@Noble Dust

Good points. I shall have to think about them

no morals. Except, "moral nihilism" then becomes a contradiction.

Given that you seem to value moral nhilism

I was going to salute you for being a true nihilist

How do you deal with the paradoxical contradiction i am now faced with?
Or perhaps you have rejected moral nhilism because of it, if so what have you come to favour and why?

@Noble Dust

Sorry typo: emotions have conotations of morality. Love is good, anger is bad etc. most of language has conotations to morality

@Noble dust

I do not folloow, sorry. Perhaps you could elaborate for me.

Since so much of our vocabulary is influenced by concepts of good and evil it is hard to describe moral nhilism. Emotions have the most connotations of ideas pertaining to consepts of emmotion, most things do. This often makes it hard for a moral to describe his point of veiw.

However indiffernce has no connection with morals. Unless indifference is considered a moral stand point in and of itself, that would make things complicated, but i would argue that indifference is not a moral stand point since one is indifferent to morality

If you were not refering to my indiffernce but my dogma, i say that every possible philosophical possition has dogma, no system is free of dogma perhaps the only thing free of dogma is

Cognito ergo sum

Hmm theres alot of good stuff in this

Then comes your emotional being, which allows you to feel emotion, empathy, and sympathy, allowing for the transcending of social life

I would argue that our emotional being does not transcend social life, social life is founded upon or emotions, love, sorrow, freindship, acceptance and unfortunately negative emotions are also prevalent in social life, fear, rejection, jealosy, hate and fustration. Perhaps we could say that our emotional being is mutually exclusive, you cannot have the two seperatly. So i would not say that our emotional being transcends or physical being. