Arguing against Absolute Nihilism

[komencanto]

I have an atheist friend who has recently completely embraced nihilism. He believes that as there is no purpose to life, no good or bad, no right or wrong, and therefore no ethics. We are all just matter going around trying to distract ourselves from the inevidability of death.

I consider utilitarianism to be the best ethics system we've got, however, I find myself unable to argue against this point of view. I don't either believe that there is any real correct purpose to life.

However, I think that we should aim to increase overall happiness in all beings and reduce pain. However, I find myself unable to defend this belief as somehow more correct than any other purpose to life.

My friends opinion is that as there is no objective right or wrong, he will advance his own pleasure and happiness at the expence of other people, because that is what comes naturally to him, and is what he wants to do. He doesn't care about other people.

He admits that he does feel compassion towards other people, and would help them if he could prevent their pain. However, he thinks this is an irrational emotion which he recieves due to evoltion. When it comes to suffering with which he will have no contact, or have to face himself, he says that it doesn't and shouldn't matter to him. He has friends and is loyal to them, both because he enjoys companionship and it may be beneficial to him to have friends. However, if he steals from someone who he doesn't know, it benefits him and is unlikely to later cause him harm, so he sees no reason not to do it.

I have tried pointing out that if everyone followed these ideas, society would descent to chaos and everyone would be worse off. Indeed this has happened at time. However, he does not want or expect other people to think the way he does (he doesn't try to convert people), so this doesn't matter to him. He sees no reason to follow a maxim that would work if everyone followed it. I can't find a flaw in that.

I have thought of another argument. While his ideas are attractive, they would remove themselves from the pool of ideas quickly. Any large group to fall behind this form of nihilism would do itself so much damage that the idea would have to be abandoned. Hence, they are not popular anywhere. Nihilism may be exactly what religions were designed to prevent.

Currently this person is simply considering theft generally OK, and saying things which I find disturbing, and I am particularly worried that I have no strong arguments to combat his.

Can anyone help me out? I would really really like to change his mind.

[bjornart]

Originally posted by komencanto
I have an atheist friend who has recently completely embraced nihilism. He believes that as there is no purpose to life, no good or bad, no right or wrong, and therefore no ethics. We are all just matter going around trying to distract ourselves from the inevidability of death.

...

He admits that he does feel compassion towards other people, and would help them if he could prevent their pain. However, he thinks this is an irrational emotion which he recieves due to evoltion. When it comes to suffering with which he will have no contact, or have to face himself, he says that it doesn't and shouldn't matter to him. He has friends and is loyal to them, both because he enjoys companionship and it may be beneficial to him to have friends. However, if he steals from someone who he doesn't know, it benefits him and is unlikely to later cause him harm, so he sees no reason not to do it.

...

I have thought of another argument. While his ideas are attractive, they would remove themselves from the pool of ideas quickly. Any large group to fall behind this form of nihilism would do itself so much damage that the idea would have to be abandoned. Hence, they are not popular anywhere. Nihilism may be exactly what religions were designed to prevent.

Currently this person is simply considering theft generally OK, and saying things which I find disturbing, and I am particularly worried that I have no strong arguments to combat his.

Can anyone help me out? I would really really like to change his mind.

Sorry, but apart from the points I've emphasized above, your friend is perfectly right. (The points being that you can have ethics without a belief in right, wrong and a meaning with life, and that thinking something "shouldn't" matter to him is a question of ethics.)

What you should do is examine your own ethics. Does your view on loyalty and "don't be a snitch" allow you to have a friend whose worldview and actions are antithetical to yours? His complacency is dependent on reaping the benefits of being a right bastard in a world of nice guys who won't harm even a bastard. The only possible cure is to threaten him that he'll end up a bastard with no friends. If this is realistic it might work, but he might just accept it and end up a friendless and bitter bastard.

[Stimpson J. Cat]

Komencanto,

My friends opinion is that as there is no objective right or wrong, he will advance his own pleasure and happiness at the expence of other people, because that is what comes naturally to him, and is what he wants to do. He doesn't care about other people.

He admits that he does feel compassion towards other people, and would help them if he could prevent their pain. However, he thinks this is an irrational emotion which he recieves due to evoltion.

This is the fundamental flaw in his reasoning. He considers his desire to advance his own pleasure to be perfectly rational, but his compassion for others to be "an irrational emotion which he receives due to evolution". Sorry, but these are essentially the same thing.

