Philosophy Now Forum

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: I just looked up the meaning of Nihilism and found that for the most part I am a Nihilist. I do not believe life has any objective meaning or purpose. I also believe that morals are derived from interaction with society and there are no objective values. I also find that the synonym for nihilism is pessimism which I find puzzling. I am not a pessimist. I do believe that most people have common sense and that makes them capable of understanding what works in society and to behave that way. I also don't understand what the correlation is between life having no meaning or purpose and pessimism. What is the big deal if life has no meaning/ purpose? The fact is we are alive and have two choices. Either whine about it or enjoy it the best that we can. The reality will never change. I choose the latter. Also the fact that people who believe life has a meaning and purpose never seem to find it but still seem to be happy in their own way. Some believe life has a meaning and purpose and never find it. I believe life has no meaning and purpose and don't look for it. What is the difference?

That's my problem with Camus. Without meaning, existence is absurd. He knew that. But he then said celebrate it. Which is fine, since he was stuck here anyways. But then he created two new minds that would have to push the boulder up the hill, repeatedly, ala Sisyphus, with no point to it. It's fine to make the most out of what you have, but what's the point in making something else do it, when they never had to? (The Buddha did the exact same thing, btw. Hence my criticism of him as well as Camus. Two men who knew exactly how silly life is, and yet perpetuated the problem instead of resolving it.)

The absurdity of life is the only really good way of living it without guilt; freely and openly. He was dead right. You ought to take heed.
Besides being an antinatalist, you don't seem to have the balls to actually live life.

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

Wyman wrote:
I don't think they keep records of that sort of thing. It would be difficult to take a poll.

I just looked up the meaning of Nihilism and found that for the most part I am a Nihilist. I do not believe life has any objective meaning or purpose. I also believe that morals are derived from interaction with society and there are no objective values. I also find that the synonym for nihilism is pessimism which I find puzzling. I am not a pessimist. I do believe that most people have common sense and that makes them capable of understanding what works in society and to behave that way. I also don't understand what the correlation is between life having no meaning or purpose and pessimism. What is the big deal if life has no meaning/ purpose? The fact is we are alive and have two choices. Either whine about it or enjoy it the best that we can. The reality will never change. I choose the latter. Also the fact that people who believe life has a meaning and purpose never seem to find it but still seem to be happy in their own way. Some believe life has a meaning and purpose and never find it. I believe life has no meaning and purpose and don't look for it. What is the difference?

That's my problem with Camus. Without meaning, existence is absurd. He knew that. But he then said celebrate it. Which is fine, since he was stuck here anyways. But then he created two new minds that would have to push the boulder up the hill, repeatedly, ala Sisyphus, with no point to it. It's fine to make the most out of what you have, but what's the point in making something else do it, when they never had to? (The Buddha did the exact same thing, btw. Hence my criticism of him as well as Camus. Two men who knew exactly how silly life is, and yet perpetuated the problem instead of resolving it.)

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: I just looked up the meaning of Nihilism and found that for the most part I am a Nihilist. I do not believe life has any objective meaning or purpose. I also believe that morals are derived from interaction with society and there are no objective values. I also find that the synonym for nihilism is pessimism which I find puzzling. I am not a pessimist. I do believe that most people have common sense and that makes them capable of understanding what works in society and to behave that way. I also don't understand what the correlation is between life having no meaning or purpose and pessimism. What is the big deal if life has no meaning/ purpose? The fact is we are alive and have two choices. Either whine about it or enjoy it the best that we can. The reality will never change. I choose the latter. Also the fact that people who believe life has a meaning and purpose never seem to find it but still seem to be happy in their own way. Some believe life has a meaning and purpose and never find it. I believe life has no meaning and purpose and don't look for it. What is the difference?

That's my problem with Camus. Without meaning, existence is absurd. He knew that. But he then said celebrate it. Which is fine, since he was stuck here anyways. But then he created two new minds that would have to push the boulder up the hill, repeatedly, ala Sisyphus, with no point to it. It's fine to make the most out of what you have, but what's the point in making something else do it, when they never had to? (The Buddha did the exact same thing, btw. Hence my criticism of him as well as Camus. Two men who knew exactly how silly life is, and yet perpetuated the problem instead of resolving it.)

Well, the Buddha realised that after he had kids, so there's that.

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: That's my problem with Camus. Without meaning, existence is absurd. He knew that. But he then said celebrate it. Which is fine, since he was stuck here anyways. But then he created two new minds that would have to push the boulder up the hill, repeatedly, ala Sisyphus, with no point to it. It's fine to make the most out of what you have, but what's the point in making something else do it, when they never had to? (The Buddha did the exact same thing, btw. Hence my criticism of him as well as Camus. Two men who knew exactly how silly life is, and yet perpetuated the problem instead of resolving it.)

Well, the Buddha realised that after he had kids, so there's that.

Did he? I didn't know this. Is there a reference to this? Not that I don't believe you; more for my own edification.

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: Well, the Buddha realised that after he had kids, so there's that.

Did he? I didn't know this. Is there a reference to this? Not that I don't believe you; more for my own edification.

