Converting away from moral nihilism or scepticism: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Introduction to Philosophy / Factual Issues / Books » Converting away from moral nihilism or scepticism » Converting away from moral nihilism or scepticism

Converting away from moral nihilism or scepticism
You like polls, right?

What is your moral status?
never been morally nihilist or sceptical	180 Proof, The_Rational_Animal, cadpat_knight, unenlightened, kris, peeted	6	25%
currently morally nihilist or sceptical, <2yrs	2gontaf2, Atrytone, wu	3	13%
currently morally nihilist or sceptical, 2-4yrs	The Joker, Ibrahim, Wolfman, absurdmike	4	17%
currently morally nihilist or sceptical, 4-8yrs	mercmisfire, Postmodern Beatnik, Deftil, FreeRadical	4	17%
currently morally nihilist or sceptical, >8yrs	dclements, Elginb	2	8%
was morally nihilist or sceptical for <2yrs	kouk, at, swstephe	3	13%
was morally nihilist or sceptical for 2-4yrs	klubbit	1	4%
was morally nihilist or sceptical for 4-8yrs		0	0%
was morally nihilist or sceptical for >8yrs	ManiacJack	1	4%
24 votes

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Converting away from moral nihilism or scepticism

Buddahchuck
Bodhisatva

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 16, 2006
Total Topics: 26
Total Posts: 589

Posted 07/25/08 - 08:47 AM:	#11
Well, I'll stay away from overarching nihilism for now, as the OP is discussing strictly moral nihilism. Concerning moral nihilism, I have reasoned myself into a predicament. If moral nihilism is the belief that morality has no truth value, then I can only accept such a proposition for lack of justification that morality does have a truth value. It seems to me, that if we are to take the classical skeptic's approach to morality being based on fundamentally either faith or reason the we must put both in doubt. If reason is the basis of morality (though recent threads have made me loathe of the term "basis of morality"), then ultimately I can justify any action as reason is not standardized. However, if I take the faith route, then the "basis of morality" becomes vastly unclear. So I am left with two roads. Reason, which inevitably leads to some sort of moral nihilism (my rational tendencies tell me that if no agreement can be reached concerning morality via reason, then there is no truth value to such a claim). Faith, which leads to a moral standard of which we have no clear idea. Because I do not wish to engage either road, I am stuck at the fork, pondering whether or not what we call morality is of a rational, human nature, or simply a sociological phenomena that occurs when humans live in groups. So I'm not sure if this makes me a moral nihilist or not.

swstephe
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Location: borneo island
Total Topics: 22
Total Posts: 2150

Posted 07/25/08 - 09:05 PM:	#12
unenlightened wrote: I find that hard to believe. I've never felt inclined to let cold logic cloud my judgement - what would be the good of that? As others have said, one cannot actually get through the day without valuing bread over stones as food, and stones over bread as a building material. There really is nothing to be said in favour of nihilism, literally nothing. Ask an "emo"? They seem to value the appearance of being nihilists.
Ethics is the measuring of morality. Morality is the measuring of good. Good is the measuring of benefit. Benefit is the measure of values.

The Joker
Ubermench

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 25, 2008
Location: South Bend IN
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 41

Posted 07/26/08 - 03:13 PM:	#13
at wrote: I disagree -choosing to believe there is something is much easier than choosing to believe there isnt. Living nihilism is pretty torturous. Agreed. If you have fully thought it out yes. Nihilism is torturous. Only if you have just given up on thought and don't believe in anything because you gave up, yes that would be the easiest way out.
"It is entirely seemly for a young man killed in battle to lie mangled by the bronze spear. In his death all things appear fair." - Homer

The Joker
Ubermench

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 25, 2008
Location: South Bend IN
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 41

Posted 07/26/08 - 03:25 PM:	#14
swstephe wrote: Ask an "emo"? They seem to value the appearance of being nihilists. I think it can be argued that being 'emo' is a result of societies influence. The mainstream people who wear what is called for, for the mainstream to 'fit in', is not unlike those who have chosen to go against the grain of society like those who call themselves 'emo'. These people are still dictated by society since they have chosen to oppose it. They would not be 'emo' if say, in society being 'emo' was the accepted way to fit in. It must be said in certain circles the former is true. That in some circles being 'emo' can be considered mainstream but still has not effected the way people are drawn to it, by the dictation from society. And my point is, I don't believe its, at least for the majority, of those who choose to call themselves 'emo' to be nihilistic and those who do to prefer to call them 'emo' and nihilistic I seriously doubt they actually understand what they are saying anyways. Last clarification: I don't think a characteristic of nihilism is being 'emo'. Because I seriously doubt these people have come to nihilism by thought but more or less by an opposite function of what society agrees with. Or in some cases just the alternative of the former. Edited by The Joker on 07/26/08 - 03:37 PM
"It is entirely seemly for a young man killed in battle to lie mangled by the bronze spear. In his death all things appear fair." - Homer

kris
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 03, 2007
Location: Indiana
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 163

Posted 07/27/08 - 04:07 AM:	#15
e00 wrote: Have you converted away from moral nihilism or scepticism to a different moral philosophy or religion? ... If no, please respond anyway. Do you consider yourself a moral nihilist? A moral sceptic? Moral nihilism is for the ignorant. Not understanding karma can lead to moral nihilism. What in the world is emo?
kris http://kris10846902.tripod.com/

