tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post74423413812951974..comments2024-03-28T17:44:11.289+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: It really *is* a matter of nihilism versus GodBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-82551696867831394132011-10-20T20:39:55.777+01:002011-10-20T20:39:55.777+01:00For an amusing, but also frightening, at play-nihi...For an amusing, but also frightening, at play-nihilism: <br /><br />http://www.naturalism.org/index.htm<br /><br />I've read several of their articles and they are richly confirming of Charlton's description of false nihilism. Not only do they refuse to accept the ultimate non-preference of existence over non-existence, total naturalism apparently conforms to every single aspect of the liberal, late Christian worldview!Athelstannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-55580716486713809062011-10-13T10:03:31.419+01:002011-10-13T10:03:31.419+01:00@Daniel - as we discussed - there is no coherent n...@Daniel - as we discussed - there is no coherent nihilism. <br /><br />Never mind writing 1900 words, if you murmer a *single* word in defence of nihilism, you are not a complete nihilist - if you ever do anything other than what impulse tells you... <br /><br />Well, there's no point in trying to imagine how a consistent nihilist would behave because they probably would not last 3 days. <br /><br />Our modern problem is a kind of 'rotating nihilism' - in which nihilism is directed at whatever is before the attention (while leaving intact whatever is not being attended). <br /><br />The nihilism problem or apparent paradox is not just precisely analogous with the nature of evil - it is exactly the same problem. <br /><br />There can be no complete and consistent nihilism because there can be no complete evil - all evil is a partial and or distorted version of Good. All evil persons (real or imaginary) have *some* good in them, else they could not exist/ would not do anything.<br /><br />But to defend nihilism (or evil) on the grounds that it is not completely nihilistic (or completely evil)...<br /><br />well, when you are doing that then you are in *deep* trouble. And yet that is just what modern nihilists do - they point out "Look! I am not a *complete* nihilist - see I ('passionately') believe in THIS and THAT <br /><br />(sotto voce - "Of course I do not believe in any objective and fixed reality, nor do I distinguish between real belief and useful-delusion - but still I passionately 'believe"(-in-my-own-arbitrary-meaning-of-the-term-'belief') in THIS, THAT and also THE OTHER. <br /><br />"SO I can't be a nihilist." <br /><br />Well, the simplest definition is that a nihilist does not believe in the reality of reality - anyone who does not believe this is a nihilist. <br /><br />(The next question for the non-nihilist concerns his grounds for belief in the reality of reality. As Pascal saw, the only coherent grounds for belief in the reality of reality is revelation from a real god).Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-15131336502853011182011-10-13T08:05:14.982+01:002011-10-13T08:05:14.982+01:00I never heard about that 1900 page suicide note/de...I never heard about that 1900 page suicide note/defense of nihilism before but — though I imagine he tries to disarm this obvious question at some point — the obvious question is: if you truly believe in nihilism, why bother writing 1900 pages defending it?<br /><br />Caring that much about the truth of your nihilism means you care about ... truth. Right?Danielhttp://outofsleep.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-10924871915800054162011-10-13T07:57:02.037+01:002011-10-13T07:57:02.037+01:00I haven't read the suicide letter, but I recal...I haven't read the suicide letter, but I recall the coverage. <br /><br />What could a modern mainstream materialistic hedonist *consistently* say that would deter someone from suicide who felt that their life was too miserable to be worth living?Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-70781088827772111592011-10-13T05:27:41.062+01:002011-10-13T05:27:41.062+01:00Mr. Charlton,
Let me compliment you on this post....Mr. Charlton,<br /><br />Let me compliment you on this post. I'm facing the same issues as Daniel is, so I too will profit from it.<br /><br />Apropos this discussion on nihilism, I don't know if you have come across a certain Mitchell Heisman. He was 35-year-old Harvard graduate who committed suicide last year, leaving behind a 1,900 page defense of nihilism as an explanation for his act. A quick sampling does, in my view, prove your point of "it's nihilism or God".<br /><br />The text is at<br />http://www.suicidenote.info/<br /><br />and information about the author at<br /><br />http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/9/22/heisman-harvard-mother-death/.<br /><br />Best,Alatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-74313694518897663542011-10-12T16:51:06.398+01:002011-10-12T16:51:06.398+01:00@Daniel - um, yaas...
That was today's delib...@Daniel - um, yaas... <br /><br />That was today's deliberate mistake.<br /><br />Fixed!Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-3218095786021742282011-10-12T15:45:08.214+01:002011-10-12T15:45:08.214+01:00But the exchange you quote happened here: http://c...But the exchange you quote happened here: http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2011/06/psychology-of-atheist.html<br /><br />Revisiting your post and our exchange has kindled some new thoughts in me, Dr. Charlton. Even after you posted the comment quoted here, I came back and basically restated my whole question/argument, like hitting my head up against a brick wall.<br /><br />Rereading what you said, especially in your second response, I found it makes much more sense now, somehow. I'll expand on that when I have time to digest it and articulate it. Thanks!Danielhttp://outofsleep.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-79380825485309812172011-10-12T12:45:02.182+01:002011-10-12T12:45:02.182+01:00@Faith
Who said reason was *enough*?
Not I. No...@Faith <br /><br />Who said reason was *enough*? <br /><br />Not I. No Christian could believe that. Certainly not one who had engaged with Pascal.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-51511290865223315442011-10-12T12:21:20.255+01:002011-10-12T12:21:20.255+01:00You ignore the option that there is something that...You ignore the option that there is something that is not God. This idea has been developed by Derek Parfit(among countless others)http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/phil3600/parfit.pdf<br /><br />Reason is not enough. Faith is required as well.faithnoreply@blogger.com