Nihilism – Second Bridge comments and summary

21 01 2014

2nd bridge 103-107 due: Tuesday 21st of January

the original post quit accepting comments so use this to finish bridge 2

 

fyi I made a few comments on the last set

Advertisements

Actions

Information

18 responses

21 01 2014
18

In summary, the Nihilist reasons that there is no reason. How is someone supposed to trust that their thinking and reason precedes that of a monkey? Because our brain automatically thinks it, in that case we have to believe our brains have simply evolved greater than that of a monkey’s and surpassed their level of comprehension. This is what C.S. Lewis says on page 104. Also with Stephen Crane’s poem, it says that knowledge is vast and we can never really know everything we can never reach the “goal”, the “end” which brings the idea that maybe there is no reason, or point to life leaving the Nihilist unable to cope. In thinking there is no point, a Nihilist can have no morals or ethics. Therefore everything just is, you do something bad and you are left with guilty feeling guilt, since there is no watchman to “punish” you.

21 01 2014
19

The second bridge of nihilism, the great cloud of unknowing tells us mainly that humans have no way to know things; to differentiate truth and illusions basing to the naturalistic worldview that human beings live in a closed system and that the cosmos is a closed system too. For naturalism there is nothing other than the system itself. Anyway i dont think Darwin’s view is correct or any related to nihilism, i find that contradictory because only monkeys do not know anything but people do yet they can think. I conclude saying that a naturalist is close to a nihilist because their worldviews are close to being similar.

21 01 2014
5

If someone is the result of impersonal forces, he has no way to know whether what he seems to know is illusion or truth.
Without matter’s functioning there would be no thought. But matter functions by a nature of its own. The only beings in the universe who care about such matters are humans. But people selves are matter.
For naturalism nothing exists outside the system itself. There is only the cosmos, and humans are the only conscious beings.
Author gives an example about Darwin’s naturalism.
We need the existence of some “rational spirit” outside both ourselves and nature from which our own rationality could derive.
We’re boxed by both the past and our present situation as thinkers.
Author proved it by saying that: if people have obeyed the laws of logic. How could they know the laws are true? They are self-evident.
But that fact does not guarantee the “truthfulness” of the laws in the sense that anything we think or say that obeys them necessarily relates
No one is a full-fledged nihilist. Yet naturalism does not allow a person to have any solid reason for confidence in human reason. Naturalism was launched on a firm acceptance of the human ability to know.
Naturalism places us as human beings in the box. But for us to have any confidence that our knowledge that we’re in a box, is true, we need to stand outside the box or to have some other being outside the box provides us with information. But there is nothing or no one outside the box to give us revelation, and we cannot ourselves transcend the box.
In the naturalistic framework, people pursue a know ledge that forever recedes before them. We can never know. James gave the universe question example. We treat person as a “case”, and problem as a “disease”. These far-out cases may be perfect examples of what happens when a person no longer knows in the commonsense way of knowing.
The Robert Farrar Capon example shows how most full epistemological nihilists are.

Many naturalists are very moral, faithful people. The problem is not that moral values are not recognized but that they have no basis. For a naturalist, the world is merely there.
Moral values are relative to one’s culture.
The rebel’s moral values cannot be allowed if they upset social cohesiveness and jeopardize cultural survival.
Cultural relativism is not forever relative. So it does not rely only on is but on what its adherents think ought to be the case.
But some think certain values are so important that cultures that do not recognize them should recognize them. Between neighboring tribes values conflict, one tribe may conduct “religious wars” to spread its values. But a naturalist has no way of determining which values among the ones in existence are the basic ones that give meaning to the specific tribal variations.
In the global community of the 21st century, we’re forced to deal with values in conflict, and naturalists have no standard, no way of knowing when peace is more important than preserving another value.
Naturalism places us as human beings in an ethically relative box. We need a measure imposed on us from outside the box. But there is nothing outside the box; there is no moral plumb line, no ultimate, no changing standard of value.
The example of moral problems by Franz Kafka and Bergman’s film wild strawberries shows that nihilism is a feeling, not just a philosophy.
In a universe where God is dead, people are not guilty of violating a moral law; they are only guilty of guilt, and that is very serious, for nothing can be done about it.

21 01 2014
20

Whether individual cognition is proved true. There is nothing left, naturalism advocates world outside man is the only conscious life. If we need to know about the outside world, we need to have the rest of the world lead us out of life, we always be box limitations. We have a fixed mode, for all legal regulations. Nihilism and moral. Even if no religious law human will continue to feel find his own guilt.we are not persons with self-consciousness and self-determination.

22 01 2014
landsvw

a little confusing. state the case with more clarity.

21 01 2014
10

The metaphysical presupposition that the cosmos is a closed system has implications not only for metaphysics but also for epistemology. Naturalism holds that perception and knowledge are either identical with or a byproduct of the brain; they arise from the functioning of matter. while we think of such situations primarily in psychological terms and while we commit such people to institutions where someone well keep them alive and others will help them return from their inner trip and get back to waking reality.

