Another Nihilist...

[Bazarov0]

Hello, I'm just another Nihilist here, Moral_Imbalance I think gave an oblique definition already so I'll just leave it at that. I used to be on this forum awhile go when it was more connected with the che lives website, but now I'm not into Che Guevara anymore, but I did read about 7 books about or by him. My username, Bazarov comes from a Nihilist character in Ivan Turgenev's Fathers and Sons. My avatar is pretty self explanatory for the reasons I have it.

[Moral_Imbalance]

Greetings and welcome.........

[Hiero]

So that makes 2 nilihists?

[Moral_Imbalance]

3

[LSD]

My avatar is pretty self explanatory for the reasons I have it.

Alright, I give up. Who is it?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Seriously?

[Moral_Imbalance]

Its Tyler Durden...... The Cynical Nihilist Survivalist......... From Fight Club

[OleMarxco]

Duh! Everyone knows that! BAH! BAH!! BAH!!! Un-educated cripples :P

[Organic Revolution]

great... another nihillist... at least your not as bad as the fascist nihilist.

[Pawn Power]

Its Tyler Durden...... The Cynical Nihilist Survivalist......... From Fight Club

Thats kinda sad that people base or inspire their moral philosophy on a hollywood movie....... no actually its funny :lol:

[Organic Revolution]

Originally posted by Revolution is the [email protected] 1 2005, 04:36 PM

Its Tyler Durden...... The Cynical Nihilist Survivalist......... From Fight Club

Thats kinda sad that people base or inspire their moral philosophy on a hollywood movie....... no actually its funny :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: i bet they also think tyler durden is a real person

[bombeverything]

It is Brad Pitt.

:lol:

[Noah]

Hehe, Im sorry but involving Hollywood movies in politics to make a point is a big no no?

[Organic Revolution]

but there nihlists so i doest matter......... i guess.

[Moral_Imbalance]

Your missing The symbolism behind it Alot of the ideas Durden says in the movie agree with Nihlist Concepts...... its a refrence and the character was from a book first not hollywood.....

You seem to find it easy to ridicule that which you dont know I could do the same to you and get nowhere what makes you think you've said anything to make me rethink my ideas.... it seems the only ones on this site worth talking to are The Anarchist Tension And others like him.... Atleast they make decent points arguments...

[Organic Revolution]

try me.... the whole problem with nihillism is that it is completley skewed. it is based of a chauvanistic pig (nietzche (sp?)) and little fucking boys who have been pushed away from society so many times that they decide there is no good in the world.

[Bazarov0]

try me.... the whole problem with nihillism is that it is completley skewed. it is based of a chauvanistic pig (nietzche (sp?)) and little fucking boys who have been pushed away from society so many times that they decide there is no good in the world. yes it is said there is no good in the world but as well as there is no bad in the world this doesn't mean that nihilists don't find pleasure in anything it just means that they don't make absolute value, or put faith in traditional value, morality, ethics and other subjective fantasy. The contradictions that can be seen when someones says something is bad and another says that that thing is good can be easily seen, for this reason as well as all value being made in subjective nothingness(in your head) when it holds no objective constant substance makes the Nihilist realize that nothing is good, bad, right or wrong because everyone has different feelings about things, but even though many link up feelings to so called 'truth' this still only makes truth in there minds and believing hold any objective constant substance is its narcissistic because theres a wide variety other subjective made concepts that go against that persons feelings and subjective made 'truth. The rejection of saying that "this is the way it should be" is taken by the Nihilist. The concept of chaos and Tyler Durden's vision is not said to be the way the world should be(but not limited to his vision because there are many characters from books that are Nihilists, for example, I already said this but the character Bazarov was a Russian Nihilist surgeon in the book Fathers and Sons) The Vision that political nihilism puts forward is the result of what the Nihilist sees eventually as civilization and all its traditional value, ethics and morality are recognized as having contradictions and that we can make any of them that we want regardless because they hold no truth when they only exist in a subjective faith based fantasy, the vision of world of chaos is not conceded to be better, its simply what the Nihilists want and they don't need to justify anything because nothing is justified of unjustified. Objectivity is impossible to reach. The Nihilist statement: "nothing can be known" is a result of extreme skepticism because existence cannot be proven, but this doesn't limit a Nihilist nesseccarily in his analyzing of why people decide to be narcissistic and believe there feelings hold truth, assumptions are made as I engage in my daily activities. I still make values but I have had a devaluation of all value. This may seem like a paradox but this is the reason Nihilism doesn't work well as a philosophy.

great... another nihillist... at least your not as bad as the fascist nihilist. Fascist Nihilist? This is an oxymoron the dispelling of traditional values as applied to humans in all there respects embodies nihilist perception as well. Fascists(I think) believe in concepts such as superior and inferior but the Nihilist recognizes and questions the values which 'superior' and 'inferior' rest on because really we can make any value we want and still will not hold any truth but definetely has the possibility of making people value themeselves senselessly over nothing, like 'nationalism', 'loyalty', 'obedience' and other of fascist teleology and values. Equality is also recognized as indulgence in nothingness because it also requires the concoction of values which require faith to believe but contradict others in the world. And if you feel if everyone is equal I'm not gonna stop you, but the Nihilist is a skeptic of everything.

[LSD]

Fascist Nihilist? This is an oxymoron

Yeah, you'd think, but we actually had one for a while.


It is Brad Pitt.

Wow, just days after Edward Norton's freak out...

I guess the entire cast of Fight Club has joined this board! :lol:

[violencia.Proletariat]

im just wondering nihilists, what would life be like if it were what you imagine it would be with nihilism?

[Organic Revolution]

death destruction... hate.. no love... and the like.

[Bazarov0]

im just wondering nihilists, what would life be like if it were what you imagine it would be with nihilism?I don't get your meaning. My life already has nihilism so I guess I could describe to you what it means. But maybe you are talking about the Nihilist vision? It can't be said really what life would be like after the destruction of civilization, although that is the main goal of the vision, but Nihilists, after the destruction wouldn't enforce Nihilism or try to make everyone a Nihilist because that would be contradicting what the vision is trying to achieve. And as for what the world would be like, theres most definetely the possiblity that theologans, idealists, and ideologues would still be around. no one can really tell what the life would be like because it all depends on the circumstances of the revolution.

death destruction... hate.. no love... and the like. Well I definetely agree that the first two would be around. The others I'm not so sure about. Because it wouldn't be possible to make everyone a Nihilist and because this isn't really a goal of the revolution, how much hate and love there is, is based on the circumstances of the destruction. Now, I think you are misunderstanding Nihilists somewhat. Nihilism is not really hate, at least its not hate of people, but more a hate of the subjective fantasies and other indulgence in subjective nothingness which people put faith into and believe to be true. Love is not really stated as something to try to go away from, since this would require the concoction of more value. Love is recognized as being a very overbearing feeling that can overpower us and control us, but because the extreme skepticism of Nihilism still holds remorse, regret and guilt as well as the teleology of 'soul mate' is rejected and dispelled because of the devaluation of all value. Feeling is said not to hold any truth because this again, is indulgence in subjective nothingness. Our be humans and attraction and chemistry are recognized as being something that is meaningless, why love? Nihilist perception holds no purpose, everything is meaningless.

[Organic Revolution]

well from what moral imballance said nihllism gets rid of love.

[Bazarov0]

Nihilism gets rid of the value in love, whether one wants to experience love or not is up to the Nihilist, but a skeptical approach is taken as taboos, jealousy, and other rules and conditions behind it are destroyed.

[Organic Revolution]

taboo's what do you mean by that?

[Bazarov0]

Originally posted by rise [email protected] 2 2005, 06:41 AM
taboo's what do you mean by that?
taboos as they are seen to be also indulgence in subjective nothingness, are not cared about by Nihilism because they only exist in the mind alone. Taboos such as adultery are not cared about in a relationship by the Nihilist(or at least me) because of the above statement of course. Maybe we are talking about two different loves here. I was talking about love as it applies to relationships not as love to the human race. If the love of human race was what you were talking about, then you would be right in saying Nihilists don't really have love. The loving of the human race is questioned to the extreme by Nihilism and nor love nor hate is really put towards the whole human race because what is a better person a worse person is already dispelled by Nihilism. But their are Nihilists who have feelings about this and it is possible that they may love/hate the human race but they aren't going to let that substantiate the concoction of long-term values out of the subjective nothingness.

[OleMarxco]

I'm beginning to wonder when Marla's gonna come here too ;)
....And WHEN! Renember, Nihilism is not about Fight Club, 'tho,
it was more like, vice versa or sumthin'. It's about that guy Nietschze...
But that's all philosophy, I guess. Moreover, it's more like Fight Club's
about Nihilism than the other way around ~~ As for Fascistic Nihilists,
yes there can be, just like Salvador Dali was/were a Anarcho-Monarchist.
Your royality? :P

[LSD]

aboos as they are seen to be also indulgence in subjective nothingness, are not cared about by Nihilism because they only exist in the mind alone. Taboos such as adultery are not cared about in a relationship by the Nihilist

How about "taboos" such as child abuse or rape?

What's the nihilist position on these "indulgences in subjective nothingness"?


It can't be said really what life would be like after the destruction of civilization

Sure it can.

It will be worse.

[bombeverything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 11:13 PM
Hehe, Im sorry but involving Hollywood movies in politics to make a point is a big no no?

Not at all. Just to be clear, my comment was meant as a joke. No offense was intended. In reality I am sympathetic to nihilist thought, and feel that many misunderstand it. I simply disagreed with some of the comments made in previous posts.

[Bazarov0]

How about "taboos" such as child abuse or rape?

What's the nihilist position on these "indulgences in subjective nothingness"?
There not conceded as wrong or bad.


Sure it can.

It will be worse. You say this, but this is your perception. Nihilists don't concede that it will be better or worse because Nihilists are devoid of traditional and absolute value. What I was trying to say when I said "It can't really be said what life would be like after the destruction of civlization" I meant that it all depends on the circumstances of the revolution that destroys civilization. True there will be no gov't, no law, no religious institutions...but when looking at the vision it is hard to divulge what everyone will do, because its not primitivism. The way one structures and lives there life after the destruction is dependend on them alone.
We are not worshippers of Tyler Durden. We respect the character and recognize his Nihilist analysis.

"You'll hunt elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center, and dig clams next to the skeleton of the Space Needle leaning at a forty-five-degree angle. We'll paint the skyscrapers with huge totem faces and goblin tikis, and every evening what's left of mankind will retreat to empty zoos and lock itself in cages as protection against bears and big cats and wolves that pace and watch us from outside the cage bars at night."-Tyler Durden

That is simply Tyler Durden's vision and that seems to be what he desired. But what someone does after the collapse is so broad and it can't really be said what any one will do because we need to think about how the Nihilist revolution was able to bring about the chaos, which would have influences on this.

[LSD]

You say this, but this is your perception.

No, it's a solid historical anlysis based on facts.

People live better lives in civilization than out of it.


Nihilists don't concede that it will be better or worse

You may not "concede" it, but if not that's pure dogmatism.

It is rather obvious from examining hisotry and anthropology that society and civilization universally improves the standard of living dramatically ...and for fairly obvious reasons as well.

It's no "mystery" why creating complex human social arrangements makes peoples lives better, it allows for infastrure, for technology, for sanitation, for security, etc...

Abolishing civilization means abolishing everything that goes with it and that certainly, means a drop in lifestyle for nearly everyone.


because Nihilists are devoid of traditional and absolute value.

This isn't a "value" issue.

This isn't that civilization is "morally" or "spiritually" better. Civilization is materially better. People in civilization lead happier, healthier, longer, more productive lives, and this has been objectively demonstrated.


True there will be no gov't, no law, no religious institutions...

All fine.

What I object to is "no rules" ...and "no civilization".

Those are the "proposals" that will lead us into chaos and primitivism.


But what someone does after the collapse is so broad and it can't really be said what any one will do

Well, I can tell you one thing they won't do.

They won't live very long or productive lives.


There not conceded as wrong or bad.

You don't think that rape is child abuse is bad for society ...or for the victims?

Surely you must acknowledge that these things inflict suffering, are you now going to propose that suffering is not bad?

:o

[Bazarov0]

No, it's a solid historical anlysis based on facts.

People live better lives in civilization than out of it.No, this is still based on your own perception, what we call better is based on subjectively made values which are relative and contradict each other because of the large amount you can make and because they no meaning or truth to them because they are indulgence in subjective nothingness. When you say its better living in civilization, what do you mean by this? You will probably give me some factors of people living in civilization which you would call better: meeting sustenance for food, having a place to sleep, having a roof over your head, not having anyone attack you. But all these are values you apply based on your own perception. What is better and what is worse is all matter of subjectively made values which have no meaning or truth to them.
You may not "concede" it, but if not that's pure dogmatism.

It is rather obvious from examining hisotry and anthropology that society and civilization universally improves the standard of living dramatically ...and for fairly obvious reasons as well.

It's no "mystery" why creating complex human social arrangements makes peoples lives better, it allows for infastrure, for technology, for sanitation, for security, etc...

Abolishing civilization means abolishing everything that goes with it and that certainly, means a drop in lifestyle for nearly everyone. Again what we call "improves" is all a matter of what values we apply. Yes, it is true that because of civilization, it is possible for people to meet sustenance easier. But why is this better? I do not go against suffering, I recognize it as something that does exist and will always exist according to what each person perspective of it is. Because its all a matter of perspective of suffering we can question what it means to suffer. In civilization people are given an ignorant fantasy world view of good and evil from religion, they have attachments to physical power and possessions, they value things that don't benefit sustenance. Value is created, fantasy is created, these are things I hate, but I will not concede to be bad or wrong, because this would result in me making another valuation. So instead I simply desire to destroy civilization but without justification as there is none for anything. Chaos is what I desire, the destruction of civilization is what I desire. If you think that's worse then the present day 'order', I don't really care.
This isn't a "value" issue.

This isn't that civilization is "morally" or "spiritually" better. Civilization is materially better. People in civilization lead happier, healthier, longer, more productive lives, and this has been objectively demonstrated.You are contradicting yourself, because what is called "better" is a value issue. It seems that you think its better when people live happier, longer, productive lives. But I am going to question these values for a moment. What truly is happiness? Even in great immense suffering people have felt happiness. Also in civilization are people really happy? Ignorance is bliss and the consumerist culture makes people drones to fantasy worlds of material possessins and suicidal tv. Yes people do have happiness but it is over nothing. Religious people find salvation and happiness in lies. People have attachments to physical power and possessions which make them value themselves more over nothing. And what about longer lives, huh? Are you saying that it is best to live a longer life? Because this is another valuation made in your head. I do not fear death, I do not find it as something to go against, I actually welcome the chance when it would happen and the feeling that it can happen to me at any time. Because once I am dead I am truly free. Now as for productive, what can be said to be productive? Is there some purpose that everyone should be trying to achieve? I reject purpose. I find no meaning in anything. I reject teleology and everything necessitated by it. Trying to go towards chaos is not a belief in final purpose, it is simply something I desire and do not find to be the end of anything.
What I object to is "no rules" ...and "no civilization".

Those are the "proposals" that will lead us into chaos and primitivism.Chaos and primitivism are exactly what I want.
You don't think that rape is child abuse is bad for society ...or for the victims?

Surely you must acknowledge that these things inflict suffering, are you now going to propose that suffering is not bad?Yes, I don't think its bad for society or for the victims, I am devoid of pointless subjective faith based concepts such as good and bad. They inflict suffering from the perspective of the people being raped and children abused, but I recognize that suffering is something that has existed and will always exist according to peoples feelings and values, this is not something that I find we must go against, because I find no meaning or purpose in it, And yes I am proposing that suffering is not bad because I do not have faith in good or bad. If children get molested let them, if women get raped let them. I have no value in human life or in anything, but I do make desicions which require valuations, and let my desires guide me.

I desire the destruction of civilization and the chaos that comes from it, regardless of how much "suffering" or "happiness" comes from this.

[workersunity]

its for people who cant think, and just wish to dismiss everything, its bs

[Bazarov0]

I never said, "I wish to dismiss everything". I do have a desire to destroy civilization, but this is from the result of the extreme skepticism and recognition of the subjective nature of value that Nihilism has given me.

[Black Dagger]

You will probably give me some factors of people living in civilization which you would call better: meeting sustenance for food, having a place to sleep, having a roof over your head, not having anyone attack you. But all these are values you apply based on your own perception. What is better and what is worse is all matter of subjectively made values which have no meaning or truth to them.

Wrong. These are not 'values', but material measures, having food, shelter and being secure is not a product of my or any other posters own worthless 'perception', but of our functions as human beings, as a species. No rational species would not desire its own survival, these three factors are essential to this survival. That is not a 'made up' or 'subjective value' but an objective fact. Without food, you will die. Therefore its 'good' to have food, because it prevents starvation and death, death being an undesirable outcome for most rational beings.



Chaos and primitivism are exactly what I want.

And this is why you will have no 'luck' forming a coalition with any serious anarchist, as i suggested in another thread, go play with the primitivists- they share your desire for infantile destruction. Except with nihilism comes the egoism of 'enlightenment', you have 'secret' knowledge about the world, only you 'truly understand' how it functions, what 'everything' 'means'- it's 'subjective value'. A quick question, what makes your perception of the world, how it functions and so forth, worth anything?

Your ideas, your 'perception' is the product of your own subjectivity, why is it that your paradigm has 'all the answers'? Surely you should reject anything as formal as 'nihilism' as a defined philosophy- it should be as meaningless as any other 'idea'- a victim of subjective values and perceptions. But of course it's not, that would negate the egoism of its adherents.



it, And yes I am proposing that suffering is not bad because I do not have faith in good or bad.

So you would not mind suffering? Being raped? Is that 'ok' with you? Should i stop your rapist? Of course not!



I have no value in human life or in anything,

Then commit suicide, only then can you 'prove' your dedication to the nihilist 'revolution'! :rolleyes:

[LSD]

You will probably give me some factors of people living in civilization which you would call better: meeting sustenance for food, having a place to sleep, having a roof over your head, not having anyone attack you. But all these are values you apply based on your own perception.

No, they are based on a rational analysis of what humans physiologically and psychologically need.


You are contradicting yourself, because what is called "better" is a value issue.

No I'm not. I don't accept you're definition of "better".

I belive that objective comparisons can be made, therefore there is no contradiction in my making them. You, however, claim that objective "better" does not exist, yet you, implicitly, keep making normative judgments!


In civilization people are given an ignorant fantasy world view of good and evil from religion, they have attachments to physical power and possessions

So what?

Why do you care about any of these things? If all values are subjective and invalid and normative judgments cannot be made, why is "fantasy" worse than "reality" or "attachments" "bad"?


they value things that don't benefit sustenance.

Didn't you just finish saying that sustenance "doesn't matter"?

if not, then why does it matter if we "value" it or not?


I desire the destruction of civilization and the chaos that comes from it, regardless of how much "suffering" or "happiness" comes from this.

Why?

If you really reject all valuations, then how can you claim that a lack of civilization would be better than its presence?

If people want to arrange themselves in civilizations and societies, why stop them?


Chaos and primitivism are exactly what I want.

Then you are making a judgment that "chaos and primitivism" are better than civilization and order.

Clearly, more people want progress than primivism. By advocating the reverse, you are attempting to inpose your own "subjectively made values" on others.


what we call better is based on subjectively made values which are relative and contradict each other because of the large amount you can make and because they no meaning or truth to them because they are indulgence in subjective nothingness.

Like nihilism, you mean?

An ideology that claims objective facts about the universe (nothing can be known, everything is subjective...)?


If children get molested let them, if women get raped let them. I have no value in human life or in anything, but I do make desicions which require valuations, and let my desires guide me.

Would you want to get raped or molested? Would you want your friends or family members to be?

If not, then it is in your interest to be in a society that prevents this from happening, because you are unlikely to be able to do so on your own.

Again, this isn't moralism, it's rationality.

The problem with nihilism is that it's obsessed with moral absolutes.

Society is artificial, values are subjective, nothing can be known ...destroy everything!

Sorry, but practical thinking requires a more pragmatic approach.

Let's say that you are absolutely correct and everything is subjective ...so what?

People want to be healthier, happier, and more fulfilled; they want society! Do you think that it's a "coincidence" that civilization is, literally, everywhere? That almost universally, the human trend is towards progress and not primitivism?

Are you so deluded that you honestly think that there's some "conspiracy" forcing people into socities or deluding them as to its nature?

People have made societies open-eyed, they realize that they are more likely to achieve their desires and fulfill their needs in civilization.

Are those needs and wants subjected? ...sure, some of them are, but again. so what?

Society is such that it can fulfill varied desires, subjective or otherwise. Perhaps "better" is ultimately subjective to each individual. If so, then, societal "better" is simply the cumulative subjective assessment of "better" by the society, and what's wrong with that?

Again, if there is no real "better", then who's to say that there's anything wrong with most people (read: virtually all) thinking that health, safety, fulfilment, etc... are "better"? It's their right to indulge in "subjective nothingness" if they so choose!

And don't you realize that if civilization fell tomorrow, it would be back up the next day?

Society isn't extra-human, it is, by definition, ultimately voluntary. Which means that if a "nihist revolution" occured and everyone was free to "do what they wanted", one of the first things that they would do would be to set up socities.

Unfortunately, at first they would almost certainly be societies in which the strong ruled the weak.

...but I'm starting to wonder if that isn't want you want. :o

[Bazarov0]

Wrong. These are not 'values', but material measures, having food, shelter and being secure is not a product of my or any other posters own worthless 'perception', but of our functions as human beings, as a species. No rational species would not desire its own survival, these three factors are essential to this survival. That is not a 'made up' or 'subjective value' but an objective fact. From dictionary.com:

1: a numerical quantity measured or assigned or computed. 2: the quality (positive or negative) that renders something desirable or valuable. 3: the amount (of money or goods or services) that is considered to be a fair equivalent for something else.[theres more here but I am not going print it all] So, from this, a material measure is a value, because it is seen as beeing something better or desirable. Value is not solely the product of perception, but feelings and biological desires imposed on us as well by our genes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I have escaped valuing because I'm a Nihilist. This is an impossiblity because we are constantly making valuations. Now you said the "...material measures...[are a a product]...of our functions as human beings." Functions? Are you implying that humans have a purpose? For I do not see this and reject it all together as well for its narcisstic way of deluding people from patterns they see where none are. "No rational species would not desire its own survival..." What can be said to be rational or irrational? Why should it be irrational to welcome death? Only one of the materials that you mentioned, however, are essential to its survival, that would be food(you also left out water), this is an objective fact so far as we know, because we have no way of knowing objective reality. The other two, are ones you yourself value because they are not essential to humans survival, one can live without shelter or security, its possible. This is not to say that these values are not desirable by many humans, but they are still values.

Without food, you will die. Therefore its 'good' to have food, because it prevents starvation and death, death being an undesirable outcome for most rational beings. Why is it 'good' to have food this is only value you have made, again what can be said to be rational or irrational? Why do you fear death? Why are you labeling death and starvation as bad or something we need to go against when you have no proof of these things and to have faith that its bad. Yes it is true that these are things many want to go away from, but this doesn't mean your absolute values of good and bad exist. They are predicated on subjective nothingness, values that only exist in your head. Feelings give no proof whatsoever as to what is 'good' or 'bad' because any kind of good and bad can be made in the head, and each mind contradicts each other in what good and bad all because it all arises from subjective nothingness which has no bearing on the objective reality apart from our own. I do not make absolute or long term value therefore, I am free to do what I desire within my biological limits.

A quick question, what makes your perception of the world, how it functions and so forth, worth anything? Firstly it is not a perception that concedes to know how the world functions, it is an extreme skepticism, and certain things can be examined in there functioning which most often incorporate nihilist perception such as Faith, a Nihilist statement would be "nothing can be known" which is why Nihilism doesn't concede to know the objective truth behind the reality of the world. Now as for 'worth anything', it isn't, just as everything is worth nothing, nothing has any worth, it did put me at ease to realize the things that Nihilism states, but it doesn't really make my worth of myself decrease or increase, it just makes it...go away.
Your ideas, your 'perception' is the product of your own subjectivity, why is it that your paradigm has 'all the answers'? Surely you should reject anything as formal as 'nihilism' as a defined philosophy- it should be as meaningless as any other 'idea'- a victim of subjective values and perceptions. But of course it's not, that would negate the egoism of its adherents. Yes, it is true my perception is a product of my own subjectivity, just as everything I do and everything everyone does is a product of there own subjectivity. I cannot escape value nor faith unless I am dead, and neither can anyone for that matter. Nihilism doesn't work that well as a philosophy, since philosophy is a love of wisdom, whereas Nihilism is a negation of any proof of knowledge, this leads into paradox, a Nihilist philospher would most often come into a chaos of paradoxes such as value in no values. "victim of subjective values and perceptions", hmm, it seems like you must hate subjective values and perceptions, if you truly find that subjective value and perceptions are monsters, I would suggest you kill yourself. As for me, I cannot escape subjective values or perceptions. Nihilists don't have to try to escape these to be Nihilists, they are extreme skeptics that question this and just about everything they are willing to, but some decide to try to escape and thus commit suicide.

So you would not mind suffering? Being raped? Is that 'ok' with you? Should i stop your rapist? Of course not! Of course I would mind suffering and being raped, although the suffering is according to my own feelings and emotions so there is no absolute as to what suffering really is. No, you don't need to stop my rapist, you don't have an obligation to, but I would probably shoot him after he raped me. I was simply saying in the quote you had given that I do not create values of subjective nothingness where I concede that suffering and being raped is 'bad'
Then commit suicide, only then can you 'prove' your dedication to the nihilist 'revolution'! I am sorry, I must make a slight change to what I had said: I do not have any longterm or absolute value in anything or anyone, along with this I reject traditional value. Value, again is inescapable unless you are dead.
No, they are based on a rational analysis of what humans physiologically and psychologically need. Yes, the things I did state are what humans need to survive(except for having a place to sleep, having a roof over your head, not having anyone attack you), and I will repeat myself again, humans going towards this are putting value in surviving they don't 'need' to value surviving, but they are. It is not need, it is a value, I take steps to survive, but this doesn't mean I'm going to make absolute values as to what humans 'need', because they do not 'need' survival, they simply put value into it. I'm sorry but I'll want to finish defending myself later LSD, because I have a desire to go to sleep.

[Bazarov0]

Why do you care about any of these things? If all values are subjective and invalid and normative judgments cannot be made, why is "fantasy" worse than "reality" or "attachments" "bad"? I never said it what was worse. But I would like to see people break there attachments to that which does not matter, I'm not saying that it is worse to imbibe consumerist ideology, I'm saying I want to see the change that will destroy that.
Didn't you just finish saying that sustenance "doesn't matter"?

if not, then why does it matter if we "value" it or not? Yes, I did say that sustenance doesn't matter, but that doesn't stop me from trying to meet it, and it doesn't matter if we value it or not. I do put value into trying to meet my sustenance, but only when I decide to value eating over not when the food is in front of me, but even though use that value often, it doesn't mean I am going to say its better if everyone is able to meet sustenance.
If you really reject all valuations, then how can you claim that a lack of civilization would be better than its presence? I never said that it's better, I simply desire it as a result of the perceptions Nihilism has given me.
Then you are making a judgment that "chaos and primitivism" are better than civilization and order.

Clearly, more people want progress than primivism. By advocating the reverse, you are attempting to inpose your own "subjectively made values" on others. No, I am not making a judgement that its better, you may think, but the reason I want chaos is because I desire it because the perceptions I have and because I want to see that radical change occur.

And don't you realize that if civilization fell tomorrow, it would be back up the next day?

Society isn't extra-human, it is, by definition, ultimately voluntary. Which means that if a "nihist revolution" occured and everyone was free to "do what they wanted", one of the first things that they would do would be to set up socities.Yes, of course this is true. But when I say 'destruction of civilization, I don't mean the destruction of society, because regardless of how many governments, religious institutions and other things I destroy, society will still exist from the social connections between different humans in a group, this is not something I am wishing to destroy.

Anyway, after the destruction it can be seen already that civilization may come about again, and for this reason there would probably more rebellions again in the future.

[LSD]

No, I am not making a judgement that its better, you may think, but the reason I want chaos is because I desire it because the perceptions I have and because I want to see that radical change occur.

But that desire is based on your own perceptions and therefore any attempt to impose that desire on other is just indulgence in subjective nothingness.


I never said it what was worse. But I would like to see people break there attachments to that which does not matter

Who cares what you want.

If you want to convince other people of your lunatic ideology, you need to explain why they should support it.

How it's in their interests!


Yes, I did say that sustenance doesn't matter, but that doesn't stop me from trying to meet it, and it doesn't matter if we value it or not.

Wait a minute.

Didn't you just critize civilization because it "[values] things that don't benefit sustenance."?

...I'm very confused. :(


No, I am not making a judgement that its better, you may think, but the reason I want chaos is because I desire it because the perceptions I have and because I want to see that radical change occur.

WHY?

Why do you want to "see that radical change occur"?

You have still not answered this very simple question!

Let's say you're entirely right and everything is subjective and artifical, so what?

Why is destroying civilization a good idea?

If values don't exist and objective rational judgment is impossible, why is the destruction of civilization preferable to its presence?

Obviously you reject the notion of objective analysis, but from your own personal subjective viewpoint, why do you want to see civilization destroyed?

Why do you want "primitivism and chaos"?

WHY?

[Thomas]

USE FUCKING PARAGRAPHS YOU STUPID NIHILISTS.

Sorry but my eyes are very tired and I lost interest in your posts because they're too much of an effort to read.

[bed_of_nails]

How many nihilists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

Nobody knows. They sit in a room and complain about how nothing really matters, so why bother.

Welcome. I had to tell a joke :D

[Organic Revolution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 09:59 PM
How many nihilists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

Nobody knows. They sit in a room and complain about how nothing really matters, so why bother.

Welcome. I had to tell a joke :D
and then they break out shooting eachother cause they looove chaos.