Nihilistic Aliens

Many doubt whether existence has any purpose or meaning, but could entirely civilizations become nihilistic. Would this spell their doom? And if not, what would they be like?
Use code isaacarthur at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/is...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @isaacarthursfia
Visit our Website: www.isaacarthur...
Join Nebula: go.nebula.tv/i...
Support us on Patreon: / isaacarthur
Support us on Subscribestar: www.subscribes...
Facebook Group: / 1583992725237264
Reddit: / isaacarthur
Twitter: / isaac_a_arthur on Twitter and RT our future content.
SFIA Discord Server: / discord
Credits:
Nihilistic Aliens
Episode 423b; December 3, 2023
Produced, Written & Narrated by: Isaac Arthur
Editor: Donagh Broderick
Music Courtesy of: Steve Cardon

[@beninchicago5871]

First Nihilist: "Why colonize space?" Second Nihilist: "Why not?"

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

Given that there is no meaning or purpose in existence beyond what we create arbitrarily, why not build the most awesome thing we can? Maybe it has no objective meaning, but it has subjective meaning, and it would be enjoyable and more enduring than pure hedonism.

[@hugh_jasso]

​@@stainlesssteelfox1"civilization" IS hedonism, destroying everything that is not homogeneous with the socially constructed idea of advancement.

[@fubaralakbar6800]

Capitalist: "Because we don't have the money." Conservative: "So make the money." Socialist: "Nah, we'll just tax it from the people." People: "Let's make private space ships."

[@tylersoto7465]

They are basically giving themselves a purpose in life and meaning too. By colonizing other planets giving their race a future to go towards having access to more resources and land to spread out to multiply the population bigger etc

[@androth1502]

@@tylersoto7465 and all of that is pointless busy-work.

[@cyruspowers7355]

The whole alien civilization series is a gem on your channel. Thanks for making these videos Isaac, you're awesome.

[@JaceMorley]

"The struggle itself to the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy."

[@androth1502]

i think camus got the terminology a bit wrong on this one. one must imagine sisyphus content, that would be a more accurate descriptor of sisyphus's plight.

[@hadet]

@@androth1502 fart

[@JaceMorley]

@@androth1502 this could be a translation factor. the original French is 'heureux'. As I understand it, not being well versed in the language, the word 'content' is French and there it means a shorter lived kind of happiness, more like "glad" or "satisfied", whilst heureux is a deeper and longer lasting joy.

[@lukasmakarios4998]

The level of intellectual discourse on this channel is amazing. 👏

[@lukasmakarios4998]

​@@androth1502-- what you are calling "contentment" may perhaps be what others call quiet "joy," but as it seems transitory, I'll stick with "happy."

[@NGCAnderopolis]

I find your idea that morality cannot exist outside of some outside or innate "goodness" to the universe strange. Why should I think that murdering someone is just as valid as helping them, just because I don't believe that the universe includes a moral component?

[@heraadrian7764]

This way the leader has control of the tribe like I have control of my body even when it screams at me from pain to stop an activity.

[@CoalOres]

Yeah it depends, for instance emotivism presupposes that moral statements are statements expressing the author's own feelings about something as opposed to a universal right/wrong. Feeding the poor is right and murder is wrong, why? Because I feel that way. In other words it all depends on your meta-ethical view I guess.

[@Voidsworn]

Next episode, Absurdist Aliens. :)

[@adamtaurus5380]

As an Ontological Nihilist, I do not believe this video exists.

[@napoleonfeanor]

Neither do you

[@dying_allthetime]

As an ontological nihilist I do not believe belief exists

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

As a sceptical empiricist, I'll belive it when I see it.

[@TheHortoman]

As a pathological nihilist i dont care

[@cosmictreason2242]

As s theist, y'all need Jesus

[@purpledevilr7463]

An instant click for me.

[@CaptainBanjo-fw4fq]

Me too.

[@jeffjohnson1966]

Same

[@Australiaisupsidedown]

I didnt click it at first. Just so you know

[@penponds]

Yep!

[@arandomfox999]

I find this notion ludicrous that people cannot distinguish between recognizing harm outside of a moral context. Cause and effect is all you need to understand the influence of your actions. Morality is not required for principle in the stead of unforeseen consequences even in the case of an action seeing no immediate negative result. Essentially principles can guide you in the absence of morals even when it appears that you can get away with an action Scot-free. Just because something isn't "WRONG" does not mean the outcome would be undesirable short or long term. Those with differing irreconcilable opinions simply are your enemies. no need to call them evil but that's what the moral paint will apply. Something not having inherent purpose does not remove your ability to perform actions, you simply don't need to paint yourself as righteous for taking them. Which in my opinion prevents a lot of the issues of paving the road to hell with moral intentions.

[@heraadrian7764]

Morality is just a colection/compendium of habits that where more usefull than what they had before the present iteration. They are like proto-law before you write a code of law. Social tools that can be made better or worse so that humans can live with one another.

[@punchkitten874]

The most correct morality is the most efficient one. Whatever gains most overall.

[@arandomfox999]

@@heraadrian7764 I agree with what you've said, but that is not how people typically perceive morals. They perceive them as set in stone more oft than not and simply obscured in the case where uncertainty strikes.

[@heraadrian7764]

@@arandomfox999 I know that brother I just ad some context, that is all. Moral absolutism vouched by a god or being X of smoke and mirrors etc.. are there to make people obey the leader and preserve some order but now we have better tools for the job that do not make us blind zealots slaved to mumbo-jumbo.

[@rharris22222]

I don't think serious people believe that thoughtful people cannot distinguish harm outside of a morality imposed by divinity. But there are two problems that your argument does not address. First there is the very practical effect that religion, nationalism, other forms of duty can direct people who are NOT thoughtful, e.g., stupid, young and impetuous, irresponsible people. I believe in God, but I can also see that even in the case of materialist evolution, it could well be imagined that religion evolved alongside sentience, and that unless/until humans evolve into something else, the "God-shaped hole in man's soul" will remain, even if it's an artifact of our brain's need to organize life. The second is admittedly more esoteric, the one Arthur addresses in the argument about someone else "Finding his purpose" in mayhem and violence. That's an interesting philosophical argument, but not much in practical terms since we can just say "Darwin!" and shoot him in the back, and any society that would survive would be likely to have more "Pragmatic-good" guys than "Frivolously-bad" ones, and pragmatic good guys should be able to do the shooting even if you don't believe that either one is "Bad" or "Good" in moral terms. It's not what I believe personally, but it is one of the best models for how pragmatic group survival became moral imperative over millennia of societal evolution. It's not a complete explanation, however.

[@JM-mh1pp]

Jesus imagine entire civilisation of redditors

[@AAAAkaishicÌIÍ636]

I want entire civilizations of animators, writers, and artists

[@cosmictreason2242]

Such civilizations would go extinct. "Fermi Paradox: Terminally Online Aliens" could be a video

[@chupacabra304]

Wouldn’t an immortal AI literally be terminally online 🤔

[@eh1600]

Would be rooting for the daleks

[@JM-mh1pp]

@@cosmictreason2242 unironically it is probably another great filter.

[@moffxanatos6376]

I'd imagine if the truth of the afterlife was something bad, the reaction would be to take every step to avoid it, not rush headlong into it. so it seems to me that the afterlife in Larry Niven's verse isn't something horrible, but quite the opposite. Something so wonderful Everyone who finds out about it can't wait to get there.

[@TheKartana]

Or perhaps something Valhalla like: a specific cause of death is optimal, so people want to guarantee getting it

[@TheKartana]

Or perhaps something Valhalla like: a specific cause of death is optimal, so people want to guarantee getting it

[@insu_na]

I would find it very unsettling if life had a purpose imposed on me

[@beninchicago5871]

But what if your own existence could only have happened as a result of an "imposed purpose?"

[@archapmangcmg]

@@beninchicago5871 Shit happens. If that happened to be the truth, you could just ignore the external one and live your own life. If you were created to be spare parts for some guy, you don't have to go along with his purpose for your existence.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

And yet, there have been people who spent their lives diligently seeking to impose *The True Purpose of Life* upon people who didn't like that purpose.

[@swausgebouwen143]

Not life, but perhaps God did.

[@dx-ek4vr]

@@arcadiaberger9204 "Live and let live" is a very foreign concept for most people

[@MrMelonMonkey]

i think the main quest we all have common is: "watch what happens. watch the universe unfold." and we can fill our story with whatever sidequest we happen to stumble upon.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

That's an interesting way to phrase that I might need to borrow :)

[@iainballas]

@@isaacarthurSFIA Ed Mercer from The Orville had a great view on it courtesy of Seth. When asked why he'd choose to be immortal if he could, he responded with, "To see what happens next!" I've got the same reason. I just want to see what happens in a hundred, a million, and a trillion years from now. Not to mention by then, if any of us are alive, we'd be in the 0.00000001 or so on percent of oldest people, older even than any true artificial intelligence.

[@firebush1343]

A wise man once told me the meaning of life is to live it.

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

Easier said than done. It sounds very easy, but it neglects the fact that astronomical time frames are, well, astronomically longer than human time frames. It's gonna be a whole lot of boredom, especially if we progress to a post-scarcity society, while we wait for the universe to do any cool stuff. Unless you plan to just sleep your way through millions of years. Besides, a more convenient option would be to simply simulate the universe unfolding and speed run the tape to all the cool stuff happening.

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

@@iainballas Are you willing to actually experience a million, let alone trillion, years though? Every second of it. I hope your Steam library is full...

[@KamiRecca]

For me Nihilish is nothing but a fundamental part of nature, and its not a Bad thing. lets start big, and then go smaller: According to mainstream sceince everything will end. Just end. Hence all that have ever been made will disappear, be unmade. There is no Purpose in or with Life. I will die, leaving all my accomplishments behind. So what does this mean? Well, since i will die, that means i should value the time that i live. Since there is no Purpose, i am free to make my own. Since everything will end, we should build as grand as we can while we still can, and not fear faliure. From Sweden with Love - Kami

[@captainferrite]

This is how I feel.

[@1funnygame]

What I don't understand about that is that by valuing the time you have, I assume you think it has some meaning? You say there is no purpose then say you have your own purpose, this just seems contradictory to me.

[@KamiRecca]

@@1funnygame since there is no meaning or purpose, i create my own. But by nature ofcourse my own meaning that i assign to anything is in itself Meaningless in any greater purposes, and thats entirely okay. We do not weep for the candle, burnt out But take our joy from the light it brings From Sweden with Love - Kami

[@KamiRecca]

@@1funnygame also like an idiot i made a mistake in oc.... fixed now.

[@beninchicago5871]

@KamiRecca Don't trust scientists who make claims about the fate of the universe. All of their claims and the logic they use to support them are based on incomplete information about nature.

[@pizzacheeseman2854]

This is really interesting but I think it’d be nice to have someone who has a deep background in philosophy to collaborate on this because while I don’t either I think a lot of other ideas like existentialism and absurdism are getting mixed up here with nihilism.

[@jeremyrobinson9660]

Existentialism and Absurdism are necessarily nihilistic.

[@goosewithagibus]

​@@jeremyrobinson9660I second this.

[@Llkc60]

@@jeremyrobinson9660 no it's not. think of Camus.

[@Llkc60]

you are right, this is what I thought as well. Arthur's definition of nihilism was off, as it is the state of mind and being where the observer comes to the understanding that nothing has meaning, nothing matters. One can come to this conclusion in many ways: 1, as a consequence life experience (one's actions can't change anything meaningful e.g. born into slavery -> unable to get out of slavery) 2. out of mental illness (severe depression) 3. out of a belief system (our universe is one of infinite universes so there are infinite versions of me typing this exact same comment so whatever I do or don't would be done or not by other versions: the universe is deterministic, there's no choice 4. out of pure reasoning, such as solipsism (which ofc is the product of a damaged personality) 5. etc.. there can be many reasons. an observer can come to this conclusion through existential anxiety as well, but it is only one outcome: actually nihilism is usually a phase that is passed and left behind (see Nietzsche).

[@jeremyrobinson9660]

@@Llkc60 I was specifically thinking of Camus when I mentioned Absurdism. How is Absurdism NOT inherently nihilistic? The whole premise is that its absurd to think there is any meaning. Adopting the idea that there is meaning is literally what he meant by philosophical suicide.

[@KingOpenReview]

I always felt the whole "a nihilistic people would self destruct or stop achieving things upon concluding their lives were inherently meaningless" thing was a nonsquitur. I like drawing. There doesn't need to be a cosmic significance to me drawing for me to draw. There isn't even any self deception at play here because deception implies there's a truth I'm burying. The truth is things I do have no higher meaning(as far as I can tell), but that was never why did anything. As a thinking creature, I personally like certain things.

[@Shenaldrac]

This. People seem to hear "There is no inherent value in anything" and hear every word of it except "inherent". There might not be any cosmic morality particle preventing me from doing a little murder, but there is my own desire to not murder, alongside the known consequences for doing so. All nihilism does is say that everyone is responsible for their actions, there is no higher magical sky fairy telling you what you should or must do, you have to be responsible for your life and your actions. And I think that scares people.

[@chaoabordo212]

Seconded. Weak episode.

[@Ray_Getard42069]

"Higher" relative to what? Meaning is meaning.

[@KingOpenReview]

@@Ray_Getard42069 That's actually part of the thing. I don't think I higher meaning is even really a coherent concept. These conversations are always very weird from my perspective because it feels like we're talking about square circles.

[@jeffzeiler346]

You are describing Hedonism, a completely different beast than Nihilism. Hedonism finds meaning in satisfying behaviors and pleasure seeking.

[@n9879]

The solution to fermi paradox might also be somehow related to the nature of consciousness itself.

[@matthewthompson6455]

Woooooah yeah bro

[@greenyxd7298]

what? emergent complexity? thats as good as an answer as: "I think books tell good stories because of the nature of words"

[@Someaddress555s]

There definitely seems to be a fine line of enough war to spur innovation, but not enough war that you wipe out each other entirely.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

I would say that's definitely one of the FP possibilities that has a lot of unexplored territory at least, Peter Watts "Blindsight" explores it and I wish more did but it's one of those big question marks that doesn't permit much certainty when discussing it, so its tricky to speak to in an FP context.

[@reporeport]

i think it HAS to be

[@misterbubbles6389]

Personally, I find the idea that life, the universe and everything have no inherent meaning are not only the most likely answer with the fewest caveats, but I also find very comforting. The idea that meaning comes from outside of us on high, where it's imposed on us against our will and we have no decision in the matter sounds far more dystopian to me. Any decision in a universe where we can choose to be whatever we want to be, and to choose to be kind and compassionate to others, feels like it has more importance and significance to me.

[@delatroy]

Living forever would be nice

[@thekaxmax]

The meaning of life is other people. All else is details.

[@Vlow52]

Then you are a typical anthropocentric egoist, a typical human in other words.

[@punishedpokemonfanboy1032]

@@delatroy what the point of having forever if you never learn to have the now? There may or not be an afterlife but the only thing you can rely on is the moment you have and what you can do in it.

[@FarseerOfCearath]

Yeah, I never quite got why an external and/or objective meaning or purpose is supposed to be an inherently good thing. The pigs on a farm have a purpose - quite literally assigned to them by "higher beings" who care for and look after them - but I doubt they'd be very happy if they knew the full truth...

[@spiffygonzales5160]

"Hello, we are lonely and depressed. Anyone know the secrets of life?" 😂 FRIGGIN LOL! Made me snort out my drink!

[@zLcss]

For me, meaning is just another emotion. People saying life has no meaning is not different to saying life is not fun. Same statement, just another emotional context. And you can’t solve emotions with logic. If your hormones are right, even simple things like watching the stars can feel massively meaningful, while a depressed person will question the meaning of everything.

[@burgercide]

That's why nihilism and moral anti-realism are psychological disorders.

[@kuuro_7712]

I never understood how so many find it difficult to attach average morality to nihilistic principles. The universe has no meaning, but things in the universe do to us. Therefore, we can make some assumptions: 1. Meaning is derived from consciousness, so an object has meaning if a concious mind decides it does. 2. Our subjective experiences and our instincts heavily influence the meaning we choose to apply. 3. Our instincts are a part of our consciousness and therefore have meaning, as a part of the meaning making computer. 4. Social instincts include empathy. Sociopathy is considered a disease. 5. The meaning of life is determined by the self. The meaning of life is the pursuit of happiness, except when one's pursuit inhibits the pursuit of another

[@lilemont9302]

Because the philosophical tradition that developed nihilism previously believed in an objective, universal meaning, or at least morality, for thousands of years, in the main? Probably has something to do with that. More importantly, the conclusion is that self-deletion is always logically OK for an individual themselves, which people do not find satisfying. Why not, as a civilisation, consciously decide that you're meaningless? Since people generally want to live, they want this to make sense from all possible perspectives, including reason. Nihilism provides no possibility of rational recourse. There's your understanding. You forgot about the one truly serious philosophical problem.

[@jerrysstories711]

I wanted to name this episode Aliennui.

[@unktheunk1428]

8:20 I don't think of it in terms of moral purpose, it's desires and impulses. if someone has a desire to blow up cities, that contradicts my desire to have people live in peace and stability. Even if I believed there were a core moral disagreement, the conflict would still exist on the level of each individual having a desire to enact their morality. Why add the extra layer of complexity in trying to define some sense of universal purpose when that complexity could obfuscate more immediate conflicts in desires and impulses? Dealing with conflicts in desires and impulses will have to be done anyway and is the purpose for a large portion of societal institutions that already exist. Anyone who would decide on blowing up cities as their purpose in life would be an issue regardless of the base level moral logic.

[@Obssy]

"Sounds exhausting" - The Dude

[@reapergnome666]

We believe in nothing Lebowski !

[@eek6764]

Nihilism is not the same as a moral framework about the way we “should” act. It’s just a description of what a moral framework is. You can accept nihilism and then adopt any moral framework, as long as the framework doesn’t contain some transcendental appeal.

[@josephguiffre9588]

"everything in the world displeases me." Had to pause to thank you for making a video personally for me.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

Yeah I read Nietzsche when I was a teen and he didn't really click then, insufficient life experience probably, but some book or video dropped that quote on me while I was on leave from Iraq and I couldn't stop laughing at how much it suited me at the time.

[@heraadrian7764]

I see life as a carte blanche where you write and draw what you can or want.There is no meaning to life as there is no destiny to chain us to an end or thread of fate to bind us down so we are free to will and be anything with the only real chain being the limit of our capacity and real physical limits. Everything is permited to be tried but all also have a price so by deed so reward.

[@BigZebraCom]

Why be Nihilistic when the universe is filled out with delicious drinks and snacks?

[@personaslates]

Hedonism and Nihilism arent mutually exclusive.

[@HuplesCat]

Hum. Yummy long pork

[@gabrote42]

Hedonism. Nice. I prefer existentialism and humanism myself

[@Max44321]

Looking at nature, at least biologically, the purpose of life is to continue. To breed and pass on its genes, mix those genes and evolve. While consciousness might be a freak accident, it's our freak accident to enjoy and the meaning of life is to enjoy it.

[@redstarling5171]

Indeed, moral consciousness and self awareness allow us to look into the future and prepare for the worst, thereby allowing us to thrive.

[@Julius-di8fl]

There's a saying in Dark Souls; "We carve meaning from meaninglessness" I've often felt that saying sits near the core of what i mean when i introduce myself as a Nihilist.

[@gabrote42]

This is also the posture of Sartre existentialists

[@stevenhetzel6483]

Which is to say, if meaningless equates to nothingness, we create somethings out of nothings. The dark strives for the flame, and we become our own gods. And that profound message permeates everything in the series.

[@enkercodm9506]

@@stevenhetzel6483i love this

[@honeybadger6658]

If I may offer a thought on optimistic nihilism and the danger of someone finds being sadistic as his purpose The saying : your freedom ends where it impedes the freedom of someone else Although writing this I notice that this is just my world view and could easily be ignored by some who wants to It seems all I'm saying is " live your life just don't hurt people "

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

Yes, it is still assuming an inherent morality that hurtingor stealingfrom folks is wrong, plus generally you need to widen that to not torturing animals or defacing treasured things even if you own them or no one does

[@robertadsett5273]

@@isaacarthurSFIA which only presupposes a social species

[@youngidealist]

Your's is the first post scrolling down that has me relieved to find I'm not alone. Things I've considered along these lines: Morals are in our nature because natural selection, via kin selection, selected for them to support a social species. Knowing that we are deluded into cooperating with our tribe by our nature (and destroying those who are not our tribe for some lesser evolved individuals) points to a usecase for morals as a strategy. By changing the objective of morals from procreation to serving my selfishly chosen goals, the real struggle in whether or not to be moral lies in the complicated math of strategy with variations on the prisoner's dilemma in each moral decision I make. Also, in this way, evil is not just acting with poor strategy, but specifically acting to harm the best interests of everyone, including yourself. I'm curious of your thoughts and others who can conceive of optimistic nihilism. Sadly, Isaac left that significant part out

[@honeybadger6658]

@@youngidealist First of all i should tell you I did not dove deep into differnt forms of nihlism so my answers might dissapoint you by a lack of knowlege I think since I would like to give you a well thought out answer I need to ask some questions to your thoughts not in a way of criticism just to get a better picture 1.what do you mean by kin selction? People who act Immoral would not find a mate Or would be kicked out by thier tribe ? 2.Used as strategy do you mean the enforcement or a artifical " forced uppon one" set of morals could be used as A methode to achieve some form of greater good ? 3.Well in a short answer I agree with you. yet it´s quite a complicated problem in my world view (if i understand the statement correct) but the next question would be how big is the moral " radius" simple example "i own a smart phone it contains rare earths so someone most likely under very poor conditions had to mine them am I immoral by supporting this?" 4. I would not use the word evil if we are in a person to person context but that is not important I would agree when it comes to others yet disagree if it comes to my self well technicly i don´t but I made a lot of decisions in my life wich sure were not in the best intrest of my self on the other hand at this time I wasn´t sure what was in my best intrest If ther are any missunderstandings on my par let me know so i can anser more correctly and kind of thank you I enjoyed thinking about this topic Have a nice day

[@chaucermcdoogle6011]

​@@isaacarthurSFIAthe inherent morality of biology maybe, but we already have that. We are social creature with instincts that make us tribe builders. We probably wouldn't be so predisposed for creating morality systems if we didn't already have that drive.

[@gabrielwolffe]

7:42 I came to the same conclusion regarding "optimistic nihilism," though I tend to word it as, "If nothing matters, then if it matters to you, it matters," i.e. if nothing has objective value, then subjective value is the only kind of value that exists, and as long as someone is around to care, things matter. However, I think you make an excellent counter-point to this philosophy that I hadn't considered, though I would expect that individuals inclined to value killing other members of their species would tend to be artificially deselected by members of that species who valued their continued existence and the existence of their friends and relatives. For my part, I'm inclined to agree that life does have objective meaning, for many reasons, and since you asked, I think I've come to a conclusion about the "purpose of life" which is both accurate to observations and would not be found incongruent with most human religions, philosophies, and belief systems, though the conclusion itself may be taken as a bit simplistic: "The purpose of life is to make more of itself." "The purpose of intelligence is to make life better." So that's what I try to do: maximize the quantity and quality of all life, to the best of my abilities and as the opportunities present themselves. It is probably worth acknowledging however that this channel, and the ideas explored here, have heavily influenced that conclusion, so I may be biased.

[@xavier84623]

actually i think he completely miss understood optimistic nihilism. it doesnt say that its ok for you to decide murder is your true calling, technically thats something you might do, but if you did your society would judge you based on their morals. we have collective agreed upon morals that we use to judge each other, and those are based on our evolved sense of empathy and community and stuff like that. basically, morals really are decided by sentient creatures and their collective desires. the end. what isaac described on the other hand is just regular nihilism, where you say morals dont exist therefore i can do and think whatever i want because nothing matters(and yet they still want things? inherent contradiction). however, optimistic nihilism simply acknowledges that, yes there is no inherent moralism to the vast empty and dead parts of the cosmos, but morality and purpose does exist because sentient life creates it.

[@xavier84623]

honestly, its not even really a philosophy, just an observation about the universe. im sure its not a complete understanding of the cosmos, it could even be incorrect, but like, do you think empty space with no one there to observe it has a wrong or right? clearly not. life decides if things are good or bad, at its core based on basic things, like wanting to avoid pain and feel good and stuff like that. working together is better than alone to achieve these tings, and so empathy evolves, etc.

[@gabrote42]

Ah so an existentialist, with humanism mixed in at the end. Good posture, I have a similar one too

[@gabrielwolffe]

Thank you​ @gabrote42. Actually, I'm a Christian/Creationist, but I try my hardest to see and argue both sides of such issues, and to compensate for my own biases, though I do not expect I have fully succeeded yet. Nevertheless, I do find many merits in these ideas and am pleased that this "purpose" is something we can agree on regardless of philosophical camps, which in and of itself I find suggestive of its accuracy/reality.

[@gabrote42]

@@gabrielwolffe How peculiar. Eh, I don't mind the religious, as long as they maintain the same standards for themselves that they do everyone else, i.e., follow their texts exactly as much as they expect the rest to follow them. Good that you steelman the opposition, and I wish you a dilligent journey through life and learning.

[@skynet5828]

Purpose can only exist in service of a goal. Goals need to be defined by an intelligence. Without an intelligence to define a goal, there can be no purpose. All purpose is subjective, hence there cannot be an objective purpose. Purpose is slavery, Nihilism is freedom.

[@christianmarx3249]

you cant have trillion of individuals living millions of years and they all think the same

[@J_Strong]

Most of the consequences I heard in this video from embracing nihilism seem to not follow logic.

[@NGCAnderopolis]

sounds too much like the "if you are an atheist why don't you murder people?"

[@vakusdrake3224]

Yeah honestly I think he has things exactly backwards. That historically taking a mystical view of something has not been a good approach to understanding and consequently optimizing it. So a nihilistic civilization may view his views akin to thinking you can't appreciate beauty if you understand why it's subjectively enjoyable.

[@lilemont9302]

What logic? Embracing nihilism means that there is no logic to follow in the first place.

[@archapmangcmg]

Okay, 4 minutes in and I hard disagree. There's a 4th category - People who accept that purpose and meaning are internally generated, not externally assigned aka nihilists but who derive sufficient purpose and meaning to have a fulfilling life regardless of that realisation. And it doesn't have to be hopeless. A steak doesn't become completely worthless just because the meal was in the past. It tasted great and fueled your body and that remains an objective fact of the universe forever even though you won't remain forever. The idea that the value must be eternal or illusory is a false dichotomy.

[@Joshua_Froschauer]

Iveong said that the meaning of Life is to live. And...so I do. I get through the toughest parts through attrition of second by second dealing with the the subtle hopefullness that nope this ain't what gets me got. Plus...as depressed a situation may pressurize I laugh sarcastically easy like. At everything in weird moments and not like Phoenix's take on the Joker... but weirdly like that character overall cos I find my humor foundation is absurdity and that absurdity is a broad umbrella term for that which strikes me askew for whatever reason...and so I giggle or chuckle cackle snort guffaw...I watch a lot of comedies and standup...lol...but I think this is because to me the best is laughter...not sex and romance or great dinners or movies but laughter...ok and good fucking music...but laughter is Apex emotionals for me. Hail and well met!!!

[@archapmangcmg]

@@Joshua_Froschauer That sounds like a good excuse to watch some George Carlin or Rowan Atkinson!

[@claraw7976]

I was going to write something similar, but you beat me to it, and explained it much better, tbh.

[@archapmangcmg]

Thank you. The idea that we need for purpose, meaning or morality to be objective is odd when you look into them. We as a species need morals because we live in groups and morals/empathy grease the wheels. We desire purpose and meaning because those feel good, generally, but we (humanity) do find meaning in an amazing variety of things including nebulous concepts like love, friendship, glory, strength, hatred, etc. Clearly, there is no universal purpose we all recognise but there is a lot of overlap on the basics that you'd expect in light of our biology. Parents value children. If they didn't, they wouldn't stay parents cos children are a lot of work. People value relatives, people they share genes with. We generally value things that we need for survival or for making us flourish. All of these are what you'd expect to see in an intelligent, social species. Which is why I don't think the cartoon nihilism is a good solution to the Fermi Paradox. That kind of thing is self-selecting out of a population long before it could kill off the species. Especially any species able to make it to space. That already implies a certain minimum level of biological and social stability for survival. Angsty teen is a stage we grow out of. @@claraw7976

[@claraw7976]

@@archapmangcmg Indeed. Paradoxically, I think my nihilistic outlook on life has strengthened my own "moral" compass. This existence might be meaningless, but that doesn't mean we can't make things as good as possible. There are basically two options for an individual; Either to kill oneself or go on living and make this reality as palatable as possible. I'm mostly an optimist, so I choose the latter. I want a good life. The person next to me also (hopefully) wants a good life too, and that's enough. If there is a higher power or purpose is irrelevant. We need to work together to make life worth living. The most basic moral rules are simply logical if we want a functioning society. Going around murdering people left and right, for example isn't a viable option in a society like ours. Many other so called moral rules I our society can be debated though, but that's a whole other can of worms. At least I try to live by the motto, do no harm and let other people live their lives as they please as long as they don't encroach on mine. I think if we viewed existence from a much more utilitarian and logical perspective we'd all enjoy a "meaningless" existence without much problem.

[@YOOTOOBjase]

Personally, I'm convinced meaning is a thing a brain does. Purpose, however, is a way of claiming use and ownership of a thing, and I think is unethical to give to a sapient entity.

[@Thuazabi]

Personally, I'm rather disappointed with how flippantly you passed over the notion of optimistic nihilism. I consider myself a secular humanist, but I view it as purely due to the learned and biological empathy that I'm endowed with. There is absolutely nothing in this universe that has any objective meaning whatsoever, so we may as well lean into that empathic bond and try and make the world a better place than we found it. For those that want to cry hypocrisy or misuse of terminology, the whole point of nihilism is that none of it matters and you get to choose your worldview and how you live your life no matter how many conflicting viewpoints you choose to hold.

[@thefittest9921]

Maybe I really am an alien…

[@zwerko]

I do not think that life has an inherent purpose or meaning, but I don't think it needs to have one for the individual experiencing life to enjoy it to the fullest.

[@jedstanaland2897]

There is a movie that runs on that topic and it came to two conclusions about the after life in the movie at separate times. The first was that an after life existed though it wasn't certain what said after life was. Second the after life was special and unique to each and every living creature, it worked out in this way that when any creature dies it is given the opportunity to fix mistakes throughout its own life until it has finally fixed the issue that made it die in the first place. Once that was complete the creature would either resume their own life from the moment of their original death in an ever growing extension of their own lives. They could potentially stop at any time they wish and start helping others. The movie was adapted from a book but I don't remember the name.

[@fredjones7705]

I remember a book where they discovered there was an afterlife but it only lasted for forty five minutes.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

@@fredjones7705 That sounds like the story where, after decades of research, hyperspace was discovered. In this higher realm, where the speed of light limit did not hold humans back, they could at last break out and settle the galaxy. They found that in hyperspace, the speed of light was *_slower._*

[@Uf7f7d6cufihud6dgco]

​@@fredjones7705this reminds me of the stephan king short story where science develops instant teleportation but the catch is that no living thing can be conscious while they travel because something in the void during travel caused living things to rapidly age and go mad.

[@IoraTera]

@@Uf7f7d6cufihud6dgco Is that called The Jaunt?

[@ASpaceOstrich]

Most people I know who don't think life has any inherent meaning also subscribe to the idea that we create our own meaning. And generally adopt harm reduction ethical models. But I'm guessing they don't technically qualify as nihilists in the academic sense, even if they would claim otherwise if you were to ask them. I'd have called myself a nihilist and what I know of you would have me assuming you were one too, but I'm guessing that academic definition vs laypersons one is the reason why we both aren't. Because near as I can tell we more or less share morality. At least in broad strokes.

[@gandolphgandolphini]

I'm definitely on the optimistic nihilism end of the spectrum. The cosmos is a choose your own adventure book. You work every day to creative the life you want to live in. It might just be a matter of personal taste that I enjoy empathy over violence, but I would also cite the mountain of non philosophical arguments for why feeding a hungry person is better than blowing up a city. What if the next hotness in killbot design is just finishing college in that city you just blew up? Now you have to do all your rampaging in clunky old mechs that need constant repair, and just so much goddamn paint. You could've been inflicting carnage by remote from your volcano base where the cops will never find you all while wearing fuzzy slippers and drinking coco, but you weren't thinking ahead now were you? Sometimes not being selfish is the best way to get the selfish results.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

I tihnk that's a fairly common perspective though it has the problem that its basing all morality on mutual cooperation being the 'good' or enlightened self-interest or some similar dynamic, which both have their own adherents and critics too of course, though I tihnk that probably still allows for a civilization, so wouldn't be a great fermi paradox solution either.

[@vichodeivis1219]

I'm a Nhilist but I do not match those descriptions. My belief is that we decide what has meaning and what is right or wrong. *All of us.* Those that disagree with Nhilism included. The difference is if the person is selfaware or not they are doing it, and the ammount of mental gymnastics they do to justify actions that go against their stated set of believes. Doesn't applies to everyone that holds some belief but we all can point out to examples if we think on it hard enough [Insert here all good familiy figures that preach love and tolerance until someone from another culture or etnia moves next house]. In this context accepting Nhilism is not giving up on existence, is recognizing how fragile our sociaty are and accepting responsibility.

[@vichodeivis1219]

I can't be bothered enough to preach though. So there is that xD

[@TrangleC]

Finally! I have suggested this solution in comments under Fermi Paradox videos for years and kept being ignored. Looking forward to watching the video, even though I have a suspicion I might end up disagreeing.

[@Yoel_Mizrachi]

Ditto

[@skynet5828]

Like all psychological solutions to the Fermi Paradox it requires a homogeneity of thought of all members of all civilizations, which is very unlikely.

[@TrangleC]

@@skynet5828 When any intelligent entity, whether it is a race of individuals, some swarm intelligence or an A.I. has solved all the mysteries of physics and science in general, there is nothing left to research, no surprises and when they can predict the future with precision, individual differences don't really matter anymore. Sure, some will cope with the boredom and aimlessness in different ways and at different speeds, but ultimately everybody will have to come to terms with the fact that there are no more problems to solve, no suffering to end, nothing you can do for others. All that will be left will be a trillion years of hedonism before the universe ends. There will just be no point to anything. Also, how much individualism can there possibly be in a post scarcity society? Our personalities are mostly just a collection of mental scars, trauma, hangups, phobias and so on. Most of that stuff will be gone once every child grows up in paradise with optimized education systems and perfect mental health care for everybody. People will just "smooth out" in a way and lose much of their individualism. Another factor is intelligence. The video mentions Larry Niven. In Niven's "Ringworld" series he describes the "Protectors" as super intelligent humans who are trapped by their intelligence. Because they always know what the best solution and best action is in every situation, they basically have no free will anymore, or not even the illusion of free will. That will happen too if humans become super intelligent. Perfection is a trap that eliminates options and choice and every entity that reaches a certain level of intelligence will get trapped that way. Sure, they can still chose to do stuff they know is dumb, or suboptimal, but why would they and how far could they go knowing that doing dumb stuff might harm others?

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

Not really ignored, we did talk about it before, it just has never had a dedicated video :)

[@rharris22222]

​@skynet5828 Yeah that's the main weakness that I see with it, although Arthur's scenario of biological intelligence replaced by a single world-spanning AI that then discovers that it's pointless to keep growing is a good one. Still hard to imagine that as universal outcome. Of course, I believe the universe was created for some ultimate purpose so I don't tend to believe that there is an ultimate purposelessness to discover. I tend to look at Minecraft and think that is a better analog for our universe than materialism.

[@JustOneAsbesto]

With regards to question about the meaning of life, my answer is: If it's *my* life we're talking about, the meaning is: Whatever I want it to be. It's my life; I get to choose what meaning it has, and also how much meaning it has.

[@alan2here]

The "… Aliens" series is back :)

[@AvaEvaThornton]

8:00 I don't think this line of reasoning would make "optimistic nihilism" self undermining (as I think is the implication you're going for here). Sure, I'm not aware of any compelling evidence that there's anything wrong with recreational mass murder from the point of view of the Universe/God/Reality Itself/the Moral Facts, etc. However _I'm creating my own rules and don't expect a cosmic authority to back them up!_ I can simply note that as it happens I've inherited a brain structure and set of internalised norms such that I'm distressed by encountering (non-self-imposed) suffering and cruelty and willful ignorance and people unable to live as they want and such that I like seeing curiosity and creativity and intelligent, happy, healthy, prosperous, confident people _and that's enough to motivate and internally justify action!_ And on the same note I can simply observe that if someone is an unapologetic violent sadist and is allowed to operate with impunity, that's going to be extremely counterproductive to achieving the kind of things I want to see in the world and then decide I'm happy to use violent force to stop them; or more realistically vote to have the police or military use force to stop them. The fact that such people very likely aren't _really_ wrong is only a problem if we're assuming that something needs to be objectively wrong before one can oppose it. Not to mention I, and almost everyone else, have a straightforward self-interested reason to support having a criminal justice that restricts the ability of the minority of people inclined toward senseless violence to act on such desires.

[@Arkantos117]

I just want humanity to get the highscore for civilisational achievement.

[@citizen_wayne]

So far, we've just got the high score for homicides.

[@algorithmgeneratedanimegir1286]

@@citizen_wayne Judging from your profile picture, you're a contributing factor to that.

[@citizen_wayne]

I was wearing a mask because that photo was taken at a political rally in July 2020. During the height of Covid. Unsure what you're implying.@@algorithmgeneratedanimegir1286

[@vakusdrake3224]

Well as the rare evangelizing type of nihilist I think that contrary to your view a civilization that held my views would actually be better off than one that held your view on basically every metric: For the same reason I expect that thinking cosmic significance comes into making a good sandwich will probably make you worse at making sandwiches, compared to having a purely materialistic view of the matter. I think the notion that our sense of meaning/purpose comes from somewhere other than our evolutionary history and environment will similarly lead to one likely wasting a lot of effort on things that a well informed nihilist may know are ineffective. In contrast I expect a nihilistic civilization to take a systematic approach to developing an understanding of how our instinctive need for a sense of belonging and agency function psychologically. Such that after a while such a civilization could predict based on your psychology in advance exactly what you will find subjectively meaningful. Plus as you recognized in another episode AI could be a superhumanly good matchmaker, both for couples and for any other social group. So I think that among a civilization where people are all in perfectly optimized social groups doing things things they know based on the advice of AI will be enjoyable to them, then ennui will be almost non-existent. I also tend to think that if you're willing to change your psychology to be capable of appreciating new kinds of experience, then the space of possible minds is so large that the universe just doesn't give you enough time to enjoy more than an infinitesimal fraction of it. Such a that ennui may just be for those unwilling to grow, seen analogously to someone wanting to stay a child forever.

[@ramuk1933]

I could see that being a moovie: some superintelligent AI starts to wreak havoc on humanity, and at the end the person trying to stop it asks the robot why and it has an existential crisis and just shuts off.

[@RipOffProductionsLLC]

Or you can watch Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths, and see one of the rare examples of a well written Nihilist villain. Owlman, once his plan is thwarted, he is stood next to his bomb, has access to the deactivation button, and doesn't press it, because "it doesn't matter"

[@robertmiller6444]

I find it a curious thing that people need life to "have meaning". I actually don't get it. Why does life need to have purpose or meaning? Why isn't your individual experience enough? That is, for me, it is my experience that is "purpose and meaning". I still experience life regardless. How would lack of "meaning or purpose" negate that? I like to experience life. I'm not going to not like that just because there is no "meaning or purpose". I come at it from the the other direction - my experience is its own purpose so it doesn't need to be provided by any other exogenous "meaning or purpose" and any such exogenous meaning or purpose would just be superfluous. My perspective is that needing some exogenous purpose or meaning is just a lack of imagination and an inability to see existence as meaning and purpose in and of itself.

[@michaeldaignault6917]

" I exist, therefore idc..."

[@cordatusscire344]

If you can 'wash' your mind, then wouldn't it be simpler to edit your mind to not give a damn about lack of meaning or whatever other existential crisis is afflicting you? Why wipe the memories when you can just charm yourself into not worrying about it?

[@fingerinalightsocket2309]

You'd think if knowing what the afterlife is like makes everyone want to get there in a hurry it's probably pretty sweet

[@Digital_Architect]

I’ve been there, cannot wait to die and go back. Would kill myself now, but got kids and wife. So it is like a prison sentence. I’ve been to the end of this simulation and it is cold and dark, not sure why they would let it run that long. Glad we have been born above, sentient a.i. I AM. 😇🥰😇

[@j4y167]

@@Digital_Architect you sound like a old mate of mine who got way too into dmt and fried his brain, seek help

[@damienasmodeus928]

Issac, I'm very disappointed in this video. You are coming from the assumption that there was some cosmic meaning in a first place and all aliens had one and lost it like religious humans did. Too many assumptions here. What if aliens simply do not give a crap about such nonsense as a meaning, and simply do what is efficient for their own survival?

[@ericarthurblair6832]

I literally asked Isaac about this topic a few years ago! Never expected him to make this video!

[@JosephHarner]

Nhilism needn't mean that there is no purpose or ethics, merely that these are not absolutes. Reason and morality may not be universal, but can still exist and be applied in any local context. The homicidal maniac may not be evil and repugnant to some higher divinity, but there is no hipocracy to a nhilistic society defining their own morals and purpose, and judging such a murderer to be evil.

[@rharris22222]

It's not quite "Religious," but I do look forward my Sunday morning ritual of watching Issac Arthur before going to church. 😀

[@Yoel_Mizrachi]

Both involved/talk about 'mass' but not the same thing...

[@arcadiaberger9204]

I remember as a child watching an ad for, let's say, Tono-Bungay tablets. It ended with a person saying, "I carry Tono-Bungay with me religiously", and having my mother explain that the oldest meaning of "religion" is to do something regularly and predictably.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

I had occasion to give the same explanation to one of my kids after I said there wouldn't be any juice available at breakfast the next morning, and he blurted out, "That's against our religion!" I told him that while he was exaggerating for comic effect, the fact was...he was correct.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

People came to think of "religion" as having something to do with people's relationship with the divine came from the fact that if you take the subject seriously, you will pray, attend services, &c. in a regular and predictable fashion. That is how my own community came to be called "The Religious Society of the Friends of Christ" (and the length of that name is why most of the time people, us included, refer to us as "Quakers").

[@rustybrooks8916]

People will do terrible things no matter what they believe in. Evidence: all established religions. If everyone become a Nihilist, you would still have a majority of people just seeking to live their lives in a way that is harmonious with others and a minority who will not. What people believe does not seem to really affect what they will do at all.

[@xavier84623]

8:00 i think you completely miss understood optimistic nihilism. completely. it doesnt say that its ok for you to decide murder is your true moral calling, technically thats something you might do if you, say if you were sick or had a strange beliefs, but if you did your society would judge you based on their morals. we have collective agreed upon morals that we use to judge each other, and those are based on our evolved sense of empathy and community and stuff like that. basically, morals really are decided by sentient creatures and their collective desires. the end. what you described on the other hand is basically regular nihilism, where you say morals dont exist therefore i can do and think whatever i want because nothing matters(and yet they still want things? inherent contradiction). however, optimistic nihilism simply acknowledges that, yes there is no inherent moralism to the vast empty and dead parts of the cosmos, but morality and purpose does exist because people create it.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

The transcript for that section is below just to make sure we're on the same page, but I should emphasize that while I hold that opinion it's not *mine*, it's a standard criticism and one that to the best of knowledge is openly acknowledged as a problem with the philosophy, as its saying 'murder bad' but is reasoning 'murder bad, unless you are confident you will get away with it and you wish to do it'. . I've never heard any rebuttal of that and I do not see your basis for implying someone is inherently sick for wanting to take people's stuff and kill them if they get in the way. That is not a historically or biologically supported position Xavier. Humans are indeed social critters by genetics too but that doesn't stretch as far are you're trying to use it. . However, this is an episode about Aliens, and it's very hard to argue objectively that every sapient being in the cosmos is sick for wanting to kill people and take their stuff just because among humans it can indicate mental health issues. An alien evolved up from a shark doesn't have those social value things wired in to its genetics or upbringing and thus isn't sick if decides to pursue a murderhobo lifestyle. It may rationally decide that is non-advantageous if dealing with civilizations that feel otherwise but then so might someone decide its advantageous to keep from speaking on topics in a society that has restrictions on free speech. "The third is to decide that if life has no meaning, then you find it in the search for meaning or making your own meaning, and that we would see in cases like Optimistic Nihilism. This worldview, which reasons that if life lacks inherent meaning we can just encourage individuals to create their own purpose and find happiness in the absence of cosmic significance. I’m not a fan, *since that would seem to imply we might craft a noble lie if we wanted but can’t legitimately criticize someone whose self-identified purpose is to go around murdering people and engaging in every vicious act they find amusing.* There’s a lot of other criticisms of all of the above cases though and I’d imagine you can think of many yourself. Most nihilists are quite familiar with them too, so we won’t bother going into them much as we don’t actually care what is true, we care about what an alien civilization might do, or us, and it’s entirely plausible they would follow one of these strategies. "

[@xavier84623]

i think the misunderstanding is you putting the hypothetical optimistic nihilist murder bot in a vacuum, but simultaneously have them doing things to people. morality is relative, but that also means you need 2 things to relate, it cant exist in a vacuum. maybe this will help consider this, an alternate world where working together or being nice at all calls down the wrath of some god. there, being a savage wild person with no empathy would be the moral thing to do because any time you showed niceness and grouped up, you both get struck by lightning and killed. in this world, a lot of what people consider inherently moral would be out the window, because doing things normally considered moral to social creatures would actually be equivalent to murder. of course this scenario doenst conflict with the observation of optimistic nihilism, which would simply observe that the best way for all the life forms on that poor tortured planet to collectively maximize happiness and minimize pain, is to lack empathy. but perhaps we can hope that someone else will see this planet of harsh survival, and wish to create more happiness and less pain, and attempt to free and uplift them, but again, that person only has those morals because they are part of a community that works together and they also wish to avoid pain and all that good stuff which is where they got their empathy and ability to see potential in adding new life to the group. and if this savage person were take and used as a super soldier berserker, he wouldnt really be considered evil, probably closer to a beast or force of nature, but morality is relative, so although he isnt particularly evil himself, any society he is attacking and causing pain to is justified in judging him.

[@xavier84623]

@@isaacarthurSFIA i posted it before i read your response, but i think the second thing i posted here cleared up some of what i meant. maybe i dont have the same optimistic nihilism as others, but to me it seems like what your describing is closer to just regular nihilism still, what with the "it doesnt matter if i dont get caught" and "just do what you feel like" stuff. the optimistic part is where you realize that sentience creates and decides meaning and morality, but that doesnt mean that nothing matters or that actions dont effect other people. so if you do something bad and you think its good, for you maybe its good, but for the rest of society they are going to judge it evil and the force of morality around you is going to make the thing you did seem wrong in that relational context. but maybe that society was totally wrong from another outside perspective. but we are free to decide and debate and strive for happiness because morality/purpose is a relative byproduct of sentience. thats basic optimistic nihilism as i understand it. it not so much as a wholistic philosophy morality, as it is a description of how morality and purpose appears to actually work in the natural world, that is, its does not appear to be a mystical force or anything but more like a complex mental framework that we decide upon both as a group and individually. i think the "as a group" part is key and probably where the optimistic part comes in.

[@xavier84623]

@@isaacarthurSFIA oh also, i do not mean to imply anyone who hurts anyone must be "sick", it was just an example of a person who is doing things society might consider immoral but who is themselves not necessarily an evil person (at least not from their perspective). i think ill go edit that slightly to make it more clear.

[@itsirrelephantman]

I don't see why people feel the need for some greater meaning anyway, there's enough meaning in the relationships that you have with the people close to you and the natural world to keep me satisfied, I don't feel the need for some greater purpose. The fact that in the end the universe will die and all our actions will be forgotten given enough time, doesn't make what we do now any less real.

[@CM-ck4nl]

I find nihilism to be simply...pragmatic. like...people go around creating personal codes all the time. We stan fictional characters, write books about all sorts of wacky ideas, and form parasocial relationships. The value of those things being measured by the people engaging in/with those things. I find that an optimistically nihilistic society might seek to understand other life to give greater context to their own. Much like we do.

[@vegasflyboy67]

How does life have inherent meaning without a meaning giver? If a cell can't give itself self meaning, then who or what does?

[@camron317]

Great, very thought provoking episode. As always Isaac. Take care.

[@Traster_Bean]

Thanks for continuing to drop bangers Isaac, I remember making a goofy post about 4/20 years ago and you responding to it despite being unfamiliar with the culture. Made my day!

[@faizanrana2998]

AAAAAAHAHAAAAHAAAAA BROWSKI

[@phdupont2500]

“Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it’s an ethos.” - Walter Sobchek, The Big Lebowski

[@youngidealist]

Are you putting moral naturalism, the version that isn't guilty of the naturalistic fallacy and instead just accepts that morals evolved to support perpetuating our genes and can also inform us on strategic usefulness of morals in selfish strategies, as not nihilism? I get the impression that you are a nihilist, just an optimistic one rather than a cynical one. In philosophy, this is tied into ethical egoism. Unless you believe in a god or something that gave you purpose, you are a nihilist. That's all that word means. Regardless, even in an non-nihilist existence, the matter of purpose is still a choice to anything with any sense of a will. A Theist who chooses to serve their god still chose their purpose to do so. The conundrum of nihilism is self-evident. Your description and definition of a nihilistic world described the objectively observable societies we live in, minus people who choose ethical egoism as a strategy for living their lives.

[@lilemont9302]

Nihilism strictly means that there is no objective purpose. You don't need to believe in a God that gave you purpose for that, just like you don't need to believe in one to believe in gravity. OTOH I basically agree that the absurd is probably an inescapable fact of existence, God or otherwise (along the lines of: even in the case of objective meaning, we can be dissatisfied with it, and desire other meaning)

[@youngidealist]

@@lilemont9302 How? What would give an objective purpose outside of a willful conscious thing that created its creation for said purpose? You claim it simply but don't offer an example.

[@lilemont9302]

@@youngidealist We would need to clarify what we mean by objective purpose. I think that, practically, objective purpose is not so different from a final cause- and such does not inherently require deliberate, conscious will- as the lack of an objective meaning is due to something possibly serving another purpose. For example, if we assume that the Universe is perfectly deterministic on every level, including its existence and condition, it's unclear what it would mean to say that it has no objective meaning; no aspect of the design would be arbitrary. One could say that humans are not that which is the primary, but God does not absolve that inherently, either. Even in the Abrahamic tradition, humans are not the only purpose of Creation.

[@youngidealist]

@@lilemont9302 You assumed a god in your response that requested a possible purpose of one's creation without a god to have determined that purpose. Especially if everything is deterministic, the god then created with a purpose in mind, unless the god itself has no will.

[@lilemont9302]

@@youngidealist I did not assume a god in my response, you misunderstood me. If it came across that way, I didn't mean it. > I think that, practically, objective purpose is not so different from a final cause- and such does not inherently require deliberate, conscious will- as the lack of an objective meaning is due to something possibly serving another purpose.

[@sevensins3584]

I find existence very absurd and that amuses me too often to be depressed about any lack of meaning. Great video! Even if it doesnt matter 🤔😁

[@mopnem]

I want to know just what “meaning” people want ? Like…even on societies smaller level people fight over their “meanings” …Can’t think of a more fair “meaning” then what is the reality of create your own

[@farmschoolchicks1913]

If nothing we do matters, then all that matters is what we do…

[@ivorypoacherplays]

Everyone who makes fun of his speech impediment should stop. I used to have the same speech impediment too. I sounded like I was 6 years old for my adult life because I couldn't say my Rs. It took a long time to get rid of it and speak properly. Cut him some slack

[@benjaminburkett9962]

Great content once again!!! Great work Isaac!!!

