Essays and contributions are listed in order of date received and posted at the discretion of your friendly editor and part-time autocrat, Freydis. The only editing will be for length if necessary. If you have something to add send it < here >. Also specify how you want credit (name?, e-mail? etc.) if any posted.

By my rough estimate about 60% of the letters sent to me express their appreciation and approval of what they’ve read in Nihilism’s Home Page (the CounterOrder), about 30% are either unsure about or want to know something more, and about 10% disapprove of it. – Freydis, June 2008.

Defining Nihilism
Gustav, November 2011

Hello. So a good while ago, I came to the conclusion that I basically agree with every concept of Nihilism. There is just one thing that bothers me, which is the fact that Nihilism disregards subjective purpose, meaning and morality as it states that all of these things means nothing, it ignores the fact that each an every person, have some sort of personal code and meaning, not as an objective inherent fact, but as some sort of rule-set and situation which dictates and fulfils your life. It seems like the sort of Nihilism that you talk about on your website, is actually rather atheistic existentialistic, while other nihilism is much more into the apathetic; "Nothing means anything and everything is allowed, therefore I must use all my time during drugs, not caring and taking no personal responsibility". By definition atheistic existentialism is based on Nihilism taking subjective matter and morality into mind. Nietzsche and Sartre was some of the big pioneers of atheistic existentialism, and both is based on the fight against superstition and false principles such as theology and morality. What is your thought about atheistic existentialism? And would it be false to consider a lot of the content of your website more existentialistic than nihilistic?

Thanks for your letter Gustav.
Using your definitions, yes I am much more in the category of ‘atheistic existentialistic’ than apathetic or solipsistic-type nihilism. I also factor in historical people and events, particularly the Russian revolutionaries of the 1860s http://www.counterorder.com/history.html, to give nihilism a political dimension and then you get Nihilism with a capital N; circle back to Dmitrii Pisarev (Nihilist spokesman and 19th century Russian literary critic): "What can be broken, should be broken", and the core definition #1 http://www.counterorder.com/nihilism.html#A and now you’re getting more of the picture.

Freydis

ANUS  a Cover for Bogus Nationalism
J.C., October 2011

Hi Freydis.

I'm writing to you mainly regarding ANUS, a site I have visited occasionally since I was in high school. Initially it was because I was becoming a fan of black metal and was fascinated not only by the music but by the history and ideology surrounding the bands. I could not find a better source for this information till I read the book Lords of Chaos.

Over time I began reading their articles and FAQs. At first I did not really understand nihilism and thought of it how mainstream society would - losers in black trenchcoats who live for nothing. This was during a relationship break up and somewhat of an existential crisis. All I took from nihilism was cynicism and misanthropy, as an angsty youth would.

Most recently after another break up (with the same person) I found myself reading the site again. This time the concept of nihilism really clicked in my head. It is not what I first thought - a cynical and depressing philosophy. It is a satisfying, naturalistic view of the world that I find comforting. To me it is positive, almost uplifting, in my life. This is probably because it addresses what I've been thinking for years.

I kept reading ANUS, including interviews with Prozak, and I was fascinated by him and his life. Obviously he is very intelligent. But the more I read the more I suspected that something was not right. Occasionally he would write something that threw up a red flag. There was a hint of racism and genocidal fantasies.

I have to say I do not align with any of those views and wondered if this was a logical endpoint to nihilism. I rejected these ideas and wondered if nihilism was something I really agreed with. I looked at sites linked to ANUS and they were the same. 95% content I agree with and 5% bile.

It should be mentioned that ANUS enjoys trolling, as do I, but I found it immensely difficult to figure out whether they were trolling or really were white supremacists hiding behind philosophy. I was suspecting the latter as these views appeared in subtle ways throughout my reading. Too subtle to be a troll.

I may be wrong but to me nationalism is incompatible with nihilism. Personally I am not patriotic or nationalistic. I was born in Australia. I like it here, but I could have easily been born in India or China, and I suppose I would like it there too. To me where you were born is as arbitrary as your name. Thus intense nationalism and white supremacy is pure garbage and shouldn't have anything to do with nihilism.

Your analysis of ANUS really pinpointed and expressed what was bothering me about the site. There's a lot of great content but something just seemed off. It brings relief to determine what was wrong with it.

Admittedly I am a complete novice to the study of philosophy. It is a subject I find interesting and I am going to pursue it. I see this as a first step in a long journey. I am only 23 years of age so I have a lot to learn. Apologies if this email is a bit fragmented. I wrote this on my mobile phone while at work.

Thanks for your time. =

Nihilism is not psychopathy, is it?
Avery,  August 26, 2011

Whenever I read Nihilists posts on certain forums, they call them selves political nihilists, but they sound somewhat irrational. They say that since they have no morals literally anything goes. Without following morality they seem to think that there is nothing wrong with killing, stealing, raping, etc. When I think about it, doesn't this sound very anti-social? I can't imagine a healthy society after a Nihilist revolution could function for very long at all. Are these so-called Nihilists really what they claim to be? Certainly there should be at least some kinds of social agreements made between people who have to share resources and living space with each other if there is to be any harmony (your site makes Nihilism sound far from chaos). You said it yourself cooperation gets us farther and conflict, and that the ego can be a non pretty picture. And that we should adapt to our environment while changing it. It seems like without some kind of basic code such as this then chaos or psychopathy would ensue. A combination of the socialization process of childhood, self-discipline and common sense should lead us to develop some kind of reasonable behavior. Your site keeps mentioning death to morality, it is arbitrary, etc., which sounds like what these so-called Nihilists I described earlier sound like, but as you clarified in one of your articles, it seems to mean being against religious morality. You've described a Nihilist morality that should be followed. But this Nihilist morality is still a morality, so it seems kind of confusing when you tell others to discard their morals when really you want them to follow this Nihilist morality.

Your website says to be who you naturally are, to be responsible for your actions, every benefit has a cost, love your friends, independent thought, you reap what you sow. You say we need a code or structure that we can actually follow in practice for mental health. Match your words with actions, have an awareness of your capacities, Measure acts against consequences. You say we need guidelines in some form or another in order to function collectively , and say that basic morality is hard-wired into us.

This has been stuck on my mind for a while now. Your site says to reject false values, while you try to provide what you think are true or Nihilistic values. Which I agree some kind of reasonable code is needed, but I think certain people are misinterpreting what your saying to possibly justify crude actions. Have you noticed anything similar?

--

Despite the crudeness of their statements, and the questionable comprehension of those 'political nihilists' in their use of the terminology, there is nonetheless a bald-faced honesty to it. Those kinds of statements are illuminating because, in many ways what they’re saying is just the kind of behavior that everyone wants to do, at least sometimes, but won’t state openly. What’s even worse are people who say one thing and do the opposite to mask their true intentions, think of the harm that comes from Priests cloaked in religious piety that rape boys with the protection of the Church establishment.

So, that reversion to animal violence is there inside everyone, and many psychological experiments have shown how easy it is to lose the veneer of civilization if the mental and physical environment supports it (like the Stanford prison experiment), and indeed real world events have shown the same thing (like Pol Pot’s Cambodia). Even more to the point,  the vast majority of the blame for the worst excesses belongs with the male ego, possessing a particularly egregious obsession with property and power. It's also worth considering the way that film and television are so frequently used as reflections of these underlying compulsions towards unacceptable behavior such as murder, robbery, and so on, acted out in fiction but rarely in fact.

Nihilism is like a mirror, it helps us see things we would otherwise overlook, or miss entirely because of our cultural and moral assumptions.

The real question is, why do we not rape, rob and steal every chance we get? The reason is that (most) everyone learns otherwise through the socialization process. Growing up we learn how to behave around other people, and it has nothing to do with religion and very little to do with manufactured morality codes because it just happens naturally. Civil behavior is just a natural fact, it’s an unavoidable necessity that emerges on its own through normal healthy behavior and interactions, and in fact it’s really the artificial moral codes and cultural imposition of specious values that confuse things, and indeed often make life much more difficult and miserable for everyone. But that's also why it's so difficult to alter primary behavior through morality rules in the adult world; if you don't learn it in the formative years of childhood there isn't a whole lot we can do about it afterwards, revolution or not.

Now, if someone grows up and doesn’t learn these basic skills of social interaction, and remains at the level of an infant (but in the body of, and with the hormones of an adult), then that’s when you get the psychological condition of a psychopath. Even then, they still follow a moral code, it’s just a warped one defined as ‘me first’ and without any foresight or consideration for anyone else. I hasten to emphasize that this is ultimately a self-defeating morality, but the psychopath isn’t capable of figuring that out, or adjusting their behavior; more mature and intelligent people have to step in and stop them. Similarly, even the ones who claim to be amoral still have a moral code.

Infants up until about eighteen months of age live in an 'eternal present', only reacting to their immediate needs and surroundings, although they can still form memories. The ability to discern that others have mental states different than your own doesn't develop until about the age of three or four. [1] If any of these stages of typical childhood development fail, for whatever reason - psychological, biological, or environmental - that can lead to socially dysfunctional behavior later in life, from autism to psychosis.

Morality confuses many because of the difficulty they have distinguishing between the artificial overlay, composed mostly of abuse and false-justifications, and the underlying grid, often given the same label of 'morality', that  emerges automatically as  a natural product of evolution and social interactions, and not just for humans but even among other animals. Apparently, even some who call themselves 'political nihilists' suffer from the same confusion and may attempt to exploit false conceptions of morality to further an abusive agenda of self-interest; but this is certainly no different, and certainly much more transparent, than the same behavior that occurs within the realm of religiously-derived morality!

The superficial paradox of existence is that we have to cooperate to survive, as the social beings that we biologically are and always have been, yet the nefarious ego that occupies our minds only cares about one thing: our own egotistical self.

Freydis
September 11, 2011, with additional material added

1. In Search or Time, by Dan Falk, 2008, pg. 114-115.

Pity?
Avery, July 2011

You say Nihilism challenges the assumptions supporting the common value pity. Pity by definition being "the feeling or sorrow and compassion caused by suffering and misfortunes of others". How is pity based on any assumptions if it is a feeling? And aren't feelings of sympathy just as natural as feelings of empathy? Isn't caring for others (which overall helps the species) considered a plus? Isn't collective well being based on preventing and trying to solve problems that face us? You do say that cooperation is more beneficial than conflict, but what use would cooperation be if we didn't feel bad for others? If we take a problem like world hunger and say that it needs to be fixed, that involves sympathy for those who are hungry, feelings of pity, which would then involve forces coming together to fix the problem (cooperating). Why do you say pity is a value? When religion tells us we have to care for the unfortunate there by making it a belief? I agree that making people believe something (even if it's caring for others) should be avoided, but that caring should come from reasoning such as "wouldn't you want others to do the same for you?" and human nature. Human nature being that which comes naturally, and I naturally feel like compassion is more beneficial to the human race than "dog-eat-dog" survival of the fittest. Any way. Thats just my thoughts on the subject. Maybe you could clarify further what you meant.

--

That part was written a long time ago. Thinking back, what I was trying to convey wasn’t about the feeling of pity, it was a challenge against the intended effect of pity.

Why does anyone feel pity? Isn’t much of pity just a smug sense of superiority too? Most assume that pity helps the suffering, but in many cases it only makes them worse, precisely because it’s emotional rather than something that can be measured or verified to check whether it’s achieving the intended purpose. As the old phrase goes, ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.’

Pity maybe isn’t the best word to use, or rather that statement needs more explanation. I still like to challenge empty pity. Empathy is what I would rather promote – i.e. trying to comprehend the situation of others in order to better cooperate, as appropriate, and interact with them on a more functional and mutually beneficial level. 

Freydis

Thank you for the response!

Your site is easy to navigate, I'm sorry I missed that part about the "N" design. I have ordered a copy of your book and look forward to reading it. Your explanation you gave on how you came across nihilism as a word and how you felt is well phrased and I can relate. I had no way to put my feelings to words when I was younger, and coming across it helped me begin a struggle that I'm grateful I'm experiencing as it has contributed in shaping me and my approach with authorities, influencial beliefs, and even social cues.

I look forward to it as I'm sure I'll learn something new.

- Jon
[May 2011]

Thoughts on Nihilism
Leizar Rock via Facebook, March 2011

SPANISH:
Pienso que las respuestas estan ahí... y que muchas veces en nuestra "humana" arrogancia no las miramos... por que nos sentimos mejores que eso... idealizamos... suponemos, interpretamos "yo soy el centro del universo"... Me agrada el nihilismo... me agrada exactamente por eso... por que no es una respuesta, el nihilismo no te dice "hey aqui está la respuesta a la vida, a tu sufrimiento, a las cosas"... el nihilismo me ha servido para bajar de ese pedestal, y aceptar que la humanidad se sobrevalora... a mi parecer toda religión, ideal, y moral es un intento de construir un altar a una humanidad que no somos... un altar donde se reflejan las fantasias y frustraciones de un grupo de personas... un altar a nuestro propio ego... ironicamente descuidamos el ego en nombre de ese altar... queriendo ser mas "humanos", mas "justos"... mas libres... curiosamente, cuando se deja de interpretar, las respuestan llegan... !siempre han estado ahí!... es entonces cuando realmente el universo
está para nosotros, pues tenemos la habilidad de decifrarlo, una habilidad que solo puede ser usada cuando se tiene la suficiente humildad...

ENGLISH:
I think the answers are there ... and many times in our "human" arrogance we don't look ... because we feel that we are better than that ... we idealize ... assume, we interpret "I am the center of the Universe" ... I like nihilism ... that's exactly why I like it ... because it's not an answer, nihilism does not say "hey, here's the answer to life, your suffering, to all things" ... nihilism has helped me to get off of that pedestal, and accept that humanity is overrated ... I think all religion, ideal, and moral is an attempt to build an altar to a humanity that we are not ... an altar that reflects the fantasies and frustrations of a group of people ... an altar to our own ego ... ironically we neglect the ego in the name of the altar ... wanting to be more "human", more "fair" ... more free ... Curiously, when you stop to interpret, the answers arrive ... They have always been there! ... And is then when the Universe really is for us, because we have the ability to decode it, a skill that can only be used when you have enough humility...

Infinite Lives in Infinity?
Jason S., March 2011

In nihilism, it's believed you have one life. Yet this overlooks the concept of infinity... we had infinity to get to where we are and how much time will be left after infinity is over and everyone on Earth dies out? Another infinity. There is no half of infinity. Science seems to support this possibility with multiverses... the death of one universe is the creation of a new one... an infinite number of universes... even so, just on the logic of the existence of infinity... what do nihilists say about the existence of an infinite number of lives?

Thanks for the informative article,

Jason

Hi Jason,

You bring up an interesting point for consideration. With infinite time and space anything can happen – an infinite number of times. But infinity is really just an error message in mathematics, so no one really knows what it means because it doesn’t exist in any way we can measure.

