Conquer Club

Disprove it, if you can.

(Hint: you can't. It is correct)

wait, is this a trap thread?

If it is then I just snared myself the VIP.

jah, ve believe in nossing.

-Uli

NUSSSSSSSSSSING.

Also, yeah, it's true.

It will get better, I promise.

Have a cupcake!

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
2 Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher,
vanity of vanities! All is vanity.
3 What does man gain by all the toil
at which he toils under the sun?
4 A generation goes, and a generation comes,
but the earth remains forever.
5 The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
and hastens to the place where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south
and goes around to the north;
around and around goes the wind,
and on its circuits the wind returns.
7 All streams run to the sea,
but the sea is not full;
to the place where the streams flow,
there they flow again.
8 All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;
the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there a thing of which it is said,
“See, this is new”?
It has been already
in the ages before us.
11 There is no remembrance of former things,
nor will there be any remembrance
of later things yet to be
among those who come after.
--Ecclesiastes chapter 1 verses 1-11

just because we can't disprove nihilism doesn't mean that it is correct

logic failz

A supra-being exists and gives meaning to reality, or no such entity or force exists and therefore there is no intrinsic value. Pick one.

-TG

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:A supra-being exists and gives meaning to reality, or no such entity or force exists and therefore there is no intrinsic value. Pick one.

-TG

why can't reality be meaningful on its own merits? why is a supra-being required?

john9blue wrote:just because we can't disprove nihilism doesn't mean that it is correct

logic failz

Didn't say that. Said it's impossible to disprove it because it is correct.

Which it is.

barackattack wrote:

john9blue wrote:just because we can't disprove nihilism doesn't mean that it is correct

logic failz

Didn't say that. Said it's impossible to disprove it because it is correct.

Which it is.

so where is your proof that nihilism is correct?

The absence of any objective meaning or value in anything around us.

Does it for me.

Is there anything that you consider to have meaning?

barackattack wrote:The absence of any objective meaning or value in anything around us.

why? because you can't sense it?

this isn't much of a proof; it gives support to the theory, but isn't even really close to any sort of conclusive proof, and you make a huge baseless assumption by saying it "can't be disproved"

edit: i give certain things in my life meaning to me. whether they have any sort of "ultimate meaning" is debatable

The concept of "meaning" is an abstract one, there's no objective way to measure "meaning". The only "meaning" things have is what we assign them.

There is no such thing as "objective meaning", therefore the whole premise of the argument is moot.

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:A supra-being exists and gives meaning to reality, or no such entity or force exists and therefore there is no intrinsic value. Pick one.

-TG

The absence of intrinsic value doesn't exclude the value given by each individual's preferences.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:A supra-being exists and gives meaning to reality, or no such entity or force exists and therefore there is no intrinsic value. Pick one.

-TG

The absence of intrinsic value doesn't exclude the value given by each individual's preferences.

And vice versa

BigBallinStalin wrote:The absence of intrinsic value doesn't exclude the value given by each individual's preferences.

Does individually held value have any significance?

barackattack wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:The absence of intrinsic value doesn't exclude the value given by each individual's preferences.

Does individually held value have any significance?

To who? And whose preferences?

It depends...

The values of individuals are opinions. Opinions are not truth.

barackattack wrote:The values of individuals are opinions. Opinions are not truth.

Not my fault you'd rather cry about the worth of the individual instead of facing facts.

oh, are we talking about truth?

i was under the impression that none of us knew the truth and were just hypothesizing about what everything means

please tell me the Truth if you'd care to share

Ad hominem? On the internet?




You need a different angle if you want to troll me.


But hey, BA, maybe you sincerely believe the dumb stuff you've been writing. Is this the "don't know if stupid or just..." dilemma?

So where do you stand on nihilism, if I'm 'trolling'?