Actually, yes. Science may be technically agnostic, but all of nihilism (which is actually destruction, meaning we have no purpose) has all of its root in science. Henceforth, it must be science! One cannot have oak roots grow into a cherry tree. The tree may be different from the roots, but without the roots the tree is nothing. Same ideals.

 

 

 

And as for the self justification purpose thing, if we cannot bend our own reality and nothing is controlling us, then we do not have a purpose. But we control ourselves, and therefore must have a purpose. :-k

Guys, I admit, I am remarkably impressed by your knowledgeable understanding of Nihilism. At least there are a good number of educated teens out there still :D

Nihilism could have roots in science. From a scientific standpoint, there is nothing to suggest that things other than matter exist. Since a universal, encompassing purpose to life cannot come from merely matter, then nihilism must be true. Thus one could argue the validity of nihilism from science.

 

 

 

There is nothing in science that suggests that anything other than matter exists, yet there's nothing in science that dosen't. Science has a focus on a way of explaining things, it dosen't make a claim that things are always as science explains. It's not metaphysically naturalistic, it dosen't carry ideological baggages and doesn't suggest that there is no overarching meaning to existence, if you believe that there is.

 

 

 

Your argument would be against a metaphysical naturalist who asserts that there is nothing beyond nature and your argument assumes that nihilism is the position that there is no objective meaning or purpose for the universe.

 

 

 

Let me try and make this really clear -

 

 

 

Science - no claim of the existence or non-existence of supernatural notions or overarching purpose to existence.

 

 

 

Nihilism - claims that there is no overarching purpose to existence.

 

 

 

Therefore, science is not nihilistic. Am I wrong? My discriptions off?

 

 

 

I didn't say that nihilism is science, I was just thinking out loud that it is possible that it can be inferred from science.

Actually, yes. Science may be technically agnostic, but all of nihilism (which is actually destruction, meaning we have no purpose) has all of its root in science. Henceforth, it must be science! One cannot have oak roots grow into a cherry tree. The tree may be different from the roots, but without the roots the tree is nothing. Same ideals.

 

 

 

Yeah...maybe I was wrong to call Nihilism science

 

 

 

So what's the deal? Do you think nihilism is science or not?

 

 

 

Anyway I'm not going to repeat myself and go running round in circles. I've already covered response to this on page 1 and on this page.

Nihilism could have roots in science. From a scientific standpoint, there is nothing to suggest that things other than matter exist. Since a universal, encompassing purpose to life cannot come from merely matter, then nihilism must be true. Thus one could argue the validity of nihilism from science.

 

 

 

There is nothing in science that suggests that anything other than matter exists, yet there's nothing in science that dosen't. Science has a focus on a way of explaining things, it dosen't make a claim that things are always as science explains. It's not metaphysically naturalistic, it dosen't carry ideological baggages and doesn't suggest that there is no overarching meaning to existence, if you believe that there is.

 

 

 

Your argument would be against a metaphysical naturalist who asserts that there is nothing beyond nature and your argument assumes that nihilism is the position that there is no objective meaning or purpose for the universe.

 

 

 

Let me try and make this really clear -

 

 

 

Science - no claim of the existence or non-existence of supernatural notions or overarching purpose to existence.

 

 

 

Nihilism - claims that there is no overarching purpose to existence.

 

 

 

Therefore, science is not nihilistic. Am I wrong? My discriptions off?

 

 

 

I didn't say that nihilism is science, I was just thinking out loud that it is possible that it can be inferred from science.

 

 

 

Damn, I think I may have overreacted, sorry. Yeah, I don't doubt that some people can become nihilists based on science. Hell, some people say their faith in god is concreted because of science. My point to raven (and I wrongly made this point directed at you) was that just because people can and do become nihilists based on scientific thinking, it dosen't make science nihilistic or vice versa.

Wonderful, another gross misrepresentation of quantum physics to try and prove something spiritual.

I'm a huge fan of quantum physics but it's a lot more complex than just the basics you've given.

The Quantum Physics Theory is much more complicated. It claims that many theories of physics are incorrect, and it is also largely in accordance, or at least hand-in-hand, with many religions such as Christianity and Buddhism. The Quantum Physics Theory is a many-part ideology that includes such thing as ultimate conscious thought that creates and perhaps even controls the universe, that space is time are an invention of our minds and are, in fact, an illusion, and that observing something can greatly change or perhaps even control the outcome of a specific event. It also claims that the future can have an impact on the present, just as much as the past can change the present.

 

 

 

 

What ??? Sorry mate but I stopped reading there.

 

It's obvious this is leading to some sort of obscene bastardization of quantum physics/mechanics

Does a rock have a purpose? Does an individual straw of grass have a purpose?

 

 

 

They, just like humans, are made of matter, them being alive or not (or being able to comprehend their existence) doesn't alter their 'purpose'.

 

 

 

Humans like to give themselves a higher 'meaning' since some of them spend a lot of time on thinking about abstract concepts (something other animals don't bother to do or aren't capable of, rather concentrating on finding nutrition and procreating).

 

 

 

You can give your life any meaning you want. But it can't be imposed to you by some external force. Only natural forces, such as another human (who can change the purpose of an innocent child by recruiting him as a child soldier and making him do back-breaking chores), or sheer random chance can affect your life.

 

 

 

The Quantum Physics Theory is a many-part ideology that includes such thing as ultimate conscious thought that creates and perhaps even controls the universe, that space is time are an invention of our minds and are, in fact, an illusion, and that observing something can greatly change or perhaps even control the outcome of a specific event.

 

 

 

I got a bit confused because you didn't mention or cite which particular "theories" you were referring to. There is no one universal "quantum physics theory", it breaks down to quantum field theory, quantum gravity theory, quantum mechanics etc.

 

 

 

I'm not familiar with any quantum physics theories which deal with 'purpose' or being able to change event outcomes by mere observation. All the work and studies I've read on QP are from a purely scientific viewpoint. Please, do provide links.

I'm not sure if you'll find this relevant, but my philosophy is largely nihilist, and I also don't hold science/rationalism as an end-all.

 

 

 

In fact, I think that most modern day nihilism stems from quite the opposite; there is a sense of "meaninglessness" of everything and everyone in the universe precisely because we don't feel there is any all-encompassing theory that defines it.

 

 

 

Science and rationalism, like religion & faith, does begin to provide some kind of meaning for an individual. It's when people start realizing that their faith in the scientific method is just as arbitrary as faith in God, that there are no absolutes or objective truths even in methodology, that people begin to feel lost and truly nihilist. (Though some, myself included, find this idea somewhat freeing)

Quantum Physics Theory declares that the most important new rule of the theory is Entanglement. It is saying that all beings has a counterpart and that they co-exist and respond instantaneously to one another.

 

 

 

Where does it say that? Both in the declaration that it is the most "important" thing in it and where it says that all beings have a counterpart.

 

And as for the self justification purpose thing, if we cannot bend our own reality and nothing is controlling us, then we do not have a purpose. But we control ourselves, and therefore must have a purpose. :-k

who's to say that you control yourself?

 

And as for the self justification purpose thing, if we cannot bend our own reality and nothing is controlling us, then we do not have a purpose. But we control ourselves, and therefore must have a purpose. :-k

who's to say that you control yourself?

 

 

 

I assume you decided to make that post, just like I decided to make this reply. It wasn't forced on me through fate or some divine intervention. I could've pressed the 'back' button, thought to submit it instead to show you can control yourself :lol:

 

And as for the self justification purpose thing, if we cannot bend our own reality and nothing is controlling us, then we do not have a purpose. But we control ourselves, and therefore must have a purpose. :-k

who's to say that you control yourself?

 

 

 

I assume you decided to make that post, just like I decided to make this reply. It wasn't forced on me through fate or some divine intervention. I could've pressed the 'back' button, thought to submit it instead to show you can control yourself :lol:

You made that post because the chemicals in your brain thought that they would get excited and have some pleasurable time in trying to prove that your point is correct.

 

 

 

Its like you lie on the couch and watch the television and then you get the urge to eat something, your brain is comfortable watching the television whilst lying on the couch however it knows that if you get the food you will be even more comfortable so it weighs up the options. Anyhow get a read of this interesting stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will#Incompatibilism

 

 

 

However I was talking more about the spiritual and long term control, i.e. the writer obviously believes in some God, so I was just waiting for him to clarify if he thinks that it's because of God that we get free choices, to which I would of said the contrary..

 

 

 

Edit: the whole concept of free will is a huuuuuge debate and opinions obviously vary... as for me I'm partially undecided however if I take the Christian prospective then from there a human has no free will IMO good night :).

I lost it after the first sentence :uhh:

Most of your essay comes from the movie, what the bleep do we know; unfortunately for you that movie is a new age spiritual movie and isn't scientific. A lot of the movies information on quantum mechanics were exaggerations or even worse completely untrue. The parts in your arguments where that human observation affects the atoms in some way and that all things that have a counterpart and react instantaneously are untrue, quantum mechanically. Those arguments are the new age spirituality interpreting quantum mechanics, not quantum mechanics itself.

 

 

 

Quantum physics is an interesting topic however to get a decent grasp of it you really need to have done a university course on mathematics and to have read a textbook rather then a novel on it. It's a pity that you can't really remove the maths without removing the reasoning behind the theory.

No, the examples I provided were from the movie. The ideology I presented was from background research.

 

 

 

Quantum Physics agrees with the idea of human purpose, it does not specify, true, about why the have a purpose, but it does declare that we do, at least on a very basic level. It goes along with religious ideas, it is not in complete accordance with them. Nothing I have said was untrue in this essay. I'm pretty sure I never said that Quantum Physics necessarily was an idea that upheld religion, but it is at least something that religious leaders and great thinkers can agree on.

I'm rather fond of the nihilist point of view, and here's my reason.

 

 

 

 

 

Any finite number compared to an infinite can be rounded down to exactly nothing.

 

Since my influence on planet Earth could, theoretically, be measured,

 

and is, therefore,

 

finite, my actions all amount to, in the grand scheme of things, exactly NOTHING.

 

 

 

So why bother?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are two types of Kashi. The first focuses on things close to home. Work, school,

 

moving out of my mom's house when I finally turn 18. The second Kashi focuses on the universe

 

as a whole, which is a bit paradoxical because an absolute infinite is inconceivable by the human

 

mind. The first Kashi is generally happy and, if not exactly easy going, manages to at least

 

get along in the world. The second Kashi becomes angry easily and talks alot about killing people.

 

 

 

It actually depends alot on who I'm hanging out with at the moment.

^Rounding down to zero and equalling zero are two very different things Kashi :-w .

Rounding down is just a form of speech. Any finite number compared to an infite is exactly

 

nothing. Basically my sphere of influence compared to INFINITE UNIVERSE becomes a

 

number so small you can't even imagine it. Imagine a 0.X1, wherein X is an unlimited number of 0's.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My model of the universe is one I've developed in my head independently, but I think

 

most accepted models of the universe consider it as UNENDING.

 

 

 

Sorry for the caps, I'm not shouting, it's more like these words are so significant that they

 

need to be capitalized.

Rounding down is just a form of speech. Any finite number compared to an infite is exactly

 

nothing.

 

Incorrect. For all intensive purposes, you would be correct in saying it's essentially nothing, but it still holds value above zero no matter how infinitely small it is.

 

 

 

Although, for this case, calling it essentially nothing works, because our minds can't grasp how meager our efforts are in comparison to all that has been done in the universe since the beginning of time.

 

 

 

Meh, I prefer to think relative to stuff I understand and can grasp, i.e., not the entirety of existence : .

Quantum Physics agrees with the idea of human purpose, it does not specify, true, about why the have a purpose, but it does declare that we do, at least on a very basic level. It goes along with religious ideas, it is not in complete accordance with them. Nothing I have said was untrue in this essay. I'm pretty sure I never said that Quantum Physics necessarily was an idea that upheld religion, but it is at least something that religious leaders and great thinkers can agree on.

 

 

 

For starters, justify that bolded claim.

I like how the first post is like, a personal attack on nihilists.