The universe we inhabit has an observable limit and no information can be transferred beyond it. Although some scientists are speculating that some form of signature from previous universes is imprinted on our own. This is fantastic if true because we may be able to learn about what’s outside or massive bubble. But nonetheless, for our own personal concerns we will never be able to communicate with any of our other lives (assuming they exist in an assumed infinite meta-universe). So for all practical purposes we still only have one human life.

Freydis

Peaceful or Violent Protest?
Vic N., Sweden, February 2011

I dont understand why its prefered to protest non violently before using violence. I is probably too simple too say since there is no right or wrong they are equally prefarable so lets not use that argument for now...

Maybe its better to skip the non violence when the whole reason why one may be protesting is because authority is not listning in the first place and that wont change anytime soon. Hence only violence is the only option for change and as such it must be prefered over non violence protests.

Infact why even bother talking peacefully too and about a "bad" authority, after all actions speaks louder than words dont they?

Yet it seems as you have come too another conclusion. That can only mean two things either you countered my feeble arguments or never thought of them which brings us back to my first question: What is the reason behind your conclusion?

Im sorry for my bad english, its not my first language but I hope you get what Im trying to say..

Sincerely

Freydis:

Well, my main reason for starting with non-violence is that image and symbolic-reasoning are very powerful forces in the public mind. Public reaction has to be considered because it is the public that are the supporters of the effort, in one way or another. So if your group starts out from the very beginning stating their aim and sole method is violent rebellion, it restricts your range of actions and potentially alienates supporters. Except in extreme cases where it’s already a violent conflict, jumping to the later stages undercuts the development of the rebellion.

But anyway, by starting with peaceful resistance nobody is losing anything, and most places in need of rebellion are already so militaristic and authoritarian that all you have to do is put a bunch of people in a public square in a passive demonstration and the police will start shooting anyway, and then it’s on to the next stage with all the responsibility for starting the violence on the shoulders of the corrupt authorities.

No worries on the language, I have an idea what you are getting at.

Vic:

Ahh yes in my thoughts I simply assumed that the protesters already had public support, a critical misstake wont make again.

Your second segement in your reply however has practically no use for me. See I live in Sweden, perhaps the most democratic and uncorrupt country in the world. If we swedes ever "street-protest" its infront of an embassy complaing about other countries.

As such its pretty impossible to gain any form of support from the public by non-violent protests because the goverment just responds "Yes yes we will fix it later" but ofcourse later never comes, in contrast to their promises to fix it. The real problem is that it seems to keep the public happy and any change in goverment wont be needed in their eyes.

While our society seems like a good example its still built on the flaws of morality not to mention its extreme use of utilitarianism as base for laws. I am starting to believe that the public is too unaware of the sinister nature of morality and the fatal flaw(s) of utilitarianism to support a new (nihilistic) society. Could I be right? How do you think I should proceed?

P.S. I really enjoy the Counterorder site. I dont think I need to point out why, you probably get enough of that but know that I am pleased to say it improves my English vocabulary.

Sincerely

Freydis:

Hi Vic,

I’m glad to have more appreciative readers in Sweden!

You bring up an important point: the more content the population is the more difficult it is to rally support for change. Part of the battle is just raising awareness in the public’s mind, getting the word out and explaining and this struggle typically takes years if not decades.

As an alternate example, the Red Army Faction felt they were in the same position where the German people were to brainwashed by consumerism and too fat and happy to recognize the corruption behind their so-called democracy. http://www.counterorder.com/nihilismbios.html#6  They used violence in an effort to wake up the people, and the world. It’s certainly a fascinating saga, a rather mixed success, but one that’s full of lessons for today.

Also, I read this page a few days ago, kind of interesting use of peaceful protest for revolution: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12522848

Vic:

Yes, while the RAF, IRA and other revolutionaries had somewhat "questionable" motives the lessons learned from them are not: It is an absolute must too have the publics support. It does not matter how good your idea and actions are, you will inevitable fail without the publics support.

As such the smart revolutionary target the people in the society because its the people that is the society but not with fear, with reason which nihilism is all about. Which brings me to my main problem:

The public is honestly to stupid. It is only the ones with abnormally high interllect that takes intrest in philosofy and politics. They seem to be so, how should I put it, trapped in our society, so hopelessly dependable on all the bs that the politicans and rich feed them. Unwilling to listen to reason out of fear that they will lose what little things they have now.

I start to feel that nihilism is too good for the public, maybe the world is not ready for nihilism yet, after all about 95% humans belive in some kind of god. Do not get me wrong, I would not hesitate to kill them all if that is what it takes to build a nihilistic society. But those remaining 5 % would simply go back to our corrupt society - still unwilling too listen to reason.

The very word 'nihilism' makes people think I am some kind of depressive suicidal lunatic. The cruel irony. I feel unable to unable to point the people to nihilism because they do not want to listen, all they want is to sit in the gutter of bs and misery by the despots and rich alike. You ever feel the same?

Freydis:

I know, it can get frustrating at times. But I’ve found many people that are paying attention and genuinely want to do something about the situation, like you. It’s not hopeless at all.

Most people are just slow, what seems obvious to us now they’ll figure it out in ten years; they don’t want to stand out or do anything unless they have to, and fear anything controversial. Who was it that said today’s heresies are tomorrows virtues? Similarly, Nietzsche once wrote, "All good things were formerly bad things; every original sin has turned into an original virtue."

Nihilism, Art and Music
Alan Z., February 2011

Greetings–

I just wanted to thank you for your eloquent comments on nihilism. It is difficult to find explanations of the nihilistic world-view that aren't tinged with negativity and destructive violence.

When I declare myself a nihilist, the response is often "Why not just kill yourself ?" Your thesis has given me new ways to verbalize my response. My hope is to convey that absence of knowledge is power, and that the search for God ends with us.

I do wonder if you have any thoughts about "beauty". Do you think it has any importance, meaning or substance?

Thanks again

Freydis:

Hi Alan,

Thanks for the letter and I’m glad you appreciate my website on Nihilism!

In my book ‘Nihilism’ I wrote on beauty and art (extracted):

I think beauty can only be generated by natural forces and mimicked by the human artist. True beauty resides within the wispy colors of a nebular cloud or the intricate veins of a green leaf, hence the art most widely deemed 'beautiful' consists of accurate depictions of nature, be it an Ingres portrait or a Church nature scene. Otherwise aesthetic values are primarily subjective and ancillary to the issue of art anyway, it just makes a good thing better.

Art is simply a means of communication, and whatever means that’s effective is valid, and then some. It's not about style or training or name or prestige, it's about evoking emotion and ideas. Art is simply a vehicle, a means of conveying a message but it also contains significant subjective qualities.

Ultimately art should be more than just a source of passive bemusement; it should be a participatory activity. When art is a recipe rather than static monstrosities collecting dust in pretentious museums, art where the viewer is part of the process, they become artists as well.

Alan Z.:

Hello Again!

I found your ideas about art very interesting. I'd say you're a kindred spirit of John Cage and that's a high compliment. Ironically, Cage was on the frontier of abandoning beauty as a prerequisite for music. I'm a composer who has always seen fractal geometry in nature as the purest beauty. The great composers of the past have had (except Liszt) little interest in the minutia of society. For them, the music itself was of paramount importance and the only inspiration. Yet the ego will inevitably impose it's force even in a composition that is 4'33" of silence.

That said, I think the composers who stayed within the fractal framework of western tonality had the greatest success. This is due to the gravity of the naturally occurring harmonic series found in tubes and strings, and their evolution into a 12 tone scale and the major/ minor system. It was our drive to symmetry that made it inevitable. And our quest to control nature.