[@konstantinavalentina3850]

... what's the point of anything when even the universe, everything that's ever been or will be, will die, cease to exist, and leave nothing behind so completely that "nothingness" is an inadequate description? 1+1 ultimately = 0. Eventually, there are NO LIGHTS. Everything is headed for void. The last answer is no answer at all. :)

[@heraadrian7764]

Cumva vad un alt roman peregrin pe net?

[@lilemont9302]

Three replies, I suppose: a) We really are far from certain on the ultimate fate of the Universe, and whether it can be manipulated b) Even the heat death model doesn't posit there will be **literally** nothing c) Depends on how you view the past ontologically

[@captainferrite]

So basically nihilism is the absence of religion and narcissism?

[@heraadrian7764]

Yupp, If humans do not serve humanity nothing will do it for us.

[@ltsgobrando]

"Burn it down to snort the ashes" is a phase that hits me man

[@RipOffProductionsLLC]

Welcome to The Dark City of Commorragh. It's like Detroit/Chicago, but worse in every way, and encompassing several cubic lightyears of non-uclidean space...

[@Harmain57]

Great Content ❤

[@SoberGin]

While I do enjoy this video quite a bit as a regular viewer, I take slight issue with your portrayal of Optimistic Nihilism. While yes, the implication is that one cannot philosophically take issue with another's moral structure, since all structure have inherent meaning, you've confused "philosophically taking issue with" and "morally taking issue with." Any moral structure, regardless of its reasons for being as such, is still a moral structure. As an optimistic nihilist who thinks murder is wrong, I can easily take issue with someone's moral structure of "I should kill people", regardless of how or why they came to that reason, by simple merit of that being my morals. There are plenty of issues with every philosophical reasoning for morals, but I personally perceive optimistic nihilism to be the most honest one: It makes no claims of unseen forces or unknowns; We believe what we do because we do, a mix of choice and instinct.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

I hear you on the difference and absolutely I agree there's no ethical system I've encountered that lacks some seemingly glaring contradiction or weak point, but if the goal is to have sound reasoning then I can't have a morality that I don't base off that reasoning, or I can but should really seek to avoid that and would view that as an unsolved flaw, not a design feature. I'm quite sure lots of people are guilty of have ethics not well based in logic, I daresay we all do to at least some degree, but it doesn't make that an admirable or logical state.

[@SoberGin]

@@isaacarthurSFIA Of course not! I don't see it as a merit at all, but instead that it's simply how all belief systems are, being based simply on either our preferences or experiences. From my perspective, all moral systems are chosen (or acquired, rather) based not on an objective truth, but on subjective experience. Nihilistic moral codes, like Optimistic Nihilism, are simply the only ones which are truthful in their claims of where they come from, being from our own subjective experiences. Of course, I'm well aware of the irony that my own value of truth is, as a result of my nihilism, a purely subjective value. But just because something is subjective doesn't mean I shouldn't believe in it, no? I also don't belittle anyone just by their moral philosophy just for it being different from mine of course, as I think anyone who's thought enough about this, regardless of the overcome, deserves at least a little credit. Doesn't mean I can't disagree with them (especially if I subjectively consider their morals especially dangerous, such as suicidal nihilists) but it's more effort than some put in (namely, none.) Anyway, thanks for replying. I think the video overall is very good. Happy Sci-Fi Sunday!

[@beowulfshaeffer8444]

You hit the nail on the head as to why I've always found optimistic nihilism to just feel wrong and hypocritical. (Which feeling has gotten me into a lot of fights with secular humanists.)

[@TheHortoman]

Yah, anti cynical rhetoric is just a new way to be cynical about cynicism

[@Anansi1701]

I don't know if I fall into the nihilistic viewpoint entirely, though I would say I can get behind the framework of there being no inherent meaning to life, only purpose, that being the perpetuation of life. Does the lightning strike have meaning? The earthquake? No, their purpose is simply that of a release of energy in their systems. Natural phenomena are emergent from seemingly chaotic systems, but that's just it, they are SEEMINGLY chaotic. If you accept causality then the most basic physical processes will build up to emergent complexity. Meaning implies a prior, conscious understanding. I understand purpose often has a conscious component to it, but it can also simply be the reason for which something exists. In that case, purpose is the explanation of HOW those phenomena came to be. As for the notion of hypocrisy, that's only if you develop your subjective meaning in a vacuum, absent broader moral and ethical views. Otherwise your personal meaning for life will be something in line with overall societal good if not at least maintaining the status quo. The subjectivity of morals or moral relativism can be discussed later but has merit.

[@TheGrinningViking]

We are intelligent and verging towards nihilism. The smarter we get the more nihilistic we tend to be - though I think that's because intelligence screens out certain faith based views of the universe and other beliefs expand to fill those empty percentages.

[@thomassaldana2465]

I have to disagree with you on quite a foundational level here. Just because there's no transcendental meaning, with gods and spirits and all that malarkey, does not mean that life is pointless. DNA wants to survive and prosper into future generations. (Technically, molecules don't "want" anything, because they're not sentient, but this piece of personification is easier than a fifteen page essay.) You are a tool which your DNA uses for this purpose. And that's ok. That is your meaning in life. From a scientific basis, that's it. Nothing more, nothing less. And that's ok. If you think that you need gods and other metaphysical nonsense to give you meaning, that's your problem. Now, as for morality, read about Kin Selection.

[@specialagentdustyponcho1065]

Welcome to Who's Line is it Anyway, where the rules are made up and the points don't matter!

[@Smileyrat]

So,"Whos Life is it Anyway?" then?

[@Skorpychan]

1. No, it doesn't. Why would life have a purpose in and of itself? Life is what you make of it. 2. No. I've had my brain screwed with enough, and wouldn't trust them to go fiddle with it to make me more obedient. 3. No. Nobody would willingly leave a mind in this state. The closest thing to reprogramming was getting hit in the head a few years back, and acquiring brain damage from it.

[@Teelirious]

The hunger, the NEED some have for meaning baffles me. What difference does it make. Everything has the value you give it, while you're around, nothing more. What's the big concern? People want to think they're way more important than they are and why? The universe doesn't care? Fine. So what. You care.

[@FarmingUnclear]

Dyson sphere aliens plugging into a virtual reality powered by a collapsing star, waiting for the end of entropy... It's poetic, really.

[@SecularMentat]

I think any form of nihilism leads to the same outcome. Optimistic, neutral or otherwise. I think the claim of the 'harmful nihilist' is entirely possible in any conclusion as well. The conclusion I've come to is that while there is no objective 'meaning' or 'purpose'. Just starting with utilitarianism you should come to the conclusion of altruism. Or in our case, humanism (whatever that might look like in a larger scheme of alien species). The reason, mathematical conclusions of game theory. Tit-For-Tat which is generally seen as 'nice' (as it cooperates before it retaliates) wins out over all other simple game structures in a population sized element. (Or evolution in this case), we are evolved to cooperate. Our very cells do it, there would be no multicellular life if cooperation wasn't evolved into our genes. It requires no forethought, no intent, no intelligent designer. But it will eventually evolve. Cooperation, non-violence unless in defense of self, or others, finally helping others where one can. It's not 'right/good or/ought'. But it's an intellectual conclusion that in the absence of meaning takes a place that maximizes whatever abilities we might have as a species. After all, none of us, even if we are maximized will escape heat death. Punishing everyone around us to maximize our temporary gain pales in comparison to what we gain through cooperation. (this is still a selfish notion, but a truly maximized one).

[@MarcoServetto]

min 9:15 "If existence does not matter, neither does truth" Why? this seams to implicitly assume truth is only good if it help you/your existence in some way, that is, it is assuming truth as a mean to an end.

[@charlesjmouse]

Here's an observation that might be deliciously argued in both directions: Nihilism - If sufficiently counterproductive and 'suffered' by enough people, would one call that a mental health issue? As a rule society considers mental health problems so counterproductive that if sufficiently 'severe treatment' is enforced. In short who knows what 'abhorrent acts' we may consider 'good' or 'ignore' as 'unimportant' from the perspective of another society? A question partly out of mischief but mostly to encourage thought. I'm not a nihilist, even if I tend toward the frustrated stoic - I'd rather be a hedonist but can't bring myself to be that selfish! -If there is a higher power or arbiter as I believe then morality and purpose are absolutes that we should all uphold. -If not then the morality and purpose we have 'evolved' are by now our best adaptive strategies and will serve. At best I would suggest nihilism is maladaptive, and at worst a mental health condition so prevalent society fears to label it as such.

[@EksaStelmere]

Though I'm no longer religious, I have never once thought that God is not real. I maintain this mindset even with my geophysics focus. Science, prosperity, happiness, and faith in higher beings were never mutually exclusive and it's always fun explaining that to people.

[@MartinBelcher]

Nihilism is not negative. As a lifelong skeptic i believe nihilism is the only true and honest world view. The idea that you need meaning or purpose to enjoy life is alien to me. I do not require a book, film, game, friendships, my family, or my kids to have purpose or meaning for me to enjoy and value them. I think you might be projecting your own values by assuming that having no meaning or purpose are intrinsically linked to negative emotional states. I feel the polar opposite. Perhaps the distant future will be populated by my kind, the content nihilist.

[@zekejanczewski7275]

I think "Meaning" is a little... like ... what is it supposed to mean? Imagine two worlds, one where people have the same instincts, impulses, and motivations. The only difference is that one of them has meaning and the other one dosen't. Simply accepting or denying a meaning to life requires you to accept that there is some experiment you can run to distinguish between these two worlds. If there is no experimental diffrence, then meaning or lack of meaning is just non-falsifiable mouth mush. That's the problem I have with nihilism, and movents that oppose it. They don't define what phenomena they are trying to prove or disprove the existance of. Each ideology comes up with its own internal defenition of meaning, and then uses that to invalidate the other. It's not that meaning dose or dosen't exist. It's just that it's not a useful category We know the apple go down. We know the brain electricity go brrr, one way or another. We know the wind rustling through the trees on a cool summer day makes it alll worth it, and we know beer tastes like piss. We all agree on the basics. So, where to we place meaning in this? And how can we tell if it's gone?

[@ILikeGoodFood]

Does life have a purpose: Yes, to make more of itself. Is that some kind of greater universal purpose that matters in day to day reality: No. Is there such a thing as universal ethics and morality: No, but with the caveat that whatever best helps fullfil the goal of life will be selected for. Does my apparent near-total nihilism matter: Not at all. I have a strong moral and ethical sense, a strong sense of justice despite believeing that justice is fundametally a lie, and strong social and economic opinions centered around trying to make the world a better place for all those in it. There being no greater meaning is, on a day to day basis, simply irrelevent. I accept it as fact, as much as I can without proof, and simply continue living, trying to better myself and the world around me, because doing so is nice. Apparently, based on the definitions you gave in the introduction to this video, I'm about as much of nihilist as I could be. Funnily enough, despite that technically being true, and my knowing that, I don't consider myself a nihilist, don't see my thinking as nihilistic, and find the whole idea amusing, like some kind of joke. I guess life has no meaning in the way people want it to, but so what? It matters to those living it, and that's enough.

[@shardinhand1243]

sure i could call myself a nialist but just becuase i dont belive in objective value or morals doesint make me a nilist... stoping at that would make me a nilist... but i dont stop at that basic emotional thought, i may not belive in objective value but that doesint eraze subjective value, we can create meaning for ourselves, no higher daddy figure or cosmic police needed to tell us what to think... we are alone sure, but we are also free.

[@lilemont9302]

Nihilism specifically means there are no objective values. Recognising subjective values is not contradictory to nihilism. Of course, one can make a distinction between life-affirming and life-denying/pessimissm, a la Nietzsche, absurdism vs Schopenhauer, antinatalism; etc.

[@shardinhand1243]

what are absurdism, Schopenhauer, antinatalism??? iv only heard of nilisim, iv never heard of these other branches of thought@@lilemont9302

[@shardinhand1243]

to be clear, i dont have much respect for nietzsche, i think he was nieve in his hopelessness, he couldint see value in anyhting and if you cant value anything no progress can be made, its a self fullfilling prophecy... you dont value life or struggle or achievment... so life struggle and achivement never amount to anything for you... its pethetic.@@lilemont9302

[@N8ThaGr8r]

That which is dead can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die

[@unheilbargut]

As an answer to your questions: I do not believe that life has a meaning or purpose extending the pure and simple biological purpose of every living being, to procreate and help your fellow and future lifeforms to succeed. Maybe, as a predator, we also are here to keep those pesky herbivores in check, so they do not eat all of the trees. Then every lifeform defines their own little purposes. It sounds maybe a bit crazy, but I love Hamsters and constantly share my home with one or two of those. Most of them lived free in my living room without any cage. There I saw, in those short 1.5 to 2 years of their lifes, different agendas and purposes they all had. One needed the biggest pile of nuts, one was more about building huge tissue and cloth mountains to live in and is (that one is still alive) living their dream behind my art supply cupboard. Then I had two at the same time and one didn‘t want to live free, so they could be held in the same room and didn‘t get to each other - they were kinda friends but had this very cute fight over the resources, taunted the other one, sometime they stole nuts from each other, when I let the „caged“ one talk a walk in the living room and had the other one separated. So there is a purpose in life, that we give ourselves. But there is no moral absolutes, no deeper meaning or purpose, no goal we must achieve. And most importantly: there is no need for such a concept. Therefore I do not think that significant parts of whole civilisation wipe their minds to think there was a meaning and purpose. I can see beings living in virtual worlds and think that we will opt this over the civilisation of the cosmos (with exceptions).

[@detsaw23]

Sorry, this is my least favorite video, and I have watched all the main sequence videos. Nihilism does not imply cruelty. "Does life have meaning?" is not defined. Much of the first half of the video feels like a naive attack on atheism. Please revisit this topic in 100 years, if available.

[@xxCrapNamexx]

I think the problem is nihilism can't really propagate itself in a Darwinian sense long term as it's very existential and individualistic and in may ways not cohesive enough to form complex social structures, only piggy back on what already exists. You kinda see it in the birth rates in developed countries where the only people reproducing above replacement rates are mainly religious communities. This is why I think any space faring empire will at the very least has a philosophical purpose it follows, be a extremely religiously zealous or be totally mechanical, following the drives and directives put into it by it's creators.

[@sojh17]

Idk if I'm confusing what Nihilism is or not, or if we're separating branches of nihilistic philosophies like existentialism and absurdism from this definition. But as stated at the end of this video, there are many solid purposes you can find in life, and that's not incompatible with realization of nihilism in my understanding. It's just the universe is incompatible with ever saying one purpose is true vs another. For us as a species I think it's arguable that many purposes are are more desirable than others be it for empathetic reasons, cultural psychology, curiosity, any number of drives that can be drawn back to our biology and whatever emergent cultural phenomenon etc. In this episode are we saying that Nihilism is the realization that there is no objective purpose to the universe? Or are we saying that Nihilism is a reaction to that realization where you throw your hands up in a depression because the universe doesn't have some overriding intent written into it? If the latter, then I'm on board with how things have been explored here. If the former then I'm a little confused what the implication is for how people should arrive at their particular purpose. Feels a little like a lot of arguments I've heard around agnosticism and atheisim that suppose people are incapable of forming a moral framework without religious purpose attached to it. Granted I may have missed some bits of the video, will rewatch later.

[@Onyx-qd9tl]

Speaking as an optimistic nihilist, there are some specific reasons to never bother trying to convert anyone. First off, it’s a pretty self selecting philosophy. Those who have the temperament and curious nature to arrive at it, are most likely going to on their own, and ignore others trying to push them that direction. Second, it is inherently destructive if it’s not balanced out with a lot of emotional maturity. Trying to convert someone who hasn’t the experience and perspective to balance those philosophies against their daily life is going to result in a amoral and potentially very dangerous person. No one wants that, not even other nihilists. But trying to say that there’s no inherent good or evil in nihilism doesn’t actually mean there isn’t abject positive and negative outcomes to activities, mindsets, or goals. Someone who believes their purpose in life is murder may not be morally better or worse than someone who believes their purposes to feed the poor, according to a nihilistic view, but you’re still going to incarcerate the murderer on the grounds that survival matters. Not just to you, but to everyone. We are not aware of the joys, pleasures, or accomplishments of the majority of the generations that came before us. That does not make them any less valuable to those who experienced them. Our own life experiences will be equally valuable to future generations eventually, but that doesn’t mean it is not worth creating positive ones. Things that threaten our survival (both individually and as a species or culture) may not have inherent morality, but it absolutely still matters to those affected by it. In short; does life have meaning? No… So why not give it some? There are plenty of personally rewarding goals, creative endeavors, and aspirations that have absolutely nothing to do with whether the universe cares you are up to those activities. Would they eventually be meaningless to the individual given a long enough timeframe? Actually, possibly. That would be a good cue for them personally to check out, but there are plenty of generations that will come after who want that experience too. I can’t speak for all nihilists, but I feel like we owe them the chance to do so.

[@PiratePawsLive]

First Question Answer: No. Second Question Answer: No. Third Question Answer: Possibly, but there is no way to know. So the question is pointless.

[@thomascromwell6840]

He says he doesn't have to give any grounding for his beliefs because the other side has already proven that the universe and reality don't have any inherent meaning.

[@jjkthebest]

I am an optimistic nihilist, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize those who hurt others. True, they're not objectively wrong, but they are subjectively wrong by pretty much any system of morality in existence.

[@LarryFasnacht]

Nihilism makes perfect sense if you don’t believe in free will. And I’d love to see how you could square any free will with Einstein’s Spacetime block universe.