Is Moral Nihilism a Morality?

[vulcanlogician]

Could we gain any further insight as to how nature works by excluding ourselves from this proposal?
EG, in the animal kingdom?

I don't think so, Ig. Animals (much like humans) have social behavior patterns that resemble morality and/or nihilism. But (to me) moral behavior only includes actions done with a rationale. Animals work on instinct. Humans are rational beings. As such only humans can be moral or immoral. (Let me know if I missed the point of your question there.)

Does the laws of the universe automatically bind us to any sort of morality just because we are capable of thinking about it?

My answer is "no." Just because something is objectively true, doesn't mean you are "bound by the universe" to accept it. Sure

The thing about moral decisions is that they are each individual's choice to make. If there were some compulsory element (like say a promise or paradise and/or threat or eternal torment) then the moral dimension of a decision wanes, and, ultimately, the decision becomes one of self interest.

Therefore, if there were some binding force in the universe that bound all thinking beings to act morally that would similarly diminish the moral element of a choice.

---

I suppose it would depend on the type of nihilism.  The differences between error theory and truth-aptness are profound.  I will say this, though...if we read will to power, we find an interesting notion played out even in little discussions like these.  While a nihilist might contend that the moral structures of our societies are meaningfully arbitrary, that morality as practiced is meaningfully arbitrary, it also carries the implication that this state of affairs deserves to be exposed.  

If that where the only implication of nihilism, it would be enough to qualify as a moral system with a limited scope.  Meta-ethical moralizing over moral systems.  

Yeah, I don't have any well-developed thinking on it, but the first thing I did was to ask myself, "What separates moral nihilism from plain old apathy?" When one considers it this way, there does seem to be some moral tinge (some ought thinking) going on in nihilism.

As I've said before, moral nihilists make some strong arguments (especially error theorists). But no one ever wants to argue nihilism here. They're all "relativists."

What irks me is when these "relativists" have well-developed theories of justice that they express outside of the philosophy subforum--ie. they think that it's just for gays to be treated as equal citizens in a society. And they push the idea fervently. Make no mistake: I agree with them wholeheartedly. But you can't say, "Treating gays as second class citizens is wrong," and then turn around and say, "morals are nothing more than the product of sociological custom."

Having a theory of justice at all presupposes some sense of moral realism. Otherwise, the only real reason a person would fight for gay rights is that "it is customary to do so." I know you feel me on this brotha.