Nihilism And Atheism

40 posts / 0 new
Last post
Stu. K.'s picture
Nihilism And Atheism

**Sorry, I was just going through some old posts and my OCD made me want to edit some mistakes I've made, I didn't know it would put at the top of the forum again, lol.**

ASSUMINGGGGG that Atheism is "true", as in there is no such thing as anything of a higher power/presence, does Nihilism HAVE to be true?

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
A lack of belief cannot be

A lack of belief cannot be true or false, it just is. You are mixing a state of being with a belief.

Is your lack of belief in Darth Vader existence true or false?(you lack belief in his existence, you do not need to believe he does not exist, but since no good argument for his existence was presented there is no need to you to form a belief about his non existence).

You either lack belief or you don't, there is no true or false attached to it.

"that Atheism is "true", as in there is no such thing as anything of a higher power/presence"

That is not the meaning of Atheism.

Atheism is the lack of belief in one particular type of god, a theistic God.

One can lack belief in something which actually exists, it does not make it true or false.
Most people lacked belief in the existence of black-holes in the past, their lack of belief was still a lack of belief irrelevant of the truth.

The only way you can put a true or false about a feeling/realization is when one is deluded in his feelings/realizations to the point of not knowing what their feeling/realization is.

Atheism tends to be quite the opposite, usually atheist have a very good understanding of why they lack belief, since there is no brainwashing/indoctrination for atheism but basic common sens.

Stu. K.'s picture
Very well thought out and put

Very well thought out and put response, my friend :D I may of not gotten my point clearly across. I think you have proved my point a little, assuming you are thinking what I am. Please tell me your definition, as mine is "there are very few things that actually TRULY exist mentally. An example of this is how you can say 'what's you're definition of this", or "If you say something (anything), you often can't truly prove many things that somebody did/say" to many words and phrases. As many have different opinions on even one word, there isn't a "true" definition of most words/thoughts/ideas.

Even for Atheism. No matter how many definitions say one thing, there isn't a "true" meaning to it. ASSUMING, meaning HYPOTHETICALLY, there is no "higher power" (won't even say atheism, as your definition could perhaps be argued with? Tell me if I am wrong about that), and we are just a bag of bones on this Earth with no purpose whatsoever, would what I said above HAVE to be true? You can even give your life "meaning", but at the very root of life, there's no such thing as most things that we think. Cheers!

BelleHall's picture
I disagree.

I disagree.

Atheism isn't an abstract concept; atheism is defined as the active belief that no deity exists. Some might say that atheism is defined as the lack of belief at all, effectively, "We can't know for sure that there is a god."

Some would be wrong, the aforementioned standpoint being known as "Agnosticism."

Stu seems to be saying that you can't know for sure what somebody means when they say something. Taken to an extreme, he's saying that if somebody says "the sky is blue", they could either be describing the colour of the sky, they could be describing their current mood, or they could be explaining their craving for a fish sandwich.

Frankly, this standpoint is a bit ridiculous. If somebody asks you for the time while you're conspicuously holding a phone or toting a watch, it can be contextually assumed that they are asking you what time it is, and not that they are threatening you for your wallet. Unless, of course, they're A: clinically insane, or B: speaking to you in a code that they KNOW you understand.

So yes, atheism is a concrete standpoint that can be defined. Any deviation can also be described accordingly.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Atheism isn't an abstract

"Atheism isn't an abstract concept; atheism is defined as the active belief that no deity exists. Some might say that atheism is defined as the lack of belief at all, effectively, "We can't know for sure that there is a god." "

AWC

OK lets get one thing past us:
Agnosticism is related to knowledge.
The claim about not knowing for sure.
Don't mix knowledge with a belief.

Lack of belief is an other topic entirely.
Watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk

The only flaw in that video is that it assumes that when he says gods he means the common theistic gods of today.
Atheism = A-Theism = (A)Not-Theism
In The Greek origin of the word, A- is a not something.

Vincent Paul Tran1's picture
Interesting video, Jeff. I

Interesting video, Jeff. I like it. What I do not understand is why he only accounts for hypothetical gods that have overt influence in the world. Since we don't even define god properly in popular culture (other than being of another realm and having some power above that of humans) I doubt anyone would even know there is a god if they encountered one in real life.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"What I do not understand is

"What I do not understand is why he only accounts for hypothetical gods that have overt influence in the world."

Which other gods should he address?

He is addressing the false claim that; "atheism is the claim that there is no gods."
Basically he is defining Atheism in that video, can't expect him to answer every question anyone comes up with.

"I doubt anyone would even know there is a god if they encountered one in real life."
Surly not, if a type of god exists, if you encounter it/he most likely you would not understand or recognize it/him.

Let say god is an alien(like the spaghetti monster), and you accidentally see the spaghetti monster, one of your possible first thoughts would be, "which kitchen did this monster escape from."
You would not think that he could be the creator of the planet/universe.

The problem lies with brainwashing of little kids about a form of good/loving creator which is an outright lie.
Wishful thinking that has no place in a mature society of today.

The reason why the belief in father Christmas is ridiculous is the same reason why the belief in a theistic god is.

Vincent Paul Tran1's picture
"The problem lies with

"The problem lies with brainwashing of little kids about a form of good/loving creator which is an outright lie.
Wishful thinking that has no place in a mature society of today.

The reason why the belief in father Christmas is ridiculous is the same reason why the belief in a theistic god is."

I am not a fan of brainwashing, but the truth can be painful and awful and although I don't believe in lies, I believe good impressions of the truth need to be propogated if the child is not mature enough to handle the uglies

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"I believe good impressions

"I believe good impressions of the truth need to be propogated if the child is not mature enough to handle the uglies"
When a child is not mature to handle the "uglies" we wait till he is mature enough to do so, like the rest of the subjects.

It is not an excuse to introduce an innocent kid to a theology not even the parents truly understand.

Vincent Paul Tran1's picture
I would agree with that

I would agree with that

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"there are very few things

"there are very few things that actually TRULY exist mentally."
Hmm, there are some words that fall on the category where one can haggle on the meaning since we are subjective persons.

However atheism is not one of them since your perception of the word comes from a lot of baseless claims you heard.
If you indeed make a deep study of the word you will arrive at just one conclusion that it arose and evolved according to the particular time.
When there was no theism it meant "Not Theos" or "GODLESS" or "without god", when theism came to the picture and the other types of gods were forgotten, A-Theism meant "Not Theism"= lack of belief in a theistic god.

What happens in language is that words that before had several meanings, later on in history start to be more specific and new words arise to replace other meanings that before were described by the same word.

Atheos is one such word.

"meaning HYPOTHETICALLY, there is no "higher power""
Even your meaning of "higher power" can be argued.
What do you mean "higher power"?
Is the sun a "higher power"?

You are more bordering on A-Deism if such word exists.
Where a Deist is the idea that there is some kind of "higher power" or prime mover that has nothing to do with theism.

Mythlover's picture
Definition of nihilism: "the

Definition of nihilism: "the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless." While many atheists may be nihilists, there are many that are not. So no. This is another thing. While one could argue that it MUST be true, that is only one brand of atheist. We come with many philosophies.

Travis Hedglin's picture
Not all Nihilists are

Not all Nihilists are atheists, and not all atheists are Nihilists. Actually, I think of theism being MORE Nihilistic than atheism, because it attempts to force a "meaning" on life that may not actually exist. Meanwhile, if one is an atheist, we can MAKE all the meaning we want out of our own lives. Life doesn't have to be meaningless, but if you have a belief in an afterlife, it certainly devalues it to a great degree.

Nunya Bizness's picture
I'm an atheist. I don't

I'm an atheist. I don't believe in God. And I don't believe in any religions. But I don't think that rules out some form of consciousness after death. If consciousness is the result of particle interactions or quantum fluctuations, well... when I die there will still be particles and fluctuations. Just a different form. A dead body is not absent of motion on a molecular scale.

So it bugs me how entrenched nihilist philosophy has become in the atheist movement. Its not scientific at all. Assuming death = lack of consciousness is about as scientific as thinking that a sleeping person = death.

CyberLN's picture
"I'm an atheist. I don't

"I'm an atheist. I don't believe in God. And I don't believe in any religions. But I don't think that rules out some form of consciousness after death."

I agree, your atheism does not rule out some form of consciousness after death. By that same token, however, it doesn't rule out the existance of gawds either.

"A dead body is not absent of motion on a molecular scale"

I suspect neither is a rock.

You're bugged by the entrenchment of nihilist philosophy in the atheist movement? Really? We are a movement? Where are we moving? To what degree are we entrenched?

"It's not scientific at all."

Neither is your notion of consciousness remaining after death.

Nunya Bizness's picture
Its philosophical CyberLN.

Its philosophical CyberLN.

The thing is, there is nothing special about life. All of our wants and needs and emotions and thoughts can b explained by simple deterministic physics. Stick a needle in my brain, change a few molecules and suddenly I go from being a republican to a democrat. You can change my memories, my wants, my needs, etc. Im just a physical process. A robot. A bunch of chemical dominoes falling down. An endless series of stimuli and response.

But I'm sentient.

So even though I am made of particles bouncing around, the end result is that I am sentient. I experience subjective experiences like pleasure, pain, red, loud, soft, sharp, etc.

But what if you had a machine that could manipulate matter on a quantum scale? And you could build a replica of a person. With all of my memories embedded in it. Would that replica be sentient? How would you know? Would it truly experience thing, or would it just be like a robot? Or... is it the other way around? Is there some central point in a robot... or every organized system, that is sentient?

This is called the problem of the philosophical zombie. the hard problem of consciousness.

There's nothing special about the material we are made of. We constantly consume dead material, in the form of vitamins, minerals, water, protein, carbs, etc. and we rearrange these materials into our body... and the end result is that we are sentient.

A person moving around, thinking, and talking has nothing to do with the sentience at the core of it all. You can be lying there on a table, zonked out of your mind, not able to process information, eyes glazed over, perfectly still. No moving. no talking. No thinking. No self awareness. But still sentient... and if someone cuts your face with a knife... you still feel it. You are still sentient. You don't move, you don't respond, you don't communicate that you are in pain, and perhaps you don't remember this event. But you still experienced it.

So... how do we know what is sentient and what isn't? We don't. Every atom, every molecule, every object, every planet, etc. might have some form of raw sentience. Qualia. Doesn't mean it is self aware, or thinks, or can respond, or is going to respond to stimulus in a way that we call a lifeform.

Since we don't know what is sentient and what isn't or if you are the only thing that is sentient, or if every organized system is sentient... there are three options.

1. You are the center of the universe. No one else is really sentient. If you cease to exist, then everything ceases to exist because you were the only observer. This is called sollipsism.

2. Everything is sentient. Circles within circles. Fractal sentient structures. Panpsychism.

3. There is something special about brains. They are sentient some of the time, in certain states, we call being conscious. This is the stance most atheists take.

But since we don't understand consciousness, we can't really say. If 1 or 2 are true, then consciousness continues after the physiological change of state we call 'death'

Nyarlathotep's picture
atheistJon - "But what if you

atheistJon - "But what if you had a machine that could manipulate matter on a quantum scale? And you could build a replica of a person."

Actually not possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-cloning_theorem

Nunya Bizness's picture
I agree with that.

I agree with that.

The exact replication of a person was not actually necessary for my point. I chose that for emphasis.

My point was that even if a person is walking around, talking, speaking, moving, etc. we cannot be sure that person is sentient.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie

CyberLN's picture
Jon, although at first blush

Jon, although at first blush this appeared to be a response to my post, I'm not finding any references to what I actually said. Perhaps you did and I've just not had enough coffee yet or you just used my response to you as a springboard for more of your thoughts. That's okay, but what I read as a rather didactic response has little, if anything, to do with what I initially wrote to you. If it did, please point out where it responds to my points. Thx!

Nunya Bizness's picture
You stated that my notions

You stated that my notions were not scientific.
I actually agreed and explained that these notions come more from my studies of philosophy. David Chalmers, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie
Didactic? That's just how any discussion on philosophy is going to come off. Its heavy stuff. I thought however, that if there was one place where I could get away with writing a few paragraphs about philosophy, it would be in an atheist forum in a threat titled, 'nihilism and atheism'.
As far as me calling atheism a 'movement'. Fine, its not a movement. I stand corrected.
Later

Nyarlathotep's picture
Oh lordy: dualism...

Oh lordy: dualism...

Anonymous's picture
atheist Jon- Atheist Jon on

atheist Jon- Atheist Jon on another post said he experienced the after life. You know like paradise or heaven or maybe just another consciousness. He was a moron then and he continues to be an idiot now. IF CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE RESULT OF PARTICLE INTERACTIONS OR QUANTUM FLUCTUATIONS, WELL WHEN I DIE THERE WILL STILL BE PARTICULES AND FLUCTUATIONS. JUST A DIFFERENT FORM. A DEAD BODY IS NOT ABSENT OF MOTION ON A MOLECULAR SCALE" What the fuck does that horse shit, bullshit and elephant dung mean?????? Atheist Jon is the craziest, nuttiest, stupidest, moronic dope in the history of the Universe. Prozac, Lithium, and years of therapy will be necessary but I am afraid he is so far gone his nuttiness is insoluable and he is doomed to the fog of his insane mind. .

