Skip navigation

I think I officially love this person’s Tumblr. Here’s a reply, which sent me into my usual entranced philosophical diatribes and insights–

antigravity000:

Heat can be measured, there are values for its presence whereas ‘coldness’ is simply a description for absence of heat. Cold is the void, heat is space. Nihilism, atheism, absurdism are the voids, faith in god(s), in creative forces, is space.

I like this.

It’s funny, isn’t it? Once we stick that -ism on Nihilism, we have Nihilists — followers — who consciously adopt a system of philosophy they want to associate with Nihilism. But in adopting a system, they affirm an identity, and in affirming an identity, you now have an identity — a positive thing — associated with yourself. It’s quite literally counter-intuitive for someone to consciously adopt Nihilism.

I’ve always thought true Nihilism would actually be closer with simply lacking in  self-criticality, or any thinking what so ever — this McDonalds, MTV, Nike culture of the 21st century is true Nihilism, for example.

True atheism isn’t the scientific rationalization of the universe and coming to the conclusion that gods don’t exist — true atheism is just the complete lack of any form of theistic insight of belief: apathetically avoiding religion, or apathetically/ignorantly following religion. (This was Nietzsche’s point about atheism, actually, and how atheism is actually just the deification of humanity sublimated over the Abrahamic God. Hence, why he’s quoted for saying “God is dead”, and not for saying “God doesn’t exist”)

And true absurdity, is just the doing absurd things without reflecting on them. This is just the common condition of daily life.

So basically, what I mean to say is, the greatest of the Nihilists are not the suffering, paralyzingly self-critical characters from the pages of Dostoyevsky or Turgenev, or that angsty youth clad in a leather trench coat. The greatest Nihilists are the Kim Kardiashians and Paris Hiltons of this world.

Advertisements

4 Comments

  1. The Kardashians and Hiltons care about money, so they can’t be nihilists. They’re pretty close, though.

    • So are you saying that that level of obsession for money -isn’t- symptomatic of nihilism…?

  2. Interesting, but the central claim seems unsupported. Is vaccuous negation more meaningful than predicate term negation? It is enough to understand the difference; I don’t see the need to arrange the varieties of atheism into a hierarchy of more and less true variants.

    • The fact that nihilism is *thought* about — the fact nothingness *becomes* the *focus* of *intellectual activity*– means that whoever is *thinking*, has already given nothingness some sort of significance and meaning in a life-meaning/philosophical sense.
      My point is that the utter *absence of thought* — not the *intellectual concern* with the absence of thought — is what’s -actually- nihilistic. Thus, I have juxtaposed Raskolnikov and Bazarov — figures who concern their intellectual attention with nothingness — with Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian — who, symbolically at least, don’t even have intellectual concerns with anything. (I have to admit, it’s *really* hard keeping a straight face and not burst out into roflmao’s as I wrote this.)

      I believe what you’re getting at (and correct me if I’m wrong) is this: isn’t Ismael passing a value judgement by saying that the absence-of-thought form of Nihilism (vaccuous negation) is the more “true” nihilism? And my answer is — of course I am! But, from all of what I said, I want to point out that there’s a clear difference between the *thinking* and *not thinking*.

      And the purpose of arranging the varieties is — and it’s not /necessarily/ hierarchical–, of course, for the sake of illustration, rhetoric and humour!

      Also, the way that Atheism is implied here has more to do with the historical origin of this word, than how it has become a movement in the modern age. I’m aware that the definition of atheism has radically changed, and it now sees itself as “positivist”, but still. That’s a whole other topic.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: