Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Because of personal things going on, my wife and I have been having to grapple with the definition of nihilism. It occurs to me that society-at-large, whether it realizes it or not, has been having to do the same. All this rancorous debate, the bad kind not the good kind, the discourse that generates lots of heat and very little light — it always seems to involve one side that cares passionately about not caring.
Well, we can test it literally. Get a load of that word-usage graph!
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy sez…
Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.
Huh. I see a problem on the horizon. All values are baseless, OR we want to destroy things. How is it both? Is it through that word “impulse”? As in, an impulse free of values? Dunno. If I have my hand on a hot stove, I have an impulse to remove it; there is value associated with that, specifically, the value of the skin on my hand. I’m just saying the rejection of all values should involve a rejection of all action and that should include the act of destruction. Unless there’s some kind of ricochet somewhere, some deviation or constraint.
Let’s look further. Wikipedia…
Nihilism is the philosophical viewpoint that suggests the denial or lack of belief towards the reputedly meaningful aspects of life. Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.[1] Moral nihilists assert that there is no inherent morality, and that accepted moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism may also take epistemological, ontological, or metaphysical forms, meaning respectively that, in some aspect, knowledge is not possible, or reality does not actually exist.
Okay so there are three things going on here: It doesn’t matter, it doesn’t (or may not) exist, and I want to wreck it. From talking to them, I see there is this impulse to check each decision-making exercise with another: “Is it worthwhile for me to even bother making a decision?” That one has to be concluded first, and the conclusion is consistently to the negative. In the long run, the “grand scheme of things,” it doesn’t matter. This is merely an extension, an impractical, outlandish one, of what we all do I’m thinking. When I take the effort to do things, like pay my bills, I have in the back of my mind an approximate “payoff date.” For bill-paying that’s somewhere around thirty days forward, at which time I do not want to be looking at a bunch of “Second Notice Please Remit” and “You’ve been hit with a late charge!” and so forth. For tax records, it’s between January 31 and April 15 of the next year. I’m putting this receipt in the special-pouch, because in that date range, my actions today will have the desired effect. These nihilists, it seems, are engaged in an exercise of sliding that all the way to the end…ALL the way…to the end of time itself, that moment when the entire universe, known & unknown, is consumed in final entropy. And this decides their political positions. Abortion? Yeah sure okay, it’s a life, it’s a baby, whatever…in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter. North Korea? Iran’s nukes? (Take a long drag, exhale) …whatever, man…
“It doesn’t exist” is existentialism. It seems there is a fastening between that, and this word. “When you were a two month old baby you fell asleep in your crib and started dreaming…you’re still asleep, dreaming all of this, none of it is real..” Who’s to say authoritatively otherwise?
“I want to wreck it” is an animal instinct enjoined to this word on the political level. This is anarchy.
Let us concentrate on the first one. I’m picking up the vibe that the “move the payoff date way down the road, to Ragnarok” is less a mental exercise and more of a brush-off. It is more like: “I want to reject the consideration of consequences but do not want to be blamed for doing so, so I’ll go through the motions of considering consequences way, WAY down here…” That would suggest the encyclopedia-definition requires tweaking. The “condemn[ation of] existence” is a “value,” and this consistent rejection of committed decision-making is a “loyalty.” Because of this contradiction, this word has always given me a lot of trouble. I’ve never had much confidence I have it down cold, and could make informed decisions about whether it’s being applied correctly without checking reference material. And I suppose it’s not really possible for anyone to comprehend it that well, maybe no one does. The definition remains murky because this contradiction is an intrinsic part of the word.
For examples of what I’m talking about, we could take some matters on which I myself am a scope-constrained nihilist. Like this one, I’ve had handed back to me more than a few times over the years, on & off the Internet: “How DARE you presume that only religious people can be moral!” With lots and lots of nose-puffing and foot-stamping and righteous indignation. See, if this rejection of religious and moral principles were a sincere and consistent thing, such an inquiry would answer itself: I just do. It’s all good. Spiders torture flies before they eat them, sadistic little boys fry ants with magnifying glasses, and I presume only religious people are moral. Doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things.
Such “nihilists” don’t see it that way.
The English language entirely fails me when I seek to express the depths of my apathy, on the matter of prosperous “large corporations” making billions of dollars in a year and then not paying taxes. I can’t find a way to put into words how much I don’t care about this. The supposed nihilists, I notice, care a whole lot. Now how’s that work? If they’re committed nihilists, and I’m not, how is it they care so much about something and I don’t give a fig? Wells Fargo paying zero dollars certainly doesn’t pass the Final Universe Entropy test, AmIRight?
Here are some more things that might stick a rake handle in the bicycle spokes of your favorite nihilist…
1. Let me buy and own a gun with a capacity of 17. Just do it. By the time the sun goes nova, who cares?
2. Let that Christian organization donate a statue of Moses to be erected right in front of City Hall, or the local courthouse. Or Jesus! With a flaming sword. Riding a Triceratops. Suck it up.
3. Let that baker refuse to make a gay-wedding cake.
4. Your supposed “income inequality” ain’t no thang.
5. Get over the 2016 election already!
6. “Raising awareness” about this or that or some other thing: How about don’t. It’s doesn’t matter over the long term anyway.
7. Hostile work environment: Aw just grow a pair, learn to deal. In a thousand years no one will remember anyway.
8. NFL cheerleaders and beauty pageants: Yes, men are slobbering over them. It’s like the wind or the tides, let it be.
9. ANYTHING that “triggers” some snowflake for any reason. Who cares, trigger their guts out, it isn’t important.
10. How about we give up on that whole “end war once & for all” thing. It’s been tried, doesn’t work, in the long run isn’t relevant.
If you know one of these kids, and you probably do…you’ll find a few items on this list that don’t work for them. Maybe all of them don’t work. By which I mean, they’ll be rejected, forcefully — meaning exactly one thing. Proving, not merely suggesting, that the nihilist has values. And he cares about them rather passionately.
I’m sure there are other little “land mines” like this that I’ve missed. But I think the point is made. Nihilism — as we see it commonly, not as the way it’s described in the encyclopedia — is not the rejection of all values. It’s more like an avoidance of responsibility. “I don’t want to go on record having that opinion.” But, it is stencil-selective. They do want to go on record having other opinions.
Can hardly wait to do it! Just like anyone else.
Perhaps we should call them “Prairie Dog Nihilists.” Mulling it over for a day or so, I figured out that descriptive phrase, couldn’t come up with a better one. The more I think about it the more I like it. Prairie dogs, you see, spend most of their time underground, in the tunnel, especially when humans pass by who could observe them. And then, timidly, not wanting to get caught, they’ll emerge to see what’s going on…when they see the humans aren’t gone yet, they’ll duck underground again, with their trademark “eep!” sound. They disappear so quickly that it is extremely difficult to get a glimpse of them, or even to figure out with confidence from whence direction the sound came.
In that way, they are exquisitely annoying.
But at least they’re not known for voting for liberal democrats or supporting their execrable policies, like the human variation.
I have a cause for this problem in mind, and a fix. I think the K-12 education system has failed us. It had deteriorated a lot by the time I entered Kindergarten, and I’ve noticed it’s changed even further since the days I spent in it, not for the better. I think these kids have spent twelve years or more, being punished for taking any kind of position on anything — and rewarded for not doing so. The effect is strong because it has had a direct impact on the A and the F students alike. These are groups that typically don’t intermingle or share any kind of common bond. But they share it here. They’ve all gotten the message, reverberated it within their ranks. So there is the power of the echo chamber in there, and it’s on steroids.
The fix, I think, is simple. I could be wrong. We’ll have to give it a go and see what happens. I propose we merely ask for consistency. Apply this “who cares on the day the sun goes dark?” test across the board. To everything. To the ten items listed above, and anything else. What these kids are missing out on, is everyday learning, and it’s the kind of learning you do in adulthood. This is what makes adults act like adults.
I don’t care about the sun going nova, I won’t be there. I care about my financial situation next month and so I’m going to pay bills. Like that.
The problem is as simple as — I think — they just haven’t been exposed to this. They haven’t learned how to adult.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’d add: The schools should teach the distinction between fact and opinion, and the relationship between the two.
Back in the Jurassic, having opinions wasn’t bad. In fact, it was good, because opinions can — and often should — be defended with facts. If I don’t like The Catcher in the Rye and you do, well, let’s talk about it. You may not change my opinion that it stinks, but the facts you bring to bear in defending your opinion will make me appreciate it more… or, at least, to understand how someone — not me! — could appreciate it. We used to call this back-and-forth process “learning,” and schools were supposed to facilitate it.
Nowadays, kids aren’t taught to differentiate between fact and opinion, not least because their moron socialist teachers don’t know the difference either. And since your average American public school teacher is about three IQ points away from carpooling in the short bus, the students quickly pick up that something’s not right here… and so they go through school bewildered, not knowing that what’s “taught” in American schools is the art of presenting opinions as if they were facts. You know the kind of thing I mean: George W. Bush was stupid, the globe is warming, low taxes hurt poor people, whites (and only whites!) are racist, etc.
These are defensible statements (in the sense that one can mount a defense of them using facts; whether or not it’s a good, effective, etc. defense is an independent question). But they are, quite obviously, opinions. Yet no discussion of them will be tolerated, so your high school civics exam looks like this: “Discuss all the ways the Bush administration, which was led by an idiot, harmed the climate and enhanced racism.” There’s only one right answer, and it’s easy to grade — no mean bonus when teachers are so overworked and underpaid [/sarc] — so that’s what’s “taught.”
Learn the difference between fact and opinion, and you’ll find yourself saying to your nihilists what the Big Lebowski said to his: “That, just, like, your opinion, man.”
- Severian | 05/06/2018 @ 09:44Just so we’re clear here.
- CaptDMO | 05/07/2018 @ 04:34Heathen =/= nihilist.
Sophist reformist entryists are the same as apostates.
IMHO, While “A man that stands for nothing will fall for anything”, my choice to
actually LIVE by a smorgasbord of conflicting “religious” elements, that happen to have landed on the pages of conflicting “texts”, does NOT mean your belief that my synthesis simply needs MORE of the discussion/persuasion of what you believe you’re the first to discover, is anything but stealing some of the short time I have left, after years of “experiential”, on the planet.
That others may have come to a similar “place” only with different side-orders on their buffet plate, is fine with me. If your pet family dog behaves like it’s acceptable to run over, jump up, and eat the food from my paper plate, I’m likely to kill it,… like any other parasitic mosquito at the al fresco (BOTH meanings) picnic, demanding my blood.