Dealing with existential nihilism

[Macoleco]

I believe the universe is consumed by conflict. This includes humanity. Everything positive we have created exists thanks to our conflict within ourselves and against the exterior. This means, then, that striving to be happy is completely acceptable and makes sense, even within the rules of the universe.

There are only 2 possible results for the universe: 1. You had a miserable life. 2. You had a decent life. Pick what you want. Your existence will become an inherent characteristica of the universe, even after you died, even if nobody remembers it. Struggling to be happy as much as we can is the logical path we should take.

[Nanny]

If there is no afterlife, as I expect, then this life is all the more precious.

Religions that say this life is a sham do a grave disservice to the living. If this is the only time I get, I want to make the most of it. When your ride's here, that is it. Your chemistry is returned to the earth and others' memories of you, and your progeny, give you at least a chance of living on in stories and memories and in your genetic success.

The promise of an afterlife is among the most cruel concepts we as a species have invented. Since this life is nothing, strap this on and walk on to a bus, or a plane, or insert example here.

But if we instead shift that perspective to "we have limited time, let's try to learn as much about this life as we can" through curiosity, partnershio, teaching, and fun, we have succeeded

Further thinking on this: 

Let's say we've accepted that there is no supreme power or afterlife. Why bother from there?

A different way to put it: there's a planet full of experiences out there. Why not seek them out? 

Pass on learning from these experiences to others. Some people write books still. 

Nihilism is the easy way out. Life is full of experiences and some of them suck. If we tell the stories right we prepare the next generations. Passing on learning is culture. We're not the only species to exhibit culture, but we can communicate it better than any species discovered so far.

[henryp]

If there is no afterlife, as I expect, then this life is all the more precious.

Religions that say this life is a sham do a grave disservice to the living. If this is the only time I get, I want to make the most of it. When your ride's here, that is it. Your chemistry is returned to the earth and others' memories of you, and your progeny, give you at least a chance of living on in stories and memories and in your genetic success.

The promise of an afterlife is among the most cruel concepts we as a species have invented. Since this life is nothing, strap this on and walk on to a bus, or a plane, or insert example here.

But if we instead shift that perspective to "we have limited time, let's try to learn as much about this life as we can" through curiosity, partnershio, teaching, and fun, we have succeeded

Further thinking on this: 

Let's say we've accepted that there is no supreme power or afterlife. Why bother from there?

A different way to put it: there's a planet full of experiences out there. Why not seek them out? 

Pass on learning from these experiences to others. Some people write books still. 

Nihilism is the easy way out. Life is full of experiences and some of them suck. If we tell the stories right we prepare the next generations. Passing on learning is culture. We're not the only species to exhibit culture, but we can communicate it better than any species discovered so far.

Nihilism is definitely not the easy way out.  Humans appear to be programmed to want to live forever with great meaning. Nihilism is swimming upstream on that front, which is why so many who consider themselves nihilists don't appear to be living very nihilistic lifestyles.

[Brian37]

Further thinking on this: 

Let's say we've accepted that there is no supreme power or afterlife. Why bother from there?

A different way to put it: there's a planet full of experiences out there. Why not seek them out? 

Pass on learning from these experiences to others. Some people write books still. 

Nihilism is the easy way out. Life is full of experiences and some of them suck. If we tell the stories right we prepare the next generations. Passing on learning is culture. We're not the only species to exhibit culture, but we can communicate it better than any species discovered so far.

Nihilism is definitely not the easy way out.  Humans appear to be programmed to want to live forever with great meaning. Nihilism is swimming upstream on that front, which is why so many who consider themselves nihilists don't appear to be living very nihilistic lifestyles.

Nothing to do with this particular post, but in my 16 years of on line debate, I notice time after time how theists confuse how science uses words and falsely equate it to a layperson's ignorant use.

"Programmed" gives me a lip twitch, even seen si fi wooers jump on that word and misunderstand it, and end up trying to replace a all powerful god with a invisible program writer. That is not what science means, it is still ultimately metaphor.

And "lifestyle" I really hate that loaded word. There is just life, "style" is a suffix humans use to allow themselves to feel superior to others. Knowing the age of our planet and universe and our finite nature, "lifestyle" is a nonsense word.  Sagan's Pale Blue dot speech should give more humans perspective to our place in the universe.

Not even the thought of a cosmic cognition as a mere "programmer", like a bunch of tiny Bill Gates or one giant Steve Jobs makes any sense to me. Why would "all this" god or "programmer" be needed? It would seem that even a non religious "programmer" would suffer the same flaw of infinite regress. If a complex programmer is required, wouldn't a more complex programmer be required to program that program?

How about space/time/all the dimensions are simply a non cognitive wave function oscillation going from on to off to on to off like seasons changing over and over. Our desire, even with atheists, to have some sort of "forever" is evolutionary, but not magical, not even a si fi level.

[bennyboy]

I don't want to see the future, say maybe for things that might improve life and health but ultimately our species will go extinct like the dinosaurs long before our planet dies some 5 billion years from now. The way our species is acting now it is far more likely we will kill ourselves off with pollution and nuclear war, so no, I don't want to see that future. I still hold out some hope we might pull our heads out of our asses collectively as a species.

My opinion of our species is that your hope will only work out if punctuated evolution is possible-- that a single mutation or rapid evolutionary stage can introduce essentially a new species. I don't know whether this theory holds any scientific weight, but it seems to me that in extreme circumstances-- for example, with ice caps melting and snow being scarce, it seems likely that the color of polar bears could change to brown in just a couple hundred years due to massive pressure from the environment and really harsh selection rules (with also very high compensation for those with early variation that benefits them).


Perhaps a more likely source of punctuated evolution could be an artificially forced culling of stupid and violent through disease or direct genetic modification.

Right now, the problem is that those who COULD save the world are responsible-- they are less power hungry, reproduce less, and so on. We've clearly, with the election of a fucking orangutan to maybe the most powerful position in the world, and I suspect it's because Americans on average are genetically unable to think and make rational decisions.

[henryp]

I don't want to see the future, say maybe for things that might improve life and health but ultimately our species will go extinct like the dinosaurs long before our planet dies some 5 billion years from now. The way our species is acting now it is far more likely we will kill ourselves off with pollution and nuclear war, so no, I don't want to see that future. I still hold out some hope we might pull our heads out of our asses collectively as a species.

My opinion of our species is that your hope will only work out if punctuated evolution is possible-- that a single mutation or rapid evolutionary stage can introduce essentially a new species. I don't know whether this theory holds any scientific weight, but it seems to me that in extreme circumstances-- for example, with ice caps melting and snow being scarce, it seems likely that the color of polar bears could change to brown in just a couple hundred years due to massive pressure from the environment and really harsh selection rules (with also very high compensation for those with early variation that benefits them).


Perhaps a more likely source of punctuated evolution could be an artificially forced culling of stupid and violent through disease or direct genetic modification.

Right now, the problem is that those who COULD save the world are responsible-- they are less power hungry, reproduce less, and so on. We've clearly, with the election of a fucking orangutan to maybe the most powerful position in the world, and I suspect it's because Americans on average are genetically unable to think and make rational decisions.

Bummer, my response didn't get added on for some reason.

To repeat quickly and sloppily, I wonderif the Orangutan, and the move towards isolatiionism and even the disregard for climate change, is that some people sense that there is a standard of living bubble that is about to be popped. So like squirrels gathering nuts before the winter, the voters asked for a circling of the wagons as they recognize that resources are likely to get tight in the near future. Of course, killing off the poor is also part of the plan, but the poor don't seem to realize that. But practically speaking, if you view humanity as in dire shape, there is some evolutionary sense to selecting Donald as the leader.

[Nanny]

I don't want to see the future, say maybe for things that might improve life and health but ultimately our species will go extinct like the dinosaurs long before our planet dies some 5 billion years from now. The way our species is acting now it is far more likely we will kill ourselves off with pollution and nuclear war, so no, I don't want to see that future. I still hold out some hope we might pull our heads out of our asses collectively as a species.

My opinion of our species is that your hope will only work out if punctuated evolution is possible-- that a single mutation or rapid evolutionary stage can introduce essentially a new species.  I don't know whether this theory holds any scientific weight, but it seems to me that in extreme circumstances-- for example, with ice caps melting and snow being scarce, it seems likely that the color of polar bears could change to brown in just a couple hundred years due to massive pressure from the environment and really harsh selection rules (with also very high compensation for those with early variation that benefits them).