I think my original question came more from a crisis of faith, and to whether such a luxury as art can be honorable in times of such global crisis. What if any difference will it make? Would it not be more beneficial to collect plastic bottles from the shorelines? Or- does our drive toward beauty and symmetry play a vital role in our evolution and future?

Best

A School Project in Nihilism
Karen C., January 2011

Hello
I am a high school student, and I have to do a school project called "Hard made easy" in which I have to explain a difficult concept in an easy way. I chose Nihilism and wanted to thank you for the information your page provided me. I also wanted to ask you what do you think Nihilism can give to sixteen year old students.

Thank you for the information and your attention.

Freydis:

The first point I want to clarify, to minimize confusion, is that 'nihilism' is a general term that covers a lot of ground: http://www.counterorder.com/nihilism.html#A ,

while 'Nihilism' is more specific and generally refers to a certain attitude and worldview, with historical antecedent in the Russian revolutionaries: http://www.counterorder.com/history.html 

But more than that it does have a continuous thread up to the present, reference biographies page: http://www.counterorder.com/nihilismbios.html#6 , and is often seen as being similar to anarchism.

So, with that in mind, the most concise material I have to help in your task is the pamphlet, available here: http://www.counterorder.com/print/nihilism_pamphlet.pdf 

Nihilism can help sixteen-year old students by giving them a different, and intellectually challenging view of the world, and if considered, a skeptical attitude that can still can compel them to overcome passivity and apathy and become engaged with their surroundings.

Personal Nihilism
Josh B.,  January 2011

Hello,

It is just as you say, the discovery of the word and the idea of nihilism came as a great relief to me when I finally looked in to it a couple weeks ago (I'm 28, a little late). The only thing I knew about it before was from the movie The Big Lebowski =P I had already been thinking and feeling this way for a long time now, but instead of doing something with it I was just influenced to believe that my thinking was just unhealthy, self-destructive, inappropriate.. So needless to say, I have been in a state of mental turmoil for some time now underneath the surface.

What is the point? Are most of these people I'm surrounded by seeing the same reality I am? (and if so how are they not appalled?) Is conforming to these social norms no matter how much I disagree the only way I can hope to be "happy"? Is this what the people I've known that have killed themselves were thinking about? These are questions I'd have going through my mind a lot. Through feeling this way but not necessarily being able to correlate the thoughts I had created a very unpleasant mental living environment for myself.

After my father died abruptly a few months ago as a result of an accident while working on his house I had really begun to question things even more than I had in the past. The futility of most of our efforts in life were right in my face to see and consider. Things have been difficult and confusing for me to try to make sense of lately. Finding your website this evening/morning at 3:30am has been a wonderful experience for me on a few different levels and I just wanted to thank you for the time and effort you have put in to it - to let you know it's had a profound effect on THIS person. Keep it up! and take it easy.. Thank you.

– Josh

Freydis:

Hi Josh!

Thanks for your letter, it’s interesting to read how nihilism has impacted other people around the world. And it’s always nice to find out the impact was appreciated!
I hope you don’t feel as isolated anymore.

There has only been a few books i have read with the potential to create a psychological, and sociological shift in thinking patterns, let alone, evolutionary. I have actually described your book to my friends, as that feeling you get in the morning when you wipe the sleep out of your eyes.

Cliff
June 2010

Is nihilism the only logical result of atheism? I have begun to think that it is and I would be more than happy to share some of my writings with you.

What is your view of the matter?

Trev:)

In theory I think you’re basically correct. In practice though, if you state that nihilism is the end result of atheism it makes the religious happy and offends many atheists, because nihilism is typically treated as a pejorative term. Christians and the like will tell everyone – ‘see this terrible condition of nihilism is what you get when you become an atheist’ and atheists will try to defend their position as being entirely reasonable and not 'dark and evil' like nihilism.

In reality it’s the belief in moral superiority that generates most of the ‘evil’, while crime, violence and similar undesirable social events are produced not through lack of morality but a variety of environmental and biological factors. But this realization is much more advanced than most people are capable of grasping, mostly because they're constantly told otherwise by moral and religious authorities.

So, I think the major challenge here is to figure out how to get to a place where we can all live within the realm of practical reality where these beliefs and assumptions are overcome.  But how do we get there? Are nihilism and atheism two separate paths, or does one lead through to the other?

Freydis
January, 2010

Nihilism clearly relates that nothing has any final or absolute meaning or value except the meaning and value we say and agree it has. And this is a factual truth, but it is only half of the view or one side of the coin, as-it-were.
What I like about your site and your insight Freydis, is your acknowledgement that there are values, relative to reality as-it-is. That is the other side of the coin so often missing in most nihilist investigative study.

Kudos to you and an incredible wealth of information.

G.R. [January 2010]

You are one antihero among few in life.

Thanks for the webpage.

-alex [ October 2009]

I've been reading articles on your site for quite some time and i just  wanted to say i'm impressed.

Everything i've read has been well written and backed up and your not just taking random stabs in the dark.

I've just one question though.

How are you supposed to implement Nihilism without destroying your life?

Freedom in this day and age usually is the destruction of your own life, well when i talk about life i mean (work, the law) ect.

I have to go to work, or i cannot support myself. I have to follow the law or i am punished, usually fined.

How would you go about dealing with this? If you were fined would you just not pay the fine and argue that they have no right to fine you for something so trivial as lets say driving without a license in a hypothetical situation?

- S.L. [August 2009]

Well, obviously unless you want to end up in jail or just have a very difficult life you have to pick your battles. And since we all live in a society, and not in a cave on a desert island, we inevitably have to make compromises between our personal freedom and the freedom of others. But this isn't necessarily a negative at all because the flip side is that through cooperation we can gain far more than we could ever have just on our own.

By gaining greater insight into how these structures and relationships are established and how they work we can make smarter decisions for ourselves and for those around us. The problem is that too many people take these things, like morality and authority, for granted and just assume that they have to be the way they are when there's really many different and effective forms social structures can take -- some much more hospitable and productive than others.

Freydis

Freydis,

I was recently was going over your site as i have a couple times in the past.

I'm still amazed everytime I read the essays on the site how refreshing it is to read something coherent and objective about all the bullshit that we're fed everyday. If most people would sit down and honestly questioned their beliefs for a few minutes a lot of religious americans (86% according to a survey i read) would probably come to similar conclusions.

The problem with most people is that instead of taking their religion seriously as an explanation for reality, they hold onto it blindly, because of some emotional "fix". I was born and raised a xtian and when I began questioning the beliefs that my parents held so blindly, my questioning was met with considerable hostility. I began to wonder, "how can people believe something without questioning it? Truth is, by definition, something that simple questions should not break down, but should rather enforce." So now when I come into contact with someone that believes in some form of metaphysical concept, I ask them to give me a clear definition of it. Most of the time they can't, and when they do, it is generally self-contradictory, or has circular logic. I finally realized that my parents hated me questioning their beliefs because they couldn't answer my questions and didn't want to think about it. Possibly because the questions that I brought up actually made them question it. And they wanted to have faith in it. Faith is such a useless concept. Wanting to believe something means nothing, otherwise a lot of wacky shit would be true. As kierkegaard discovered, you can only have faith if there is already a lack of evidence.

Enough of my history, I'm sure you don't want to hear my life story. I just want to congratulate you for having a nice, organized web site. I also want to congratulate you for having the one of the most common sense websites on the internet. Thank you for your time and for your enjoyable essays.

Regards,
Steve

[January 26, 2009]

I have truly been enlightened by the anti-philosophy. Thank you for giving me the answers to the questions that no god, or politic can even dream of answering for me. I had always known there were others out there like me that sought something beyond the moral squabbles of humanity. Your purpose is the truth, and at 20 years of age, I am far ahead of anybody around me, know matter what there age, education, or status may be.

 I know the truth.

Thank you.

~Krysto~

[January 2, 2009]

Translation of the Die letzte Glocke (The Last Bell),  from the original German into English by Arimahn, October 2008:

Sunshard, sickly, rains down on glass
Shadow phantoms jump from concrete to asphalt
Dirt, stench and human queues drift by
And I, yes I, are one among many

Just run, little humans, circle (around the) streets
Increase your goods and chattels
But soon, yes soon, they'll come

Droning clouds, black as Death

Ever faster the wheel is turning
(with seeing eyes...)
Ever deeper is the fall
(... you are fleeing into your own tomb)
Ever farther swings the scythe
(No escape)
Until the yield is rotting on the ground, plagued by rats

The last bell, it crashes
Down into the dirt of this world
[Her] bronze tone sounds mute
Into the dust
The last bell, it crashes/ /down into reality

Neon-Sea, diode-glow, cascades full of sound
Confusion and Temptation give an unholy escort
Leave me be, I'm not buying, not even your happiness

Because I, yes I, can reveal your lies

Just build your Babylon
Hybris' flight is rising higher
But soon, yes soon, cracks will rend this

Sick fundament of Earth's bones

[For] Two thousand years it gave the beat
Surrounded by cannons, (in) the blood of (the) extermination camps
Paved with the gold of our freedom it plays the song

Of assimilation, just hear it scream for your soul

How ever we're to turn and twist
Nothing's to do, seal the old casket
Whatever we aspire to, long for in pain/

Goodbye, occident, we extinguish the candles

If you just knew or imagined...
All the illusiveness is capturing you
But I, yes I, walk unseen

[A] Burning torch among the madness of this world

Ever louder the roof is cracking
(With hearing ears...)
Ever farther the pillar is swinging
(...you entomb yourselves in a house of sand)
Ever faster the beam is falling
(Dust to Dust)

And from it's tower the symbol of the occident comes tumbling down

"Peace on earth?"
...this makes me laugh!
Let this phantasm spark the fire!

To all of man's liking.

What do I care for the world you are ripping apart?

I just wanted to thank you for the information on your website. I never truly understood the meaning or purpose of nihilism until now. This is exactly how I have come to perceive myself and the world around me. It is good to know that I am not the only one that thinks the meaning of life is simply existence and that almost everything around us is completely irrelevant. Only a free mind can come to this realization. We are few and must spread the word to devolve our species. If not, all that will be left is human remains, gold bars and nuke casings.

Thanks again, Joel W. [June 2008]

Art by Philip Tarr, March 2008

Beliefs, by Paty Harden

Meaningless things,
Surround Human Beings,
Cloud up their Minds,
Confine them to Binds,
What do words mean?
And what do thoughts say?
When they take your whole life through monotonous Days?
Dissimulate fear, Believe in a God,
A reason to breathe and resume senseless Thoughts,
Cling to Beliefs, For they're all that you got,
Take off your vizard and cry when you're Caught,
Beliefs are the things that you think that you know,
Seeds in the fallow of a mind you can sow,
Beliefs are the things with potential to grow,
Go to the market and make yourself blow.
Soak in ideas, continue to till,
Beliefs spur a passion that's willing to kill.
Disown your brother, because he is gay,
Follow the rules that you have to obey.
That fellows' religion, is Different from Mine!
Ignorant fool, My God's more Divine!
The trees stand tall, they think not at All,
And when their time comes they surrender and fall,
Pertinacious till' they,
Succumb to a Pall,
Humans are desperate and grasp at it all,
Surrender your feelings, surrender beliefs,
Surrender ideas of duality,
Have a mind willing, For Eternal Release,
Until this is done you will never be Free.
[October, 2007]

Hey there, fellow rationalist,

I just wanted to write to you and let you know how thoroughly impressed that I am with your counterorder site. It is engaging, enlightening, compelling, and just simply mentally stimulating. Your essays are concise and are in every way copiously logical and irrefutable. We agree on every single point, yet I couldn't have said or written anything more proficiently than you did. I'd love to see a theist try to battle your wit and concise arguments!

Not to just kiss your fanny incessantly here... but seriously, I've done quite a bit of reading and research myself on nihilism and the quest for rationality in general, and few have had as compelling arguments and overall quality presentation of the ideology as yourself. You really have a strong command of language and the said rhetoric, and should be published. I'd certainly buy a copy.

Please don't feel obligated to write back. I am writing in extollment! Thank you so much for your site, and of course all of the years' worth of hard work and thought that you have put into it. I'm thoroughly relishing!

CM in NJ [2007]

"When nothingness is shown, Limitlessness is the apparent nothing"

-Philip Tarr, 2007

The droning of Human Animals could resemble music.
Sounds of industrialization mimic there internal dialogue
Their purpose. Building a factory of thought's driven by machines.
Droning, Droning on. We cant escape it's blast furnace of age old ideals.

-Philip Tarr, 2006

I don't want a false reality/ one with an American sponsored mentality/
black and white is not my fixation/ Ill never recite to that dictation/ No
absolute power - No absolute truth- those who have the most answers often
have the least proof - No absolute meaning is needed to find the absolute
reason why we live or why we die- Uniform ideas are set in stone/the descent
of free thought is systematically intone/ my path will avert the simulacra/
my arms will not carry the burden of mans law- We all have the ability to
question/ thoughts are unrestricted they move freely from detection/ a
horrifying glimpse of our existence/ a possible future is that of
independence?

Music lyrics from Doomed Youth, 11.01.07

I'd like to start off by saying that I enjoy reading the CounterOrder, and I agree with most of the points you've listed.

After reading the section titled "Death to Purpose," you noted "if your just going to die then what's the point of anything?" Now being a nihilist myself, I completely agree with this statement. The only question I have to that statement is basically what should determine the level of danger we subject ourselves to? Disregard for our well-being is self-destruction, it's having a death wish, not nihilism. Is it that we should be nonchalant about life/death, and ourselves in the bigger picture? This is what I understood from your quote. Please explain if possible.

mikhail

Well, my message wasn't quite that simple. By asking the rhetorical question I was trying to convey that if all you live for is to die then there's no (other) point to anything you do in between now and the end point. So no I don't think nihilism has to be a death wish for the self at all. The physical body is of limited endurance but we as intelligent human beings exist in other realms besides just the physical body, we have minds and a consciousness and we can think up new ideas, ruminate on existing ideas, invent, destroy and pass on both our genetic material and our mental ideas as well. Don't sell your existence short, use every minute of it!

Freydis [15.11.06]

Greetings,
               I am currently studying sociology at an advanced level in education and recently came across a criticism of post-modernism; that it contradicts itself in that it refuses meta-narratives but it itself appears to take the meta-narrative form. I was hoping for an explanation on what the nihilist stance was on meta-narratives and whether promoters would consider nihilism an overall, all-encompassing movement itself?

All help appreciated as a matter of interest.

Sincerely,
Anonymous interested individual

Hi,

The more I've studied postmodernism the less substance I can find in it. Any objective analysis of the whole postmodernism language and set of ideas has to conclude that it is either a bad joke taken seriously or one of the greatest academic frauds perpetrated on an unsuspecting public.

So to answer your question then, I'm not sure what a 'meta-narrative' is really supposed to mean and it would undoubtedly depend on the context anyway, but I'm going to assume the primary intent is to try and construct an all encompassing explanation of the universe and events in general. In that regard nihilism leads us to a few basic conclusions. Much of what we think of the world and events around us is based on perceptions, impressions that are often misleading or just plain inaccurate. Consistent rules, physical laws, are evident and significant but any all-encompassing purpose or design of things is not evident. In other words no ultimate purpose to anything on a cosmic scale can be found. Now we can certainly go farther than that but for now I'll just stop there.

Freydis [04.06.06]

Hi

I'm currently doing a university essay on consumerism. I was interested to know your opinions on the role consumerism and materialism play in the part of nihilism. I understand that consumerism is only a very tiny fragment of the nihilistic ideals but was interested to know what you thought consumerism has done to western society in general.

Many thanks, Karen

It seems to me that consumerism as we think of it today has its origins in the post WWII era of industrial production surplus, the result of mass production techniques and the commodities made available by a worldwide transportation system coupled with the socio-political need to maintain minimal unemployment. In the 1950s America propaganda pushed on the public made it clear that the duty of every citizen in a 'free' capitalistic country was to buy as many products as they could. Not surprisingly a materialistic consumer driven society emerged and has been refined over the decades since then. Consequently, the dominant value system is structured upon spending and acquiring money and increasingly the morality of good and bad are measured using dollars.

The beauty of this new morality is the quantifiable nature of it. This is a radical departure from all known previous moral orders that have been mostly arbitrary having been based on habit and tradition with the express, if often unstated, purpose of keeping things from changing.

This is a remarkable development in human history but it clearly leaves much to be desired since as we know capital is a sticky substance - it makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.

That this new morality is materialistic, quantifiable, and often merit-based and change friendly is not undesirable, and indeed these qualities are an inevitable consequence of rational development. Rather, the source of the problem is that the equation here is incomplete. The consumerist, capitalistic value system is circular and self-referential; it fails to include the negative externalities of industrial production, for example. Nor is it able to include intangible qualities such as beauty or friendship. Further, the moral foundation of this value system is based on a tautology in that rich is good and poor is bad, that winners win and the losers lose and the winners are perceived as being inherently better than the losers – a flawed interpretation of Darwinism twisted and perverted to substantiate a preordained conclusion.

The value of money is not being questioned or even being measured in a valid context. People structure their entire lives based on the search for monetary wealth (and the products it can buy), it is the desire for money just to have more money. The effort is pointless because it has no context just as consumers are divorced from meaning and a separate identity outside of the money loop. Consumers are strongly discouraged from finding or forming independent meaning and identity and especially from questioning the established value system of consumer driven capitalism, just as under more traditional moral authority codes.

Taking a grand view of events I have to conclude that the moral values of contemporary consumer driven capitalism are an intermediate stage in the progression towards a system that adequately includes human needs and the needs of the natural environment around us.

Freydis [24.03.06]

For me, nihilism, calls to mind mythology and the iconic monad of the Seraphim, an order of angels whose faces were forever concealed deeply in the folds of their wings. Everybody would like to see what lies behind the face of being, existence, truth, nihilism, et cetera, but we shall never see inside. Only the liar will. The wings are a shield and a lie form what would instantly kill us, or what would instantly drive us to kill ourselves.

Also the sun. Don't think you can get to the center, because you can't. Burn in it if you want to go.

The core of being is nothingness, which should transcend our terrible associations with nothingness -- the images and tones are of mythic stock, that they inspire awe and beauty in this waste we are mired in. We should always see wings even in the dark. I find pleasure in the idea that nihilism is an inevitable phase in the cycle of some mystical kind of human transcendence. I want to be able to call all beings nihilists, and believe that many know that they deny life or affirm it, in whatever actions or non-actions that characterize them.

I want nihilism to be the art of being. The awareness of an art of being.

Life is. Nihilism is.

But I could just as well be spouting bullshit to please myself, the pretender that I am. Why and what am I saying? Who knows who tells the truth, or how, as if it were possible that there was a set of truths to tell. This is life as it runs itself. No matter if you tell the truth, the truth cannot be told, only passively witnessed alone in the quick motions of a life that doesn't bow to adjectives.

There is no intimacy for those who deny life, just insanity and the unfulfilled lust for intimacy. Void. I don't want to act toward anything. I just want to die.

Poetry, art, homosexual crucifixions... ouch.
By anonymous, December 2005.

One of the interesting paradoxes inherent within nihilism is that is seems to promote individuality by suggesting that the individual doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. Nihilism can work with existentialism as well as hedonism to form the ideal philosophy (or anti-philosophy) which centers around the individual's decision to reject authority (God, government, traditional thought, etc.) in favor of creative and critical thinking. Hedonism can indeed lead to enslavement since a person is capable of allowing his pleasures to ruin his life. However, responsible hedonism can lead to pleasure. Slavery to one’s compulsions is essentially hedonism gone wrong. Then again, does pleasure exist if it is contingent upon the immediate present? Since desires need to be fulfilled each time they arise, how can one be happy from the fulfilling of an immediate urge? Those same urges may come back and haunt you moments later. Does the self really exist, if a person is capable of changing his self to adapt to different environments? Many people try to be themselves which is a contradiction of the concept itself.

Happiness is every bit a societal construct as is love. Sex is instinctual; love is utopian. Similarly, seeking pleasure is instinctual; happiness is utopian. You cannot achieve happiness since it is transitory. Christianity states that eternal happiness comes when one lives a good, “Christian” life. However, people are incapable of being happy on a consistent basis, and therefore it is illogical to think that life after death allows the self to stop being human, and turn into some sort of vegetative angel-like state. Humans are imperfect and are capable of good and evil. In fact, it is silly that society tries to dichotomize everything: good and bad, moral and immoral, black and white, democrat and republican, etc. Humans are too complex to be categorized by those silly labels.

Nihilism is a foundation for which to build your own philosophies on. It is a rejection of morality, religion, rules, government, etc., all of which are attempting to oppress the individual and scare him into a life of compliance. A true self derives from critical thinking, personal philosophies, and an understanding of the hypocrisies permeating the world we live in. Embrace nihilism by letting go of preconceived notions. By John Mancuso April, 2005.

Thank you for your insightful article on nihilism. I always had a feeling that there was a word for the way that I felt about the world, and more importantly, people who felt like me. I just didn't know what it was. Thank you for clearing it up.
Matt [January 4, 2005]

By: a human, September 27, 2004

Hi,
just a question, how can you say from a subjective point of view that reality is what it is. I am what you may call a nihilist but ultimately how can anything, including reality been know to "exist". How do you know our senses are lying to us is that not possible.

And you mention faith. Ultimately no faith is credible, but ultimately can you prove that the Olympians gods, the Judeo-Christian God, Superman, or the Jedi or anything else cannot exist given our finite and ultimately pointless "understanding" of the "existence" around us?
Sam [July 30, 2004]

Our senses and also our human brains have evolved to fit a certain range of experiences and events. For instance the eye is receptive to a very narrow range of radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum but we can’t detect x-rays for instance. But as in the case of x-rays we can still deduce that they exist from the effects. Everything about realty is an issue of cause and effect, of deducing a source from an event. When these connections are shown to be consistent throughout time and space they are considered to be objective phenomena existing outside the realm of simple human perceptions.

Our senses do ‘lie’ to us, especially from events that occur outside the usual framework of expectations, but this ‘lie’ is only because every human sense has to be interpreted by the mind. The lie can be identified through comparisons and alternative sources.

It’s impossible to prove a negative, which is why religions still cling leech-like to so many human minds even in the 21st century. If I make up a fantasy that has no capacity to be checked or verified then how can you or anyone else prove it doesn’t exist? The question to ask is not 'how can we disprove one fantasy after another' but rather: 'who cares, what bearing and effect does the fantasy actually have on daily life?!'