Vincent Paul Tran1's picture
why do you purposely

why do you purposely antagonise people, blasphemy?

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
-----------------------------

-------------------------------------------------
Public information announcement:
-------------------------------------------------
(by The Pragmatic)

"blasphemy" is actually the infamous troll of the Atheist Republic forum.

Generally referred to as "Kenny", has been banned many times under different names.
Previously known aliases include: "Kenny Schweiger", "Kenny", "myself", "alleycat", "richardd", "Christopher", "marken", "punkin", "amber", "Simon", "fred,k".

Claims to be an atheist. But he has a fondness for using "sarcasm", even though no one ever gets his sarcasm and he has been told this many times, he keeps posting such deceiving comments.

He seems obsessed with religions, creationists and the stupidity of Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, Joel Osteen, Ted Cruz, Sean Hannity, Donald Trump, Vanna White, Sarah Palin, etc.

This announcement will be posted whenever he spams, agitates, confuses or flies of the handle.

Also, he finds these announcements 'boring'.

Anonymous's picture
Vincent-Absurd stupid idiotic

Vincent-Absurd stupid idiotic, dumb, moronic ideas must be exposed. I purposely antagonize people who have ridiculous ideas because I can't be passive when confronted by assholes who have brains the size of an ant. Vincent--If I insulted you in the past--good- It is so much fun demeaning morons. Read my quote again what atheist Jon.. said about his experience of consciousness after death and the confusion of CAPITAL WORDS he expressed that is a fog of meaningless jibberish. God Bless

Vincent Paul Tran1's picture
blasphemy, I only mean that

blasphemy, I only mean that in my view attacking in such a manner tends to drive wedges between people and degenerate honest conversation

Anonymous's picture
Vincent---Honest conversation

Vincent---Honest conversation is to express how you feel. When Donald Trump says immigrants are murders and rapists.. I say Donald-"GO FUCK YOURSELF".. When ISIS mother fuckers behead infidels and murder homosexuals.. I say "Fuck you -you mother fucking fuck face fucks. When Joel Osteen and the other fucking prosperity preachers in the name of Jesus grow rich on the backs of ignorant foolish dumbass morons... I say fuck you Joel Osteen. Vincent--When I belittle you and other idiots in this forum I am expressing contempt for your ideas. Have a nice day...God Bless...

Stu. K.'s picture
@Belle CH, Post #3.

@Belle CH, Post #3.

Yes yes. Of COURSE it is indeed ridiculous. And I myself find it impossible for anybody to live that way. However though, isn't nihilism at the very root of everything? Us humans just make up words and some ideas. And because we cannot prove alot of things right or wrong, they come out to be nothing.

@Jeff Vella Leone, Post #10

"what is a higher power, even that can be argued" Thank you for proving my point. There isnt a true definition on it, rendering it "nihilisty".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We can make allllll meaning that we want out of our lives, but at the end of the day, theres no such thing as alot of things :/
Sorry y'all I'll add a little more when I get home, bell is about to ring. I ain't quite finished I don't think :(

Travis Hedglin's picture
Solipsism is a failed

Solipsism is a failed philosophy, otherwise you wouldn't be worried about the bell, Pavlov. Humans may "make up" words, but they usually map to our experiences to some degree, and that is what gives them VALUE. You can deny those experiences all you like, but you are still FORCED to deal with it on its terms. Meaning you live in a reality with a framework, and as long as that exists, things have value.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"what is a higher power, even

"what is a higher power, even that can be argued" Thank you for proving my point. There isnt a true definition on it, rendering it "nihilisty".

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.

"higher power" is an attribute that can be attached to anything, it is not a baseless value.
It in fact is a condition that says something higher in power.

It can mean several things but it does not mean that it can't be known either.

+ Nihilism is proven wrong by the sheer fact that there are things that are truly known.

"I think therefor I am" is a 100% know thing.

Mathematics is also known 100%, 1+1 can always be 2 regardless of subjectivity and interpretation(it may mean something else but it can always mean 2) eg: 1 ball +1 ball = 2 balls.
The ball may not exist but the quantification exists and is universal regardless of dimension/universe.

SeanBreen's picture
Short answer, no. A god and

In response to the OP's question:

The short answer is no. A god and religion are not prerequisites for purpose, meaning or value in life. We all craft our own purposes, and for lots of people a large part of their purpose is found in religion. That doesn't mean that a person who has a lack of religion has a lack of purpose. All humans ascribe the highest value to the things we care about the most. In my experience, nihilists don't care about much, which is why they don't ascribe value to much.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.