Need some help with running a moral skepticism kritik at an LD Debate Event

Author: Username

Posts

Total: 45
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,951
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@Lemming
I am also in a conversation with Tarif, though I find his arguments rely a bit too heavily on semantics. I claim to be a nihilist myself, and me and him seem to be stuck on whether life can have meaning for an individual even if the nihilist feels life is ultimately meaningless.
 
What's your opinion on the issue?
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,354
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Lunatic
My view of nihilism,
Hm, to 'me, nihilism is an intellectual conclusion that all these moralities and ethics that get bandied about by communities, societies, groups of people, are objectively empty.
Why is that. . .
I suppose it's because they look interchangeable upon humans to me, despite making claims to the contrary, despite claiming that 'their view is the right one.

I don't think that the killing of babies is wrong as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that being greedy is wrong as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that helping other people is good as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that loving your fellow man is good as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.

That 'doesn't mean I'm going to go around killing babies, robbing other people, stop helping people, or stop trying to have good will towards others.
I'm a human after all.
More specifically I'm a certain 'type of human.
I was born with all the biological necessities for empathy, intelligence, understanding, love, patience.
I was raised and habituated in an environment that 'encouraged my current moral code. Same way a course of water runs over the land and cuts a trench into it, my moral code is fixed the same way. It's difficult for me to go a different path, than the one I'm set upon.

There's human born with their brains wired up a different way,
Humans raised in different environments, that give rise to perceptions and actions, secularly recognized as negative.
And there's humans sometimes who suffer brain damage, such as Phineas Gage, and whose perceptions and actions change.

I suppose I might 'still encounter some experience in my life that changes me physically or mentally.
But until then, I don't have the requirements to not act morally, as it's currently recognized.

Returning to the point though,
. . .
Nihilism is an intellectual rejection of concrete meaning/morality as they are commonly recognized.
Which is not very healthy, 'only in itself I'd say.
I think humans live on meaning,
Which is why nihilism is an uncommon label for one to put upon oneself.
It really doesn't say much for what values a person chooses to live by.
What subjective goals and aspirations they possess.
Instead people pick up monikers such as Stoic, Existentialist, Absurdist, these different labels, and 'many others, speak of how a person chooses to respond to that intellectual conclusion of nihilism.

Myself, I'm a bit bitter about it all, and call myself a nihilist out of irritation, a bit of wallowing in my grief for what I view as lost.
But even those labels such as Stoic, Existentialist, Absurdist.
'Still leave a lot to be explained of what that person is, or how they act.
So they pick up others such as,
Democrat, Republican.
Christian, Atheist.
Environmentalist.
Egoist, Altruist.
American, German.
The list goes on, though there's usually context into which when speaks of such labels.
I'm rambling a fair bit.

To my idea of nihilism, there's no intrinsic meaning to be found in existence.
No way that things 'must be morally speaking.
We're all humans sitting at a game of Life, or chess, Candyland, or Risk.
There's nothing really that says we 'have to play, or 'must follow 'these or 'those rules.
The games were invented by past humans and ourselves,
Anything sacred in the rules only exists my those wills,
And they can bend, or break, or be abandoned.
And all that will matter is the moment, those individual meanings that people give to it.
"Illusions, vagaries of perception. Temporary constructs of a human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose."
Which is why God is such a comfort at times to some people I imagine, for human's artificial actions and meanings are still not grounded.
Still not sufficient.
But we are human, and we endure, or not.

Hm, too much incoherent babbling for my liking, especially at the end.
As I've said, my understanding of nihilism is a self taught and primitive homebrew.
I'm willing enough to discuss it with other people,
Helps me understand my stance, sometimes change it.
But my understanding of it is still yet shallow and tangled.
Username
Username's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 755
3
6
11
Username's avatar
Username
3
6
11
-->
@Lemming
I think that's moral anti-realism, not moral nihilism. 
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,354
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Username
Hm, at a Google glance, I think you're right.
They seem pretty much the same to me, but maybe I'll think different after reading a bit.
Username
Username's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 755
3
6
11
Username's avatar
Username
3
6
11
-->
@Lemming
They seem pretty much the same to me, but maybe I'll think different after reading a bit.

Moral Realism: Morality objective, mind-independently true, has value

Moral Anti-Realism: Morality subjective/we made it up, still has value

Moral Nihilism/Skepticism: Morality subjective/we made it up, has no value 
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,354
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Username
Well, I 'still think morality has no value.
There's nothing to be frightened of a daddy longlegs, it can't bite you. It's harmless.
Even if one becomes frightened by it, it 'still can't bite you, It's harmless.

Even if a human 'attributes and 'acts as though there's value, there is none.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Username
I shouldn't have to "believe" anything.

If you can demonstrate the logical necessity (and specific formula) of a universal, unchanging, "objective" moral code, then, like a mathematical solution, it would become irrefutable. Just type out the code. Just the PRIMARY AXIOMS.
No faith would be required.

(IFF) you have a strong survival instinct (AND) hope for a better future (THEN) you will do anything in your power to protect yourself (AND) you will do anything in your power to protect your family and loved ones (as it serves priority #1) (AND) you will do anything in your power to protect your property (as it serves priorities #1 and #2) (AND) if you are convinced that priorities #1, #2, and #3 are secure, ONLY THEN are you capable of truly free COOPERATION with others (otherwise you are COERCED).
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lunatic
I shouldn't have to "believe" anything.

If you can demonstrate the logical necessity (and specific formula) of a universal, unchanging, "objective" moral code, then, like a mathematical solution, it would become irrefutable. Just type out the code. Just the PRIMARY AXIOMS.
No faith would be required.

(IFF) you have a strong survival instinct (AND) hope for a better future (THEN) you will do anything in your power to protect yourself (AND) you will do anything in your power to protect your family and loved ones (as it serves priority #1) (AND) you will do anything in your power to protect your property (as it serves priorities #1 and #2) (AND) if you are convinced that priorities #1, #2, and #3 are secure, ONLY THEN are you capable of truly free COOPERATION with others (otherwise you are COERCED).

22 days later

Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Lunatic
“I am also in a conversation with Tarif, though I find his arguments rely a bit too heavily on semantics.”

It’s Tarik and what’s wrong with that considering words such as nihilist are semantical?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tarik
Words Words Words.

One tries to be as realistic as one can, and simultaneously make the best of things.

And we all achieve this differently in exactly the same way.
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
I don’t see how that’s responsive but nonetheless I’m still waiting on support of your definition of belief.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tarik
If you're going to dispute the Lexicon....Then you must take that up with the Lexicographer.

Nonetheless, it's nice to see you interacting with a wider audience.

Regards.
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
As far as I’m concerned you’re disputing the lexicon not me.

Regards.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tarik
I’m still waiting on support of your definition of belief.
BELIEF:

(A) Something of which a person is convinced.

(B) An actionable hypothesis.
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Fine by me, zedvictor4 seems to think it’s more simplified then that though.