Freydis

 PART ONE: Life in general.

 Life and death are two things in life, so to say, that come and go  regularly. But there are some conditions and circumstances that pertain to the forced death of someone. Also, the disputed "murder" of something. This is where the various subtopics will be introduced.

But to begin with death, we must first begin with the topic of life itself. Being a fragile, hopeless, and beautiful thing all at once, life can cause and effect several things. One of these is the absense of life, or mortality. An example of something it can affect would be other lives.

Technology and civilization have, through centuries of cultivation, made life coexistence and interaction much easier. But has this done less good than harm? While civilization has evolved, it has adapted to ways of justifying bloodshed for profit, killing in the name of freedom and peace, and murder for security and protection from "evil doers". Through civilized methods of living, humans have made it to where the human race must exist and be convenienced at the expense of others. This arrogance caused by the fascist that is nature creates this bottom line- We're all born to die. So in the case of living, is this the price we have to pay to exist? Is this the price others have to pay for us to exist? Will the human race return the earth to how it originally was, or will it descimate what it has already begun to destroy?

Rather than to focus mainly on the bad, the pros of human life on earth must be visited. Although we are all natural consumers, humans have found ways to help repair the damage done. Examples of this are recycling, conservation, dietary habits (such as vegetarianism), cleaning up trash/hazardous waste, and environmental protection. Although many of us care about the way the human race has affected the earth, a very small percentage of that fraction do anything to help.

Through civilization, human race has brought yet another important factor: society. Although societies are natural and have been around since the invention of language and creation of communication, the society of humans has been the one to advance the greatest. But again, has this advance done more good than harm? Of course we can't possibly go back into the past at this point, we cant do much to prevent it. Therefore, we're victims of life because we didn't choose to be born or choose where to be born. This is the problem with birth that strikes me as the most agrivating.

Modern human society (most specifically, the United States) has become a hectic race for power. Patriotism, religion, and discrimination have destroyed all aspects of dignity in human life and continue to fool us all with warped meanings and contradicting aspects. In just about every aspect of the business society, there is an example of how speed and quantity overcome quality and how all of this ties into the true essense of human life. Not only that, but hierarchial classes, despotism, and class struggle affected living conditions of the upper, wealthy, powerful and merciless, to the lower, poor, weak, and merciful. But what about the middle? The middle class is more of a pawn than anything else. It's played for it's "worth" and  then "dumped" into the lower class. Or maybe some individual from the middle class has the lack of self-conscience required to kiss ass and climb the  hierarchial ladder. The middle class is a filler, the gap, the fools of the  hierarchial system. The middle class is just there to take up space, they are what keeps the political system in any society regulated and pacified. Regardless, this is how the system has existed for centuries. Is this freedom, or is this oppression?

Moving on, I would like to explain the conception of the individual. A human individual is equipped with a mind and a body to assist the mind. I see the mind as the basic source of anything in the body mainly because it is where the individual is run and controlled. Without a mind, an individual cannot function. But what matters most of all is the human ability to form an opinion. Whatever the eyes see, the mind takes in. And whatever processes is the opinion. Sometimes, however, the mind can question what it sees. But if the mind sees no other alternatives, it sees it's opinion as factual law. Just like how the early human may have first perceived religion. They saw things happen around them and knew that they could not possibly do that, such as moving water, lighting, wind, fire, thunder, precipitation, etc. Thus, they came to the conclusion that there must be something out there with more power than them. When they felt helpless and insecure, they turned to that power as a sense of faith and security. But this out-of-contexted "OPINION" was manipulated by individuals who believed that this "power" could be used to set in line society and get them to believe and do anything that the leader wished. Dissent was rebelling against the Almighty Power!

Dissent was rare due to the problem of which there is either a lack of factual information (or information in general, just words without detail, proof or explanation of why or how), or something biased used in a way to careen your attention away from the underlying topic. This could be anything form a controversial issue that a majority of people would have some sort of poignant attraction (or detraction) to, to a wrongly or falsely investigated case in news. For example, there could be a homeless person who has a family and is sick of being left out on the streets with nothing, and they rob, kill or harm something in order to get what they NEED, not necessarily what they want. Coverage of this on the news may warp the real reason why they killed or stole, saying that they had an disease, mental illness, or that they're clinically insane. This would be a reason to lock them up in jail. Or, in the case of the NYPD, a reason to patrol and kill off all the poor striving just to live up to their stolen and false aspirations. But is this murder either way in any way justifiable?

By Andy June 28, 2004; also published at The Revolt Press.

Could you please tell me the difference between existentialism and nihilism.
Or direct me to where i could find the answer.
 - Melissa

Existentialism is a category of philosophy that deals with the individual and their struggle to interact in life and define what is real; it concerns the difficulties of existence, hence the name. Famous existentialists include Sartre and Kierkegaard. Existentialism constructs elaborate philosophical structures trying to define some basic terms and it can all get quite murky but basically existentialism concludes that everyone is isolated and life is just angst.

Existentialism and nihilism have similarities and differences. Existentialism starts with many of the same issues as nihilism such as defining real, the nature and purpose of existence and the nature of individual goals too. Nihilism at root is significantly simpler than existentialism because it rejects those philosophical constructions and the intangibles that create endless debate. I suppose the primary difference is that existentialists maintain a set of beliefs that eventually builds to state that unhappiness can be overcome but nihilism would maintain that unhappiness is either inevitable or irrelevant.

It’s difficult to provide a concise answer to you question, especially given the multiple views and prejudices floating around concerning existentialism and nihilism. Author Robert G. Olson, who wrote the book An Introduction to Existentialism, calls existentialism nihilism in effect but not in intent. I think that sums it up pretty well. Existentialism is really just taking the very long and torturous route only to get to nihilism in the end. - Freydis, May 2004.

i broke away from catholicism in particualr, christianity and organized religions in general, several years ago. and i left in search of, at first, other points of view... trying to create an amalgam of all the ideologies and theologies and philosophies out there... in search of that "golden mean".... imagine my surprise when i read your "What is Nihilism" essay only to discover that i'm a nihilist. that last paragraph really clinched it for me.

and here i thought i was onto to something original.
;)

the power is in our hands. to better this world, or to let it degenerate. i'm gonna continue checkin out your site.

thanks.
Erik Bauer
nihilist

I have a question. It may sound like a fundamentalist question but I am just curious and I need an answer. Do you believe, or think, or even doubt in your mind that perhaps Jesus existed? If the answer is yes, does he not warrant even just a nod of approval for what he tried to do. I have read the counterorder site and I keep balancing in between different perspectives. I mean, is religion really that awful? I know it's not a perfect system but it does seem to keep people's minds occupied and by applying the morals I think it can make the world a better place. I believe that the message Jesus gave out, which basically was "love thy neighbor as thyself" is a very universal message. Imagine if people followed that code, would that be such a bad thing? I find your writings to be very interesting and very logical in many aspects, though sometimes it seems you give in to your subjective thoughts. Please respond with any kind of answer, I want to be convinced.  From: anonymous (per request)

Those are some important questions to ask. As far as Jesus, I wouldn’t be blown away if some archeological evidence for instance turned up to show he was a real person. But the existence of Jesus doesn’t validate the Christian belief set. The supernatural events supposedly associated with Jesus can’t be proven nor can any of the promises made to believers in the Bible. Heaven, angels, all the mystical characters of the Bible, where do these things exist? How do they interact with reality? They don’t! We might as well believe in purple elves that dance around mushrooms and promise to deliver us to the magical kingdom of peace on Pluto after we die just as long as we have faith they are real. It’s all just the wild imagination of ancient writers and the misty eyed testament of preachers and zealots that perpetuate it all.

