What is it that makes something autonomous and unidealized? Pessimism in itself is an ideal and even as much as we don’t want to think it, so is realism.
I’m not getting into this whole philosophy of defining words either. That shit is anti-philosophy. Rather I would like to discuss what they represent.
I just want to get some discussion going here to get an idea.
In reference to modern mans “philosophical dilemma” Existentialism made a “leap of no faith” if you will to Nihilism by discrediting everything that was idealized because it wasn’t autonomous/independent (from what? I can’t see.) This was the driving force of much of the leap (to Nihilism) but the actual transition was due to the extreme opposition of existentialist belief in “meaning”.
Apathy is the neutral standpoint of the two.
Ideas?
No? No-one here on the boards has anything to contribute to this? All of you know-it-alls that had shit to say on my previous Nihilism thread must agree now then.
Ok. Thanks.
I’d gladly discuss it with you mate, in great depth, but there is just one small problem.
I don’t have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about!
Now if we can chat about inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism then I’m your man.
Oh, or how to get girls into bed.
There really isn’t any point to this.
Non-spiritual (in the truest sense) people tend to get all frantic about their life’s purpose and meaning.
If everyone stopped trying to glean meaning from everything and just live and care for one another, there’d be a lot less angst over such things.
I think your painting this picture with an awfully broad brush. Specificity perhaps? Try asking us about a specific existentialist concept and how it could logically lead to nihilism.