Is Moral Nihilism a Morality?

[SenseMaker007]

IOW you think it would be incoherent with respect to the premise of nihilism as you see it. 

No. It's incoherent for nihilism to be a morality because then it wouldn't be nihilism. It has nothing to do with how I see it and everything to do with what nihilism means.

That doesn't mean it's impossible for nihilism to do so (only impermissible, lol), as we've discussed, only that the consequences for doing so is a meaningful incoherence.

That is not what I've said. I don't agree with you. On the contrary, it's nihilism that's incoherent and it has nothing to do with consequences. I don't agree with you.

 Yet nihilism does carry at least a minimal set of normatives that can't be denied -coherently, by a rational person.  It has struck others as capable of being a moral framework.  People do wonder if any comment on morality can be divorced from normative implications.

Yes, I'm always like this, are you?  

Well, if you're always like this then you're not worth discussing with because you can't make yourself clear nor answer questions clearly.

If permissibility is meaningless x because y,

What does "If permissibility is meaningless x because y" mean? It doesn't appear to make any sense.

then it is not permissible to label things x permissible because y.

When your conclusion is suppose to follow from a premise that doesn't make sense then it's hard to evaluate your conclusion.

 That would be meaningless.

What would be? You're not being clear.

 If all moral statements are wrong, then x does not deserve z for y.

What does "X does not derserve Z for Y" mean? Let's say we replaced it with "Individual does not deserve life for bad behavior" ... even that doesn't quite make sense.

 It's a tight knot, but that's nihilism for ya.

What is?

The point is that you have consistently failed to demonstrate how ethical nihilism, noncognitivism and error theory ever implicitly makes any normative statements. 

Obviously we can do it, so that's not a comment on our ability, but on what we should or shouldn't do, if we properly understand nihilism and genuinely hold it to be true.

Are you trying to say that we can obviously contradict our beliefs? I.e. as I said, someone can be a nihilist but still make statements that aren't nihilistic.

You think that a nihilist shouldn't.

I never said that I think a nihilist shouldn't make normative statements. I said a nihilist can make normative statements but nihilism doesn't implicitly make normative statements. If it did, it wouldn't be nihilism.

 You think that it's wrong to do so.

I never said that.

 All things beings equal, you think that an "emptier" position deserves the title "nihilism" more than a comparatively fuller one.

I like to use the word nihilism to mean what it means, yes.

I think you are struggling to understand this topic.

Do you see why people wonder whether normativity and desert can be divorced from comments on morality, even metaethical positions?

What people wonder is not relevant. You can't back up your claim that I have made normative statements and back up your claim that nihilism is implicitly normative. All you can do is assert them.

 

Some people have been conditioned to think that there's a special sauce in normative propositions - but there isn't.

That has nothing to do with any of my questions and doesn't back up your claim that nihilism is implicitly normative or that I've made any normative statements.

You struggle with relevance.