I am a Nihilist Is that a bad thing?

Hi

I'm slightly confused: why should it ever be thought a "bad thing" to be a moral nihilist? As John Mackie said, moral values are not part of the fabric of the world: quite clearly, there is no property of being good or being bad that is possessed by some acts or traits but not by others. Moral values are, I'd argue, projections onto the world: to say of an act, for example, that it is wrong is not to ascribe any property to it, but rather to express how you feel about it.

There are no moral properties, and so there is nothing to secure the truth of moral predications. Take the predicate 'is red'. An object O satisfies this predicate just in case it possesses the property of being red: the set of things of which the predicate is true is just the set of things that possess the property of redness. Contrast this with a moral predicate; 'is good', for example. There is no property P possession of which is both necessary and sufficient for membership of the set of things that satisfy the predicate. There is, then, no property to which any moral predicate answers.

This poses an interesting question: what do moral evaluations mean? What would it mean to say of moral nihilism - or, indeed, nihilism in general - that it is a "bad thing"? Similarly, what would it mean to say of moral nihilism that it is a "good thing"? In virtue of what is it good or bad? What, in other words, determines whether it is good or bad? There is no fact or set of facts to secure the truth of either the judgment that nihilism - or, for that matter, anything at all - is good or the judgment that nihilism is bad. To say that it is good (bad) to be a nihilist is simply to express approval (disapproval) of being nihilistic: there is no fact concerning whether being nihilistic is or is not good, is or is not bad.

I don't see being nihilistic as a "way of life", and I don't quite understand why someone should be either proud or ashamed of being a nihilist. Nihilism is a belief about what exists: why should someone be proud or ashamed of believing that there are no moral values, for example. Let me give an example. I believe that there are atoms and molecules. I believe, in other words, that atoms and molecules are part of the world: atoms and molecules really exist, whereas unicorns and ghosts don't. The nihilist says that moral values don't really exist; moral values are not part of the world. (I agree completely.) But just as I am neither proud nor ashamed to believe in atoms and molecules, so I am neither proud nor ashamed to disbelieve in moral values, and, thus, neither proud nor ashamed to be a moral nihilist. (This analogy holds for all forms of nihilism, not just moral nihilism).

However, I can appreciate that upon arriving at the view that nihilism is correct, one is likely to feel liberated. I just wonder if prior to seeing that nihilism is correct, you may have felt guilty about things that you'd done? I find it really interesting to try to understand why people should hold the views that they do. As I've tried to explain, I don't consider being nihilistic good or bad. Nihilism is either correct or incorrect; that's all. But I do think that some people will be more attracted to nihilism than others. In other words, some people will have more desire than others to find truth in nihilism. My guess is that people who are relatively guilt-free and comfortable with themselves will be less likely to want nihilism to be true, and, thus, less likely to come to believe that nihilism is true (I think that there is a link between desire and belief such that you are more likely to believe it true that P if you want it to be true that P). Self-proclaimed nihilists might well harbour a lot of repressed guilt and anxiety (of course, this will be unconscous: they will truly believe that they have no such guilt; it would only be under psychological examination that their real feelings would surface), and it would have been because it offered them an escape from self-rapprochement and feelings of shame that they found nihilism so attractive. As soon as someone develops the desire for nihilism to be correct, it becomes considerably more likely that she'll come to the belief that it is correct.

Avowed nihilists are thus very interesting creatures: why is it that they should be so attracted to nihilism?

I found your question extremely interesting [compare: your question was extremely interesting :-)] and it certainly made me think.

Thank you :-)

I'm not sure this is a question as much as it is a manifesto or statement. You claim to be a nihilist, but so far as I know, nihilists believe in nothing. Put another way, nihilists put their belief in no-thing. Nothing is the star of the show. This of course leads to the question what is nothing? Interesting. From what you have said, I don't think that you believe in no thing because you believe in another world apart from this existence. I think you might be mistaking nihilism for skepticism. You are not searching for nothing, you are searching for something. I believe this makes you a philosopher, not a nihilist. So to answer your question, no, it is not a bad thing to be a philosopher, even a skeptical one.

So if I told you I was going to walk into a wall your the type of person who would say...

"If you want to, go ahead."

People with mentality reduced by the nihilistic presuppositions about morals and values are the ones that don't care, and allow people like Bush, and Hilter to run the world. It sort of reminds me of the Christian believers, were one thinks the goal is to reach heaven, which sort of takes away any real responsibility here on earth. It makes me some what revolted that you could pick up the preposterous notion that nothing matters even if we pretend it does.

"What every artist should try to prevent is the car, in which is our civilized life, plunging over the side of the precipice — the exhibitionist extremist promoter driving the whole bag of tricks into a nihilistic nothingness or zero!" - Wyndham Lewis.

Nihilism is the ultimate evil.

In my honest opinion it just seems like you posed this question to receive some rebuke. Why would you do such a thing...unless you were trying to A) prove a point B) get attention C) cause unneeded drama D) get good answers about why you are really here. Since I have a pounding headache, I am to guess C.

I am amoral. I guess that means I'm a nihilist too? I don't know what the difference between the two is. But to be clear, I don't believe in "right" and "wrong". Also, I believe in psychological egoism, and determinism.

But to answer your question, it depends what you mean by "bad thing".

Do you think you'd be happier if you held more standard beliefs that the majority have? If so, then being a nihilist is a bad thing for you, but there's nothing you can do about that. You can't choose what you believe.

Do you think you have a negative effect on other people due to your beliefs? If so, then being a nihilist is a bad thing for other people.

I only read your first paragraph and then kind of skipped around looking for things that might catch my eye (and they did!) but first of all, you lost credibility with me right from the heading question, in fact, you lost credibility with me just by asking a question.

Here's how it works, 'nihilist':

1) A nihilist would never ask (or care) if something is a 'bad thing'.

2) 823 words is a WHOLE LOTTA equivocation from someone that "argues that life is without meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value". (Do you think your argumentative responses to posters support or contradict those assertions?)

3) If you argue with a poster, is that because you are attempting to defend or even advocate your 'values' such as "life is without value"?

4) A self-professed "amoralist" forfeits any philosophically credible position from which to declare "objectivity is evil".

5) The self-proclaimed nihilist disproves the proclamation by eating a sandwich, in fact, the self-proclaimed nihilist disproves the proclamation by making the proclamation. It is after all 'without meaning or purpose' - Only those that philosophically affirm meaning and purpose can with credibility, apply such values as categorical names and definitions. The nihilist cannot call the nihilist a nihilist without catastrophically contradicting the fundamental assertion that all is without meaning, purpose and value.

BONUS) (Just because I hate subjectivity that much) I can prove you, Nietzsche, Rand and any other existentialist that insists 'reality is subjective' indisputably wrong without so much as one word in argument by simply striking you all in the face with a brick. (Think about it.) In addition, you all prove yourselves wrong by eating a sandwich. The existentialist proves reality is objective by attempting to convince me that reality is subjective, after all, if reality truly is subjective then it doesn't matter whether I know it or not, does it? At this point, you 'win' this argument by -- never -- speaking -- another -- word -- in -- argument.

P.S. If your posting is all some sort of tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, it's pretty damn clever.

As a nihilist, you should be liberated from questioning whether your belief is 'good' or 'bad'. I think it's like bitter medicine - tastes bad but is good for you. LIke you said, initially it tormented you, but on the long run, it saved you. It's because in this media saturated society, huge emphasis is placed on 'the meaning of life'. Religion vs. Religion number two vs. science.

But if we don't concern ourselves with this...this chase that outruns our individual existence - then the way we live our life, our moral codes and our actions aren't restricted.

I won't let one religious doctrine cage me in because I'm not a fundamentalist who needs reassurance to HOW I should live my life.

This, to me, is why nihilism is so appealing and rather desirable. A nihilist lives! like, really.

Some people say its a bad thing because they don't have a firm grasp of the concept, they're afraid of the repercussions of having freedom in moral codes.

Personally, I do what I please as long as I hurt no one, as hurting others will not please me anyway. I'm not a nihilist and never will be, but I identify with some of its aspects.

For me, 'bad' is being compeltely restrained by one belief. I personally think its 'good' to be aware of all belief systems - popular or wayward - and draw ur own morality from these centuries of philosophical musings.

If you were a nihilist, surely you would not be asking this question, nor take as much effort into writing this.

Good for you, do you value your belief in nihilism? And do nihilists believe in labels... such as nihilist. I'm just kidding though to each their own, good luck along your existential journey i appreciate that your traveling.

why do you choose a subjective set of morals in a universe you beleive has no absolute ones? how do you chose how to value one thing above another if you see the value of all posibilites as equal, i don't understand how you have managed to arrive at a having a moral structure?

I like Nokilleye's answer, among others, and can only add that I reckon you're just about halfway round the Full Circle you'll come to when you grow up and realize what life is all about. Have fun getting there!