I suppose you can find it everywhere. The story goes that he was a prince named Siddhartha and his father the king figured that he would never let him see what true suffering was so he kept him sheltered within the palace. After he got married and had kids, one day he walked out of the palace and saw the condition of the people and all the poverty and suffering and it shocked the hell out of him. So he had an existential crisis right there and then and left for the woods and the rest is history.

Here's the first link I could find. http://buddhism.about.com/od/lifeoftheb ... halife.htm

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: Did he? I didn't know this. Is there a reference to this? Not that I don't believe you; more for my own edification.

I suppose you can find it everywhere. The story goes that he was a prince named Siddhartha and his father the king figured that he would never let him see what true suffering was so he kept him sheltered within the palace. After he got married and had kids, one day he walked out of the palace and saw the condition of the people and all the poverty and suffering and it shocked the hell out of him. So he had an existential crisis right there and then and left for the woods and the rest is history.

Here's the first link I could find. http://buddhism.about.com/od/lifeoftheb ... halife.htm

Thanks. I know the basic story, but did he specifically rue creating another to suffer?

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: I suppose you can find it everywhere. The story goes that he was a prince named Siddhartha and his father the king figured that he would never let him see what true suffering was so he kept him sheltered within the palace. After he got married and had kids, one day he walked out of the palace and saw the condition of the people and all the poverty and suffering and it shocked the hell out of him. So he had an existential crisis right there and then and left for the woods and the rest is history.

Here's the first link I could find. http://buddhism.about.com/od/lifeoftheb ... halife.htm

Thanks. I know the basic story, but did he specifically rue creating another to suffer?

Well, I am going out on a limb here, but I think to the Buddha it would be irrelevant. What was done was done. He would definitely not regret it.

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: Thanks. I know the basic story, but did he specifically rue creating another to suffer?

Well, I am going out on a limb here, but I think to the Buddha it would be irrelevant. What was done was done. He would definitely not regret it.

Irrelevant to him, perhaps, but not to his son, whom he condemned to suffering.

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: Well, I am going out on a limb here, but I think to the Buddha it would be irrelevant. What was done was done. He would definitely not regret it.

Irrelevant to him, perhaps, but not to his son, whom he condemned to suffering.

Well, that is not really true because not many people see life as such a bad thing as you do. And his son did become his disciple.

Dalek Prime wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: Irrelevant to him, perhaps, but not to his son, whom he condemned to suffering.

Well, that is not really true because not many people see life as such a bad thing as you do. And his son did become his disciple.

Really? The Buddha based his whole philosophy on escaping the suffering of the world, his son agreeing with him (like he had a real choice, being raised and taught by him), and you're telling me that I'm being negative!? Come on! That's such a ridiculously unfair reply to me, in light of the Buddha's own beliefs.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
The absurdity of life is the only really good way of living it without guilt; freely and openly. He was dead right. You ought to take heed.
Besides being an antinatalist, you don't seem to have the balls to actually live life.

Oh, I'm so glad you barfed on our conversation, ya cranky shit. First off, I am an absurdist, so what is you're fucking point in saying 'take heed'? Second, I am clearly alive, hence living life. So, not only are you wrong on both counts, you're aggravatingly, stupidly wrong. As usual.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
The absurdity of life is the only really good way of living it without guilt; freely and openly. He was dead right. You ought to take heed.
Besides being an antinatalist, you don't seem to have the balls to actually live life.

Oh, I'm so glad you barfed on our conversation, ya cranky shit. First off, I am an absurdist, so what is you're fucking point in saying 'take heed'? Second, I am clearly alive, hence living life. So, not only are you wrong on both counts, you're aggravatingly, stupidly wrong. As usual.

You are not very happy though are you?? Camus had an interesting life. It's worth taking heed to those that did better than yourself, obviously

Dalek Prime wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: Oh, I'm so glad you barfed on our conversation, ya cranky shit. First off, I am an absurdist, so what is you're fucking point in saying 'take heed'? Second, I am clearly alive, hence living life. So, not only are you wrong on both counts, you're aggravatingly, stupidly wrong. As usual.

You are not very happy though are you?? Camus had an interesting life. It's worth taking heed to those that did better than yourself, obviously

Was Camus deliriously happy? I know you're not, or you wouldn't be so cranky. What did Camus do that was so great besides write words? And is that so great? I can write as well. Oh look, I'm writing here. Big whoop.

What comprises great anyways. I saw a bit from a documentary,The Man Who Saved the World last night, about the Russian officer who stalled on firing his warheads, as a glitch in the system called a incoming alert. He waited for visual confirmation, and there were no missiles coming in. He prevented the end of life on earth. And do you know what happened? His general reprimanded him for not keeping a log of events. And then his wife died. And then he called Kevin Costner and Al Pacino great men.

What a load of shit life is. But I'm happy, because this stupidity will end some day, and I won't have to put up with cranky shits like you.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: Counselling suicide again, schmuck? Save it for the teenagers on the net who have probably done it because of you, Killer.

It's just your logical conclusion since you life is so meaningless.

No, you just want to deflect the fact that you counsel suicide on the net.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
It's just your logical conclusion since you life is so meaningless.

No, you just want to deflect the fact that you counsel suicide on the net.

Only to you.