Perhaps a more likely source of punctuated evolution could be an artificially forced culling of stupid and violent through disease or direct genetic modification.

Right now, the problem is that those who COULD save the world are responsible-- they are less power hungry, reproduce less, and so on.  We've clearly, with the election of a fucking orangutan to maybe the most powerful position in the world, and I suspect it's because Americans on average are genetically unable to think and make rational decisions.

Human beings survive. Nukes, planet-smashing asteroids, a bad slip on ice can end it for any and all of us. So let's give up, cower in fear and await our doom, eh? Or better yet, why not snuff it out and get it over with, eh? 

If I don't get to take this ride again I want to experience every bit of it. I used to be more Sartre. Now I'm more Camus. The struggle is the end in itself. And there's some fun along the way, too. 

Evolution by natural selection punctuates nothing. Only the fittest survive. My guess is that it's more likely that brown bears will expand their territory and eventually re-evolve into something like a polar bear than it is for the polar bear to adapt to its changing environment. Evolution does not care who was there first.

[Brian37]

My opinion of our species is that your hope will only work out if punctuated evolution is possible-- that a single mutation or rapid evolutionary stage can introduce essentially a new species.  I don't know whether this theory holds any scientific weight, but it seems to me that in extreme circumstances-- for example, with ice caps melting and snow being scarce, it seems likely that the color of polar bears could change to brown in just a couple hundred years due to massive pressure from the environment and really harsh selection rules (with also very high compensation for those with early variation that benefits them).


Perhaps a more likely source of punctuated evolution could be an artificially forced culling of stupid and violent through disease or direct genetic modification.

Right now, the problem is that those who COULD save the world are responsible-- they are less power hungry, reproduce less, and so on.  We've clearly, with the election of a fucking orangutan to maybe the most powerful position in the world, and I suspect it's because Americans on average are genetically unable to think and make rational decisions.

Bummer, my response didn't get added on for some reason.

To repeat quickly and sloppily, I wonderif the Orangutan, and the move towards isolatiionism and even the disregard for climate change, is that some people sense that there is a standard of living bubble that is about to be popped.  So like squirrels gathering nuts before the winter, the voters asked for a circling of the wagons as they recognize that resources are likely to get tight in the near future.  Of course, killing off the poor is also part of the plan, but the poor don't seem to realize that.   But practically speaking, if you view humanity as in dire shape, there is some evolutionary sense to selecting Donald as the leader.

This is the deep rooted group survival evolution in our species. While compassion and sharing are also an attribute that fosters cooperation, unfortunately so does greed. 

But this is also why I hate both Che supporters who want to end "capitalism" and at the same time GOP/and economic Ayn Rand Libertarians "fuck you I got mine" Neither realize that "capitalism" IS NOT  a form of government. There is not one nation friend or foe that does not invest in the global market. China allows western private companies and capitalize off selling cheap products to the rest of the world. Saudi Arabia's Royal Family owns oil companies, banks and invests in the global weapons complex. Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in GE.

You could argue that any asshole who gains power wins, even Hitler won for a short period of time. Evolution does not care unfortunately if cruelty or compassion win. It is ultimately up to humans to chose what we do.

What most people don't understand is what Sagan did, what empathetic people do. It doesn't matter who we are, what nation we live in, or how rich we get, or how powerful we get. Our successes are always short term in cosmic time. We falsely see, for example, the Ancient Egyptians as famous. Outside historians who have degrees in their 3,000 year dynasty, how many can name every single one of the Pharaohs of that entire time?

We need to collectively sooner rather than later start accepting our place as temporary and that we cannot exploit our planet faster than it naturally absorbs our pollution. We cannot keep going faster than nature's ability to recoup what we extract. 

All the riches and power in the world will never make anyone immortal.

[bennyboy]

We cannot keep going faster than nature's ability to recoup what we extract. 

We can and are. You mean not that we cannot, but that we should not, because it's likely to do great harm to our quality of life and our species' chance of survival, right?