Postmodern Beatnik
Existential Hero

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005
Total Topics: 16
Total Posts: 1442

Posted 07/27/08 - 07:45 AM:	#16
kris wrote: Moral nihilism is for the ignorant. He said without presenting an argument. kris wrote: Not understanding karma can lead to moral nihilism. Karma can't create moral truths. All it could do is create consequences for actions that one would have to take into account when deciding what is practically rational. And by the way, Buddhists are moral nihilists in the metaethical sense. Buddhist ethics, or sila, are first order prescriptions relative to the goal of achieving enlightenment in short order. There are no second order prescriptions in Buddhism, and Buddhists would eschew such thinking anyway. kris wrote: What in the world is emo? A teenage subculture that originated in the US and is loosely defined by the music and fashions to which it subscribes. Though currently rather mainstream (insofar as it is the mainstream way of not being mainstream), it developed out of emocore, a style of hardcore punk.
It is not a mistake to have strong views. The mistake is to have nothing else. --Anthony Weston

kris
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 03, 2007
Location: Indiana
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 163

Posted 07/27/08 - 11:12 AM:	#17
Postmodern Beatnik wrote: Karma can't create moral truths. All it could do is create consequences for actions that one would have to take into account when deciding what is practically rational. And by the way, Buddhists are moral nihilists in the metaethical sense. Buddhist ethics, or sila, are first order prescriptions relative to the goal of achieving enlightenment in short order. There are no second order prescriptions in Buddhism, and Buddhists would eschew such thinking anyway. It is true that karma cannot create moral truths. Neither can anyone or anything else, notwithstanding all the pretense to the contrary. When one truly understands karma, one no longer conducts oneself in a lawless vacuum akin to moral nihilism. Knolwledge of karma tells me that I and I alone am responsible for my actions and I and I alone have to live with the consequences of my actions. This is how one bercomes mindful of how one conducts oneself, without the need for moral truths. Those who are ignorant of the workings of karma feel the need to search for the mirage of moral truths or end up with moral nihilism.
kris http://kris10846902.tripod.com/

Postmodern Beatnik
Existential Hero

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005
Total Topics: 16
Total Posts: 1442

Posted 07/27/08 - 02:36 PM:	#18
kris wrote: It is true that karma cannot create moral truths. Neither can anyone or anything else, notwithstanding all the pretense to the contrary. And moral nihilism is the position that there are no moral truths, as I explained above. It is nothing more than that, especially understood as a second order statement as suggested by the OP. As such, you have not contradicted me at all. kris wrote: When one truly understands karma, one no longer conducts oneself in a lawless vacuum akin to moral nihilism. Moral nihilism does not suggest a lawless vacuum, it merely suggests that one certain type of law (moral law) does not exist. Moral nihilists are not necessarily more likely to murder, gossip, or jaywalk than anyone else. kris wrote: Knolwledge of karma tells me that I and I alone am responsible for my actions and I and I alone have to live with the consequences of my actions. This is how one bercomes mindful of how one conducts oneself, without the need for moral truths. Those who are ignorant of the workings of karma feel the need to search for the mirage of moral truths or end up with moral nihilism. Regardless of whether or not karma -- in the Buddhist, Hindu, or Jainist sense -- obtains in this universe, there are still very real consequences to our actions. Moral nihilists can be just as in tune with these consequences as every other person in the world. And if we have free will, then we and we alone are still responsible for our actions -- regardless of whether or not karma exists. Karma is simply one more possible thing to factor in to the prudential calculus.
It is not a mistake to have strong views. The mistake is to have nothing else. --Anthony Weston

kris
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 03, 2007
Location: Indiana
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 163

Posted 07/27/08 - 04:01 PM:	#19
For us, believers in karma, karma is a law of cause and effect that governs all that happens in the world. It is an overarching principle that obviates any need for separate moral truths or a separate moral law. When we speak of cause and effect, moral considerations are not excluded. Karma takes care of them. We just don't need a separate mechanism to deal with moral issues. My position thus is that I am not a moral nihilist even though I don't subscribe to moral tuths or a moral law. Karma does it for me. I am not a moral nihilist in metaethical sense as, you say, Buddhists are.
kris http://kris10846902.tripod.com/

The Joker
Ubermench

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 25, 2008
Location: South Bend IN
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 41

Posted 07/27/08 - 06:35 PM:	#20
kris wrote: For us, believers in karma, karma is a law of cause and effect that governs all that happens in the world. It is an overarching principle that obviates any need for separate moral truths or a separate moral law. When we speak of cause and effect, moral considerations are not excluded. Karma takes care of them. We just don't need a separate mechanism to deal with moral issues. My position thus is that I am not a moral nihilist even though I don't subscribe to moral tuths or a moral law. Karma does it for me. I am not a moral nihilist in metaethical sense as, you say, Buddhists are. By what mechanic does karma perform out of, or is it completely based in faith?
"It is entirely seemly for a young man killed in battle to lie mangled by the bronze spear. In his death all things appear fair." - Homer

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.