One can ask "Why should a nihilist value anything other than his own personal happiness?", but this just raises the obvious question "why should a nihilist value his own personal happiness?". The only reason people value their own happiness, and even their own lives, is because they have evolved these emotional responses as a survival mechanism.

The bottom line is that people do have values. That is simply a part of human nature. Rationality does not enter into it.

When it comes to suffering with which he will have no contact, or have to face himself, he says that it doesn't and shouldn't matter to him.

Somehow I doubt this. More likely he is desperately trying to convince himself that he believes this, in order to eliminate any guilt or responsibility he feels for the suffering going on in the world.


Dr. Stupid

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by komencanto
However, I think that we should aim to increase overall happiness in all beings and reduce pain.

I don't think that is good enough.
We can end in a bed, just taking painkillers and drugs.
That is not a good thing. imo.

[The Don]

As a nihilist, my personal pleasure is enhanced by people's reactions. The only reason I ever do anythnig for anyone else is because it makes me feel good either because that person is suitably grateful or because of the way that doing something good for someone else (and not expecting thanks) makes us feel.

To illustrate this, just imagine how cross you'd feel if you did something nice for someone but they are insufficiently grateful (for example the Iraqi people). The reason why you're all cross is not because they were ungrateful (after all, you are prepared to undertake acts for which you expect no thanks) but because they weren't as grateful as YOU thought they ought to be. YOU didn't get your buzz.

The reason why people aer prepared to do differeny types of nice things for other people is that there are different ways in which other people make them happy.

For example I am embarrased by shows of thanks but because of my slightly masochistic tendancies I get a buzz out of going without in order to give someone else something. People get lots of tiny kindnesses, mostly unnoticed, from me. Mrs Don is the complete opposite, she is wildly generous but expects significant shows of gratitude.

Our approach is driven by our nihilistic need to feel pleasure

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by komencanto
I have an atheist friend who has recently completely embraced nihilism. He believes that as there is no purpose to life, no good or bad, no right or wrong, and therefore no ethics. We are all just matter going around trying to distract ourselves from the inevidability of death.

.................................................. .........................

Currently this person is simply considering theft generally OK, and saying things which I find disturbing, and I am particularly worried that I have no strong arguments to combat his.

Can anyone help me out? I would really really like to change his mind.

It sounds more like a lack of empathy and compassion than Nihilism.. ( though nihilism may involve less of these emotions than some other philosophies )

The lack of these emotions are distinct traits of psychopaths and their variants, including serial killers.

I would be concerned about your friend...

[Dancing David]

Comapassionate Nihilism is probably an easier path than compassionate conservatism.

He sounds that he is in the first reaction to the idea of nihilism and well on his way to becoming an anarchist.

Stimpy hit the nail on the head, in nihilism, nothing really exists, including 'your friend' so why promote his own selfish interest when he really doesn't exist.

Nihilist ethics: While nothing may or may not exist it would appear that the world exists and that we are creatures in it. So while the human notions of the world are all illusion, it does appear that the world exists. An examination of the world would show that there is an 'interedepedance' of being. There is no act that is not connected to someother act/thing. This may just be an appearance but it is a conclusion that many people have come to.

So while it may just appear that there is a connection between things, it is still a useful notion. I think that ethics/morals is based upon the idea that what benefit other people to some extent will also benefit me. And that ethical behavior still comes down in the long run to what benefits the individual.

If it is all illsuion I chose to live in the illusion that is more pleasnt than the one that isn't.

[coalesce]

"My friends opinion is that as there is no objective right or wrong, he will advance his own pleasure and happiness at the expence of other people, because that is what comes naturally to him, and is what he wants to do. He doesn't care about other people."

Seriously—kick him square in the nuts, and tell him that he's correct and that there is no right and wrong, and how much better you feel about doing what feels naturally to you, and how, during those two or three minutes when he couldn't see straight while writhing on the floor, you didn't think once about your own demise, that his pain was enough of a distraction for you from the inevitability of death.

Michael

[Agammamon]

It's pretty difficult to defend a conventional morality on external grounds. Even the Christians have to resort to an ultimate punisher/rewarder to justify it.

You can tell him that he may always act in his best interest but that action may be to refrain from maximizing short term gains for maximizing long term ones. For example he may want your car but will not steal it because the short term gain of acquiring it is offset in the long run by a stiff jail sentence.
It's an interesting paradox. Generally the best interests of a nihilist lie in acting like everyone else, ie ethically.

[Beleth]

Sounds like a typical college underclassman wrestling with philosophy for the first time to me.

The problem with nihilism is that it's very short-sighted. One may say "I'm loyal to my friends but the rest of the world can FOAD" now, but what happens when circumstances dictate obtaining new friends? He's going to have to act against his nihilistic beliefs to make those new friends.

I really like Stimpy's answer too.

[tdn]

Originally posted by Beleth
Sounds like a typical college underclassman wrestling with philosophy for the first time to me.

Sounds like a jerk trying to hide his jerkery behind a thin veil of philosophy to me.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by komencanto
Can anyone help me out? I would really really like to change his mind.
First, tell your friend that is acting completely irrationally for letting his worldviews dictate his morals. (Make sure to use the word "irrational", he seems like the type of person who responds to what he believes is "rational" or not.)

Second, if your friend believes compassion is an irrational emotion due to evolution, explain to him in terms of Natural Selection that since humans are social animals and benefit from interactions with many others, natural selection should favor behavior that allows us to better get along with others. Emotions are not irrational, they are beneficial.

Third, if you want to give him a good set of ethics, he'll probably respond favorably to pragmatism. Pragmatism means that when judging ideas and values, one must not only consider the ideal, but the real-world application of those ideas and values. For instance Communism is a perfectly sound philosophy in the ideal, but when practiced in the real world, it fails due to human selfishness, greed, and lust for absolute power. Even if your friend's morals are driven by selfishness, make sure you emphasize that he should consider all the pros and cons of his choices. This kind of thinking might turn your friend away from activities such as breaking the law.

Fourth, there is no designed preset purpose for life, your friend has that right. But really, who cares if there is no specified "higher purpose" in living? If you, or anyone or anything else, want to do something with your life, then your life has purpose. Nothing else is relevant, not your worldviews, not the fact everything is made of matter, nothing at all.

Fifth, if your friend believes there are truely no ethics, kick him in the shins. He'll eventually grow out of this "moral anarachy" phase he's in right now.

(Your friend sounds an awful lot like a Lord Kenneth, so be patient)

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

When a person just feels like giving up on life and acting like a jerk, why do they need to come up with a philosophical name for it? Methinks they are not entirely convinced.

~~ Paul

[Fade]

Your friend doesn't even seem to understand what Nihilism IS.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Fade
Your friend doesn't even seem to understand what Nihilism IS.
Seems I'm not the only one who thought it was weird the way the Nihilist thinks "we are all just matter"...

Seemed kinda self-defeating to me...

[TENYEARS]

There is no right, there is no wrong, but there are repercusions. Every movement has an affect on something. When you someday understand what gravity is, what matter is, will your actions change? Systems are in place, to maintain systems which are in place to maintain systems. How many systems are there? There is one answer, do you know it? I don't know to many isms nor do I care to, but logic is quite simple and so is the truth. The truth is not indicative of any system, but is of itself the intrinsic nature of the system itself. What is this truth?

[Dorian Gray]

I don't either believe that there is any real correct purpose to life. I will bet, when pressed, that your friend will admit to having a purpose. Otherwise, he will be arguing a form of 'no true Scotsman' when you argue that his nihilism serves a purpose to him. At the very least, he will be forced to admit that his nihilism gives him pleasure, and that is his purpose.

You should also inform him that other people in fact have purposes, and some of those involve enforcing laws, however arbitrary your friend deems them to be.

Everyone has a purpose that is correct for them. 'Having no purpose' is itself a purpose - in that it provides a reference point for purposes.

On the other hand, not everyone has a porpoise.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Yahweh

Seems I'm not the only one who thought it was weird the way the Nihilist thinks "we are all just matter"...

Seemed kinda self-defeating to me...

Have you seen anything other than matter, the immaterialsists point out that we can't even be sure of that. I think nihilism is a foil to words like 'devine right of kings', 'sanctity' and other moral phrases.

Again all we have are human thoughts they can never really be the things thought about, etc...

A nihilist would say it appears that we are matter...

[spejic]

Nihilism is a very interesting philosophical problem. There really is no rational argument against it once you recognize its existence (because all such arguments rest on foundations that nihilists deny). Nietzsche spent most of his works exploring nihilism: acknowledge its truthfulness, seeing its inevitable destructive nature, trying to find a way around it, and failing (although in a very spectacular, entertaining way). It would be good to read him, and for your friend to read him too. Generally, the modern way to live a life as a nihilist is to recognize that there is no over-arching story to life (no " metanarratives"), and thus no way to live life authentically, but to instead create a self-story (that is, create a "style") that gives the self a framework for living. Basically, you just push nihilism to the back burner emotionally. If you let nihilism be a part of every thought you have, you will inevitably end up either hedonistic or destructive.

