studies were the work of the devil. I can remember feeling so stressed out that I ended up lying in bed until 5pm because I was too distressed to get up.

As far as nihilism, it is probably a spectrum because at times I feel nihilistic about the state of the world. What I have found is that some religious people see it as a sign of the end times predicted in the Bible. That leads them to say that it is evidence of the new world, the resurrection etc. However, that is an irrational leap because the existence of climate change, war and poverty does not mean that the Biblical vision is true necessarily.