RE: Any Nihilists here?
August 24, 2023 at 5:25 am
(This post was last modified: August 24, 2023 at 5:30 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Never a bad idea to hear out people on the other end of a position. I spend most of my "philosophy time" reading and listening to nutball shit. Thankfully, it hasn't made me a nutball yet. I guess there's always hope, I've changed my mind before!
Realism is an interesting one. Basically, the more educated you are in anything else...in the west....the more likely you are to accept or propose some sort of antirealist ideation. There are historic and cultural reasons for this. Quixotically, the more educated in metaethical theories you are, again in the west, the more likely you are to express or propose realist ideation. That's how you end up with people claiming that the standard assumption of contemporary ethics is not valid, or is somehow unworkable, and ethicists spending pretty nmuch all of their time describing the ins and outs of a moral theory that the body public rejects.
I blame the nuts, actually. They're the ones who put a bunch of ridiculous ideas into peoples heads, and called it moral objectivity not because the statements were morally objective, but because they believed that's how things were. Alot of antirealist stuff comes from a particular time and place, rejecting specific ideas. Nietzche, for example, denied traditional ideas about meaning and morality - but still clearly had ideas about them of his own. He noticed this himself, frequently. Leading the the question of whether we get Nietzsche wrong, or nihilism wrong.
Realism is an interesting one. Basically, the more educated you are in anything else...in the west....the more likely you are to accept or propose some sort of antirealist ideation. There are historic and cultural reasons for this. Quixotically, the more educated in metaethical theories you are, again in the west, the more likely you are to express or propose realist ideation. That's how you end up with people claiming that the standard assumption of contemporary ethics is not valid, or is somehow unworkable, and ethicists spending pretty nmuch all of their time describing the ins and outs of a moral theory that the body public rejects.
I blame the nuts, actually. They're the ones who put a bunch of ridiculous ideas into peoples heads, and called it moral objectivity not because the statements were morally objective, but because they believed that's how things were. Alot of antirealist stuff comes from a particular time and place, rejecting specific ideas. Nietzche, for example, denied traditional ideas about meaning and morality - but still clearly had ideas about them of his own. He noticed this himself, frequently. Leading the the question of whether we get Nietzsche wrong, or nihilism wrong.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