Here is a good start to understanding nihilism:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/n/nihilism.htm

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

So the way it works is that you think really hard about what the inate meaning of life is. Unable to come up with one, you think up a philosophy that describes life as having no meaning. Then you wallow in this for awhile. Finally, you realize that it's damn depressing, so you try to push that philosophy into the background and replace it with a sort of happy-face version of itself. A kind of humorous charicature of the depressing wholeness that was the original philosophy. This feels better, so then you modify the description of the original philosophy.

The machinations are astounding. I know, I know, I'm belittling this philosophy thing again.

Maybe life is its own metanarrative?

~~ Paul

[gentlehorse]

Nothing matters. Spending a night hugging the toilet after drinking way too much alcohol is essentially equivalent to devoting years to discovering the cure for a disease. Recreationally vicitmizing someone is on a par with teaching a child to read. Hmmm... Maybe so-- Nonetheless, I'll think I'll pass on nihilism.

Maybe I just don't have a good grasp of nihilism. As if it matters--

[komencanto]

I at last have got some time to write some replies.

This person, believes that because there is no God, no purpose, there is nothing right or wrong. Therefore, he can do whatever he wants without for any rational reason, feeling guilty or bad. He would attack a bunch of people to steal their mobiles if he could, because the only experience he can have is his own, and as the money he would get makes him happy, there is no reason not to do it.

He regularly steals from our school canteen, and sees business conmen as his idols. He has told me that he aspires to reach a high level in a company and then siphon off money for all he's worth. These are the brilliant people who get what they want in life without getting into much danger, and are to be respected, according to him.

This is what I meant by nihilism. Simply rejecting any sort of ethics. He has decided that as nothing is better than anything else, he should simply do what comes naturally to him, seeking pleasure for himself. He has admitted that sometimes he gains pleasure from helping other people and does that, but would not help others if it disadvantaged himself.

Now I'll reply to the replies:

[komencanto]

Originally posted by Dorian Gray
I will bet, when pressed, that your friend will admit to having a purpose. Otherwise, he will be arguing a form of 'no true Scotsman' when you argue that his nihilism serves a purpose to him. At the very least, he will be forced to admit that his nihilism gives him pleasure, and that is his purpose.
.

He never claimed to have no purpose. His puspose is hedonism. He simply claimed that there is no desire that is better than any other. If you get kicks out of raping people, then there is nothing wrong with that. He gets kicks out of doing what he does (stealing, etc) and so he does that, regardless of the effect it has on people he doesn't know.

[komencanto]

Originally posted by bjornart

What you should do is examine your own ethics. Does your view on loyalty and "don't be a snitch" allow you to have a friend whose worldview and actions are antithetical to yours? His complacency is dependent on reaping the benefits of being a right bastard in a world of nice guys who won't harm even a bastard. The only possible cure is to threaten him that he'll end up a bastard with no friends. If this is realistic it might work, but he might just accept it and end up a friendless and bitter bastard.

It's interesting that you say that. You see, I and another friend said that we would feel obligated to report him to the police should he murder someone. He felt that this was disgusting disloyalty, and would never dob on a friend no matter what the act. He sees loyalty as an incredible virtue for some reason.

I think I understand this. He says that he does not care at all for the suffering (although small) he might cause by stealing small items from places, because he never sees or knows the people who run the business and doesn't care if they suffer. I have suggested that this means that he has a difective empathy, because it is normal for people to suffer when seeing or knowing about injustice of pain. But he says this means he is being more logical in his actions and less instinctive, and that his is a good thing.

He says he values loyalty because he needs friend in the world to help him, and he wants to be able to count on people when he needs them, therefore he promises us that he would never steal from us, etc, in order that it will benefit him at some point. I have suggested that I do not like to steal from anyone because I see ALL people in this way, not just those I know personally. I hope that by being honest I can gain the trust of everyone, and that the world would be better for everyone if we were all honest and could trust one another. I admit that really this doesn't make that much sence, as my not stealing is not going to make the canteen owners any better disposed towards me really.

[komencanto]

Originally posted by coalesce

Seriously—kick him square in the nuts, and tell him that he's correct and that there is no right and wrong, and how much better you feel about doing what feels naturally to you, and how, during those two or three minutes when he couldn't see straight while writhing on the floor, you didn't think once about your own demise, that his pain was enough of a distraction for you from the inevitability of death.
Michael

That would be brilliant if I ever had that courage to do such a thing =)
Or that bastardry and lack of empathy.

[komencanto]

Come on, surely someone has something to say, or is this guy just outright correct?

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by komencanto
It's interesting that you say that. You see, I and another friend said that we would feel obligated to report him to the police should he murder someone. He felt that this was disgusting disloyalty, and would never dob on a friend no matter what the act. He sees loyalty as an incredible virtue for some reason.
Ah, so he has doublestandards (loyalty could be a form a ethics). It appears that it is a virtue for other to be loyal and respectful to him, but not the other way around.

I would not know why he expects people to be loyal to him, when he would be unwilling to be loyal to thers.

If he were hedonistic, perhaps he can reason like this: While maximizing his pleasure, he could minimize his anguish. Minimizing anguish comes in the form of following principles of law.

He would not be so content with raping others if due process from the law caught up with him.

This person is an idiot. Dont associate with him (unless you want to steal his wallet).

I'm sooooo glad this person has committed himself to trash. He seems to have found a Philosophy to justify criminal behavior, oh goodie...

[komencanto]

Originally posted by Yahweh

Ah, so he has doublestandards (loyalty could be a form a ethics). It appears that it is a virtue for other to be loyal and respectful to him, but not the other way around.

I would not know why he expects people to be loyal to him, when he would be unwilling to be loyal to them.


No, that's not what he says. Just that he would be loyal to others for loyalty in return, and would expect loyalty seeing as how he is loyal to us.


If he were hedonistic, perhaps he can reason like this: While maximizing his pleasure, he could minimize his anguish. Minimizing anguish comes in the form of following principles of law.

He would not be so content with raping others if due process from the law caught up with him.


He says that he doesn't do these things because of the law, not because he finds them disgusting , but rather out of fear of being caught and prosecuted. Hence, he doesn't steal things is plain sight, because the benefit of the object, isn't worth the time with the police.


This person is an idiot. Dont associate with him (unless you want to steal his wallet).

I'm sooooo glad this person has committed himself to trash. He seems to have found a Philosophy to justify criminal behavior, oh goodie...

Basically. The problem is hes a good friend of mine of several years and is still a nice guy. I would just like to turn him away from this philosophy before he starts to take it too seriously.

[Brian]

Originally posted by komencanto






Basically. The problem is hes a good friend of mine of several years and is still a nice guy. I would just like to turn him away from this philosophy before he starts to take it too seriously.
I thought of posting about being nihilistic. Nevermind.

This kid will outgrow it. Throw the Hemmingway, Sartre & Dostoyevsky at him.

[komencanto]

Fair enough. So nobody has any better suggestions?

[Gestahl]

Originally posted by komencanto


No, that's not what he says. Just that he would be loyal to others for loyalty in return, and would expect loyalty seeing as how he is loyal to us.


And *that* is the key. Reciprocity in human exchanges is the basis of Game Theory's predictions that cooperation brings greater success! If your friend truly has only his best interests in mind, that still means he should cooperate and fit within the society.

Especially given that we have corrective systems to weed out people like your friend. Your friend will wind up dead, in jail, or an old crank with no friends, or he will succeed somehow through this system. I find his philosophy very short-sighted. If we lived in a true anarchy, not just politically speaking, his philosophy is perfect. However, there is no true anarchy, and within the system in which we live, his philosophy is self-destructive. If he cannot see this, dump the loser, cuz he will drag you down with him... reciprocity works both ways. Associating with people like this leads people to harmful situations.

This guy is just someone who wants to get whatever he wants, and a philosophy with some reasoning to back it up. There is no free lunch, and any idiot should know that.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by komencanto
Fair enough. So nobody has any better suggestions?
Explain to him one thing:

His Philosophy of Egoism may encourage acting selfishly, however it says nothing of acting foolishly.

Your friend is acting foolishly.

[T'ai Chi]

There might not be universal rights and wrongs, but there are certainly right and wrongs that are imposed by socities that might as well be universal if you're embedded in that particular society. :)

[Kopji]

Humm... Well once upon a time there were two tribes.

Tribe A:
A loving and caring one, who treated its members fairly and lived in harmony and peace. They welcomed visitors, strangers, and people with diverse and unusual ideas.

Tribe B:
A second tribe was identical to the first, but had suffered rape and pillaging from outsiders in the past. This tribe now treated it's own members fairly and with kindness, but dealt with outsiders mercilessly and killed them on sight. This strategy enabled their survival in a hostile world.

The tribe A people were killed or captured long ago, your friend is making the grave mistake of walking into tribe B's camp...