phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 4:38 pm
It's nihilistic because value and meaning come from the commands and will of a god. They don't come from this world and this life.
Simply unbelievable!
Well, if I do say so myself.
Nihilism: "the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless"
Essentially meaningless.
Christianity not only provides mere mortals with a
divine meaning and purpose on this side of the grave, this meaning and purpose then continues on for all of eternity on the other side of it.
Many nihilists start with the assumption that precisely
because there is no God -- no One True Path to enlightenment, immortality and salvation -- mere mortals "down here" have for centuries sustained endless conflicts regarding possible secular equivalents of God and religion. Ideological, deontological and the like.
So without god, there is no value or meaning. This is expressed by IC and Iambiguous.
What never ceases to amaze me are those here who have engaged in exchanges with me for years and yet still manage to completely misconstrue my thinking regarding meaning and purpose and value given human interactions in a No God world.
I do not argue that there is no meaning or no morality or no value. I suggest instead that given my own rooted existentially in dasein grasp of human interactions in a No God, it seems reasonable to me "here and now" that neither scientists nor philosophers nor ethicists have come up with a moral agenda that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to subscribe to.
That, in other words, meaning and purpose and values are ever evolving historically and culturally out in particular worlds understood in ofttimes very different ways by particular people who may well be living very different lives.
And, yes, there may well be a God, the God. Or, if not, there may well be an objective scientific or philosophical morality.
But believing that is one thing, actually demonstrating that this is the case given particular contexts, another thing altogether.
So, the only way his reaction to me makes sense is that above all, he doesn't want to ever believe that my own "fractured and fragmented" moral philosophy might one day become his own. So, for that crucial reason alone I must be wrong!!!
On the other hand, IC does share my own belief that in the absence of God, all things are permitted. That, in other words, the only true antidote to nihilism
is God and religion.
On the
other other hand, IC claims that beyond a leap of faith or a wager, he has proof that the Christian God does in fact exist. But he refuses to post and to react to those YouTube videos [one by one] here in order to save the souls of those who do not accept Jesus Christ as their own personal savior.
Leading me to suggest that he doesn't even believe this himself.