The problem is that dicks like Trump are the guys who go out and really actively do stuff. The philosophers, social scientists, and so on, usually keep their ideas in conferences, Ted talks, and dinnertime conversation. So we're gonna have a Trump-like world, almost for sure.

[Brian37]

We cannot keep going faster than nature's ability to recoup what we extract. 

We can and are.  You mean not that we cannot, but that we should not, because it's likely to do great harm to our quality of life and our species' chance of survival, right?

The problem is that dicks like Trump are the guys who go out and really actively do stuff.  The philosophers, social scientists, and so on, usually keep their ideas in conferences, Ted talks, and dinnertime conversation.  So we're gonna have a Trump-like world, almost for sure.

You are saying the same thing I am. Yes we should not, but yes we are. Very highly likely that if we don't slow down, our species will end up with more conflict over resources and even a possible nuclear war. Far too much of our species is stuck on artificial constructs and short term satisfaction.

---

My opinion of our species is that your hope will only work out if punctuated evolution is possible-- that a single mutation or rapid evolutionary stage can introduce essentially a new species.  I don't know whether this theory holds any scientific weight, but it seems to me that in extreme circumstances-- for example, with ice caps melting and snow being scarce, it seems likely that the color of polar bears could change to brown in just a couple hundred years due to massive pressure from the environment and really harsh selection rules (with also very high compensation for those with early variation that benefits them).


Perhaps a more likely source of punctuated evolution could be an artificially forced culling of stupid and violent through disease or direct genetic modification.

Right now, the problem is that those who COULD save the world are responsible-- they are less power hungry, reproduce less, and so on.  We've clearly, with the election of a fucking orangutan to maybe the most powerful position in the world, and I suspect it's because Americans on average are genetically unable to think and make rational decisions.

Human beings survive. Nukes, planet-smashing asteroids, a bad slip on ice can end it for any and all of us. So let's give up, cower in fear and await our doom, eh? Or better yet, why not snuff it out and get it over with, eh? 

If I don't get to take this ride again I want to experience every bit of it. I used to be more Sartre. Now I'm more Camus. The struggle is the end in itself. And there's some fun along the way, too. 

Evolution by natural selection punctuates nothing. Only the fittest survive. My guess is that it's more likely that brown bears will expand their territory and eventually re-evolve into something like a polar bear than it is for the polar bear to adapt to its changing environment. Evolution does not care who was there first.

"I want to experience every bit of it"........ Yea, but lots of people have that view, and that is fine, we are all individuals. The theist still claims this even with the after life claim. 

When I was younger there was a time when  I wanted to chase things. But what I was doing was chasing other people's ideas and scripts. Now that I am older and wiser don't buy that. What fills the individual is still an individual thing. What fills me is intellectual not places not things. 

I have in my 50 years been lucky enough to be exposed to lots of the world, mostly not from travel, but from contact with people migrating here due to living  a suburb close to diverse DC. Also from having my mom exposing me to magazines like National Geographic World, but also having all sorts of diverse art from Spain and Europe. We had at one point when I was a kid for a few weeks a Japanese college student stay at our house. Not to mention all the travel to Europe and all over the United States. And a lifetime of having diverse co workers too.

I have not been to Hawaii, always wanted to go. But if I never do, that is ok too, because climate and boarders and pretty things, still don't change change we are the same species. 

Don't get me wrong, yes it is your life so sure, do what you want while you are alive. But to me, things don't fill me, interactions with others do. My mom is the biggest example. I'd take time with her over anything else in the world. I am at the point in my life, that what is important to me, especially now that she is not around, is keeping myself intellectually busy. I love being at home, I love keeping up with global news, I love talking to my friends on line and posting on line and debating on line and writing my poetry.

"experience" and "just do it" and "work hard play hard" to me are loaded cliches marketers use to get you to consume. I think it is perfectly ok to experience things by slowing down and taking your time and engaging your brain. Not all of life has to be about sweat and running your body into the ground. I don't mind those who like spending long hours being physical, be it work or play, but I only wish those who think that would stop projecting their own desires on others who don't want to. I am not accusing you of that, this post is more a commentary to anyone reading this.

Be yourself, that is the only way to experience life. We only get one life.