On the surface religion does seem to benefit people, for instance the religious tend to be more disciplined and friendly. But the reason they are nice is so that others will want to adopt their beliefs and the reason they are disciplined is to set an example as an ambassador of their belief set so to speak. Further these positive attributers are basically universal throughout the believers. So even the most far-out UFO cult or the most mainstream Christian believer they all will be acting this way. I mean this is in general, of course regardless of the group or belief your going to find a few jerks and a few crazies, etc. Even people that have no spiritual guidance can gain these positive attributes say like those that study marital arts. So in this case religion is just a focus for the mind, a reference point for people to balance their lives, a reference I might add that could be substituted with something rooted in reality and gain the same benefits.

But nonsensical beliefs should never be let off the hook – how many have needlessly died in religious wars? How many people did the Catholic church torture for heresy or apostasy or whim? Religion is an excuse, it uses morality to justify the unjustifiable and stifle dissent, to do things that no one would approve of otherwise – exploitation, violence, injustice, terrorism, suffering, and on it goes.

The message Jesus handed out is fine, I mean I agree, I think we should treat others as we wish to be treated too. But nobody needs Jesus to do that. Buddhism is basically the same, albeit a bit more extreme because it carries over to animals and plants and anything else that could be animate.

People are always going to fight over something, but why give them religion too, why another reason to divide into sides and go at it and make the world and everyone in it go through hell? I think it boils down to the fact that when people fight over rational things like say water-rights, then a solution is always possible. But when they fight in an irrational mode over things that can’t even be measured like ‘my God is stronger than your God’ then it never ends. How long have Muslims and Hindus been fighting in India? How long have Jews been battling Muslims? How many crusades have been fought under the Holy Cross? Enough already. Time to stop acting stupid and start thinking.

I hope that wasn’t overkill or excessive given your very reasonable question. Anyway, thanks for your letter.

Freydis 19.01.04

dEFY yOUR mIND

What is openmindedness, I struggle now to think a different way & in doing so i had an epiphony, defy your mind, what i mean by that is simply to think about somthing, analyze it, over & over & then try to think of a different way entirely. To constantly defy what you percieve reality to be in turn making yourself more open minded, & in doing so you may achieve a level of clarity like the great philosopher Socrates, but ironically in doing this, you actually see things as a child, because if you think about it logically, you are seeing things again for the first time as a child of mind, this may be bordering on what we deem insane in this cumbersome culture, but the great philosophers were pretty much defying how their culture thought ; paving the way for the next generation of free thinking peoples & alienating the majority of the populous who didn't like very much to be told they in actuality know nothing, and lived very humble, poor in wealth lives (albeit intel!lectually fullfilling) and hated by the prominent religions for trying to free peoples minds, instead of telling them THIS IS THE WAY THINGS ARE. Everything is conditioned in our society as well as others, because that is the way we learn, but can we go beyond this, can we see that maybe that was necessary to learn for awhile till you come to a certain point in your life, then realize this is only like that to get me to where I am now, now I have realized what life was like in reflection, and to see that I can easily become complacent in what i thought i knew by the pre conditioning our society has laid upon us.
It's funny, if someone asked a question like "Are we the toy of some alien creature etc", I would have said anything is possible almost instinctually, sort of laid onto us by such shows as star trek, but now that i actually analyze this statement, I was saying that simply to impress other people in what i thought was openmindedness, but did I actually contemplate this question beyond how we are taught to think, the answer of course is NO. But now as the epiphony passes, it makes me giggle in a childlike reverie and i can sit here in quiet contemplation for hours ( I think i finally have an understanding of the techniques of meditation, once I would have said what a boring way to spend your life but now i see it truly is contemplation), now yes i'm sure i may be called a lunatic by some, but I don't really care on how my thinking is viewed, i am however self conscious about the way i carry myself, how i sound, what i look like etc etc, which has all been conditioned into us,! Now you may ask yourself well isn't that just what life is, but why should it be like that, just because you were taught somthing, doesn't mean it's right and why should it, we talk of evolution , but how can we ever hope to get beyond this when we keep ourselves here as prisoners, hardly anyone questions things, we all just sit here complacently doing what we know. Do these things matter, caring on how your physical appearance attracts the opposite sex is very important in our culture, actually in analyzing it is the whole basis for why we do anything, besides essential survival instincts, which reproduction ironically falls under. Now what I have stated makes me somewhat vulnerable to being categorized as eccentric or bordering on insanity possibly as pre determined by our cultural unwritten laws.

What is openmindedness really, we try to give designation to a concept that is everchanging , and in some respect defies being labeled but of course the humane qualities in us force it to be given a label for terminology's sake, but how can you define the undefineable because the second we think of somthing else, such as the possibility that we could be the plaything of some alien entity, that it shifts, because now that can be an accepted thought & now to think that possibility isn't exactly openminded, it's not your thought, it was based on someone elses thought and we do not really have imaginations, only memory recall, plus what i'd like to call good accesorization which without would surely leave us devoid of any type of dynamic concepts or progress. Anyhow, contemplating that once alien concept is now an acceptable ponderance, as we learn from things such as Star Trek, which endeavors to think of itself as a parallel for what life could be like in some idealistic! society, but it is still stuck in what we consider human thought (probably cause we don't know anything else).

The philosophicity & relevance of this question I believe is to attain an understanding of why we are where we are & can't get past some of these initial concepts, so we are actually stuck in our evolution of the mind because we can't seem to get beyond the reproductive aspects and why these procreational ideas come into play are simply we fear death, so we want a part of us to go on, it is a struggle against death, living beings are all fighting nonexistence, and striving for immortality. You may ask yourself what is the point of being immortal, defeating time, it would seem to expand our knowledge, to learn more and gain a heightened sense of awareness. So we want infinite knowledge to achieve infinite power, but these are human concepts & we allow them to remain as they are, let's break society down (as much as I abhorr to categorize it is indeed human nature to do so ["Thou Shalt Not Judge" really, {note my sarcasm} ] the "intellectualls" or what they'd like to think !of themselves as, would understand and/or agree with my views. Some would discuss them with me and point what they think are flaws or whatnot and some would think I'm a moron that has no idea what he's talking about, among the common people, they'd either get bored of what I'm philosophizing and tell me so or tell me I am a deep thinker and then change the topic to the suberbowl. Now the "morons" or intellectually devoid, would think I'm crazy cause I'm just blabbering words or would just tell me to pray and believe in god then smile and offer more cookies. I am breaking this down to show the pertinence of it. It takes a majority to change a society, & unfortunately the intellectually enlightnened are in minority as they always have been, so it seems we will be stuck in a perpetual cycle of non-progression of mind.

By khorne

Hello!

No questions, no criticism!

Just a big thank you for having this web up! I finally found something worth reading in this trash internet world! I have no words to describe my delight when I found your page! I though I was all alone in this world; that didn’t really bother me though cause I don’t mind spiritual solitude. It just made me wonder and sometimes angry with human nature.

All the pages I’ve found in the past about Nihilism were just another illogical, mislead, hooligan commercial, signifying - once again with the archetype fear of death - a form of religion. That basically makes me sick!

So thank you! Thank you for your work, thank you for your effort and thank you for your time on this page!

Yours truly,
Alexandra N.S. [October 2003]

This website is a pillar of inspiration and support for me. I thank you for that. My hat goes off to you truthspeaker.
asylum seaker [September 2003]

< Click here to view more letters and comments on Page Two >