markdohle Posted December 12, 2017 #1 Share Posted December 12, 2017 “Optimistic Nihilism” and Whistling Past God’s Graveyard The colorful six-minute animation from the YouTube channel Kurzgesagt recently raked in millions of views with a brief history of...well, everything. The narrator offers a naturalistic view of the entire universe, but carries it to nihilistic conclusions. You’ve heard the story before: In its infancy, humanity believed in God, purpose, and the centrality of human life to cope with the scariness of earth. As we got “older,” science showed us how backward these ideas were. The condescension toward believers and the assumed conflict between faith and reason is not surprising. What is surprising is Kurzgesagt’s conclusion about what this all means in the end. In short, we come face to face with an inconceivably enormous universe that is from nothing, for nothing, and amounts to nothing, culminating finally in its own heat death. continue https://strangenotions.com/optimistic-nihilism-and-whistling-past-gods-graveyard/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 12, 2017 #2 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Oh the irony. But alas, we are free to choose however we want to think about the Universe. It's an enormous equation when calculated, that produces without emotion by itself, an answer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markdohle Posted December 12, 2017 Author #3 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Even though I am a Christian, I can see how this video could ring some comfort to people who think along those lines. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoFish Posted December 13, 2017 #4 Share Posted December 13, 2017 45 minutes ago, markdohle said: “Optimistic Nihilism” and Whistling Past God’s Graveyard The colorful six-minute animation from the YouTube channel Kurzgesagt recently raked in millions of views with a brief history of...well, everything. The narrator offers a naturalistic view of the entire universe, but carries it to nihilistic conclusions. You’ve heard the story before: In its infancy, humanity believed in God, purpose, and the centrality of human life to cope with the scariness of earth. As we got “older,” science showed us how backward these ideas were. The condescension toward believers and the assumed conflict between faith and reason is not surprising. What is surprising is Kurzgesagt’s conclusion about what this all means in the end. In short, we come face to face with an inconceivably enormous universe that is from nothing, for nothing, and amounts to nothing, culminating finally in its own heat death. continue https://strangenotions.com/optimistic-nihilism-and-whistling-past-gods-graveyard/ I see nothing wrong. I'm pretty much an "Optimistic Nihilist". No need to dress up the unknown with imaginary friends and enemies. Here's the video in question. I've shared this before. Helps to put all those imaginary problems people have in life into perspective. Cheer up champ. One of us in wrong. Neither one knows who. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podo Posted December 13, 2017 #5 Share Posted December 13, 2017 I don't see the video's ending as negative. It's rational, using conclusions that can be achieved via the current body of scientific knowledge. This is sound logic. The universe doesn't have to have a point to it for it to be real, and here, and ours. Life is far too important, considering it is so short, to be taken seriously. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #6 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) It seems to me that if one has concluded the universe doesn't have to have a point to it for it to be real, then it might also occur that being antagonistic, which is to be actively hostile or in opposition to the spiritual realities of the point of the Universe, this might be something that ought to be avoided. Having honest doubts is understandable, but why keep the door closed? If that's what one is doing. Edited December 13, 2017 by Will Due 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoFish Posted December 13, 2017 #7 Share Posted December 13, 2017 The universe existed fine before me and it'll be fine without me. The main point to optimistic nihilism (at least to me) is to not take life too serious. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only_ Posted December 13, 2017 #8 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) Edited December 13, 2017 by TruthSeeker_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 13, 2017 #9 Share Posted December 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Will Due said: It seems to me that if one has concluded the universe doesn't have to have a point to it for it to be real, then it might also occur that being antagonistic, which is to be actively hostile or in opposition to the spiritual realities of the point of the Universe, this might be something that ought to be avoided. Having honest doubts is understandable, but why keep the door closed? If that's what one is doing. Why should one avoid being actively hostile or in opposition to the western ideology of being obedient to law by imposition ( god)? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #10 Share Posted December 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sherapy said: Why should one avoid being actively hostile or in opposition to the western ideology of being obedient to law by imposition ( god)? There isn't anything wrong with being antagonistic towards western ideology. But why, if it's what one is doing, be in opposition or actively be hostile towards the spirit realities that exist in the Universe, and thereby miss the point of temporarily existing as a person of free will dignity, who can choose to be cooperative instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted December 13, 2017 #11 Share Posted December 13, 2017 37 minutes ago, Sherapy said: Why should one avoid being actively hostile or in opposition to the western ideology of being obedient to law by imposition ( god)? Which definition of imposition? It's a word with graduated meaning, from positive to negative. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #12 Share Posted December 13, 2017 11 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Which definition of imposition? It's a word with graduated meaning, from positive to negative. I think Sheri can look that up in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted December 13, 2017 #13 Share Posted December 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Will Due said: I think Sheri can look that up in my book. Being forced to read and accept what another writes as truth and right thinking, Will, is itself and imposition in the negative sense. Faith can no more be forced or coerced than love, and what arises from such attempts negates any good intended. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #14 Share Posted December 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Being forced to read and accept what another writes as truth and right thinking, Will, is itself and imposition in the negative sense. Faith can no more be forced or coerced than love, and what arises from such attempts negates any good intended. I don't think it says that in the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #15 Share Posted December 13, 2017 6 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Being forced to read and accept what another writes as truth and right thinking, Will, is itself and imposition in the negative sense. Faith can no more be forced or coerced than love, and what arises from such attempts negates any good intended. No wait. I found this: Spoiler The argumentative defense of any proposition is inversely proportional to the truth contained. So I guess you're right. PS, I agree with your statement above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted December 13, 2017 #16 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Just now, Will Due said: I don't think it says that in the book. I read your book, Will, years ago. It was a harder slog to get through than Hubbard's wretched Dianetics. It pegged my BS meter more than a few times and seemed largely derivative, mostly a hodge-podge of uncredited quotes and passages from other works. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 13, 2017 #17 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Which definition of imposition? It's a word with graduated meaning, from positive to negative. It was asked in the vein of Will's warning to avoid being in opposition or hostile to man made interpretations. I wanted to know and still want to know why should one avoid this? I suppose it would be the negative meaning of imposition. Edited December 13, 2017 by Sherapy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 13, 2017 #18 Share Posted December 13, 2017 55 minutes ago, Will Due said: There isn't anything wrong with being antagonistic towards western ideology. But why, if it's what one is doing, be in opposition or actively be hostile towards the spirit realities that exist in the Universe, and thereby miss the point of temporarily existing as a person of free will dignity, who can choose to be cooperative instead? What spirit realities Will? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted December 13, 2017 #19 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Just now, Sherapy said: It was asked in the vein of Will's warning to avoid being in opposition or hostile to man made interpretations. I wanted to know and still want to know why should one avoid this? I suppose it would be the negative of imposition. I assumed as much, merely a rhetorical question for the sake of clarity. One should be wary of anything imposed contrary to one's own will--no pun intended. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #20 Share Posted December 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Hammerclaw said: I read your book, Will, years ago. It was a harder slog to get through than Hubbard's wretched Dianetics. It pegged my BS meter more than a few times and seemed largely derivative, mostly a hodge-podge of uncredited quotes and passages from other works. Good to know Hammer. But it isn't my book. I never got lost in it perhaps being derivative though. I just read it judging it by its cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted December 13, 2017 #21 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Just now, Will Due said: Good to know Hammer. But it isn't my book. I never got lost in it perhaps being derivative though. I just read it judging it by its cover. Oh, my God, Will! You can't judge a book by it's cover! *lol* 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 13, 2017 #22 Share Posted December 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Hammerclaw said: I assumed as much, merely a rhetorical question for the sake of clarity. One should be wary of anything imposed contrary to one's own will--no pun intended. My thoughts too. It could be that Will aligns with code law, that which is mandated by imposition. I was curious as to what he was avoiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #23 Share Posted December 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sherapy said: What spirit realities Will? Sheri, I don't want to be rude. Everyone has their capacity to understand certain things or not. My dad asked me the same thing several times. I'm sorry, but I don't scratch my head anymore when I'm asked about what's to me, and I'm also pretty sure is to many others, one of the most basic things to percieve as a human being. Spirit realities. No disrespect. Everyone isn't the same in that regard, I'm begrudgingly coming around to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 13, 2017 #24 Share Posted December 13, 2017 11 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: I read your book, Will, years ago. It was a harder slog to get through than Hubbard's wretched Dianetics. It pegged my BS meter more than a few times and seemed largely derivative, mostly a hodge-podge of uncredited quotes and passages from other works. And no one knows who wrote the UB. at least with Joesph Smith (that is what Dianetics and the UB remind me of) we all know he was sitting behind the curtain plagiarizing the Bible. Sheesh. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted December 13, 2017 #25 Share Posted December 13, 2017 7 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Oh, my God, Will! You can't judge a book by it's cover! *lol* Of course you can. How else will you even think to open it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now