21 01 2014
3

In the second bridge, in summary , with Nihilist person has no way of knowing whether what he or she seems to know is illusion or truth. On the page 104, C.S.Lewis says that we know it’s right because we have obeyed the law of logic. The idea is we can not know everything, in the end we just go on with some principle that seem to be right.. .

21 01 2014
12

Humans obviously cant be compared to animals because we are so much better and have much more meaning than animals. Some things that i dont really agree with is people try to humanize animals. Like people who adopt dogs instead of kids that need a family or that put so much attention on their pets than more important things in life. We need to learn to give everything the value it deserves. Except if your nihilsts, lol

22 01 2014
landsvw

summarize the section with comments…

21 01 2014
2

The second bridge is talking about the great cloud of unknowing. The argument in brief is : if any given person is the result of impersonal forces, whether working haphazardly or by inexorable law, that person doesn’t have way of knowing whether what he or she seems to know is illusion or truth. For naturalism nothing exists outside the system itself. Naturalism doesn’t allow a person to have ant solid reason for confidence in human reason

21 01 2014
23

in this this chapter it talks how the cosmos is a closed system has implicatioms not only for the metaphysics but also for epistemology. in few words, if any given person is the result of impersonal forces that person has no way of knowing whether what he or she seems to know is illusion or truth. there is no reason to think that matter has any interest in leading a conscious being to true percepetion or to logical conclusion based on accurate observation. for naturalism nothing exists outside the system itself. there is no god perfect or impefect, personal or impersonal. the whole point of this it can be summarized briefly, naturalism places us human beings in a box. but for us to have any confindence that we are in box is true, we need to stand outside the box or to have some other being outside the box provide us with information. but there is nothing or no outside the box. basically as you noticed from the above, there istoo much evidence that knoweldge is possibe. what we need is way to explain why we have it. this naturalism does not do. so the one who remains a consistent naturalistbmust be a closet nihilist does not know where he is.

21 01 2014
1

Human beings value to a Nihilist does not exist. When we are measured in value to the Nihilist, we are basically dead beings. The believer of Nihilism says that knowledge comes solely from a byproduct of our brains. We cannot know anything from a higher being, because there isn’t one. There is only the cosmos and humans are the only beings conscious of their surroundings. C.S. Lewis states that if Naturalism were to be true then we would have no reason to have confidence in the idea of nature being in uniform. Nobody can be a full fledged Nihilist, simply because of the never ending question of how we got here and what comes after life.

22 01 2014
22

In the second bridgewe see a person doesn’t know whether what he seems to know is truth or illusion. For naturalists nothing exists outside the system itself, there is no God and they live in a closed system. If naturalism was true then there is no point of trusting our observations and reasoning since we don’t even know if its truth.

22 01 2014
7

The main topic of this part is unknowing. I get that the only beings in the universe who care about matters are humans. For naturalism, nothing exists outside the system itself. There is no god-deceiving or non deceiving, perfect or imperfect, personal or impersonal. Also, we can know that some things we know can be shown to be false or at least highly unlikely. To interview all, we can get that there is too much evidence that knowledge is possible. We need a way to explain why we have it which naturalism does not do it. So the one who remains a consistent naturalist must be a closet nihilist who does not know where he is.

22 01 2014
4

Since nihilists dont believe in anything thats important they tend to question if we can even think. They cant be sure although when thought of as atleast a superior monkey it is more hopeful that there might b a slight possibility. There’s the question raised questioning how or why we put some people in institutions since they are believed to be mentally sick. In it all however the only way to make it fair is to go with the majority which believes or determines somethings i think.

22 01 2014
15

Nothing has meaning so any course of action can be taken. Yet we can affirm a goal by purposely doing things. Nihilist trust in his thoughts. Also Nihilist always have something to deny.
People who are nihilists cannot live because its against everything they believe in.

23 01 2014
landsvw

nihilist doesn’t trust thoughts… how can a superior monkey trust his or her own thoughts?

30 01 2014
18

To sum up the reading, it is about how Nihilist’s constantly contradict themselves therefore the practice of Nihilism is near impossible with all the flaws. One in being a Nihilist nothing has meaning, so there is no sense of morals therefore they can do anything. Second, Nihilists believe there is no value in anything so there is no value in their thinking but how can they then trust their thinking that is supposed to have no value. This traps them in a paradox. Third, to deny there is a God, there must be a God to deny is there which is again a paradox. Fourth, that means there is no art. Art is dead, because you can not create in a Nihilistic worldview. But art is creation, it has meaning in which Nihilists don’t believe in. Lastly, Nihilist don’t believe in anything or life so why are they alive, a true Nihilist would probably kill themselves so this worldview can not be lived.




%d bloggers like this: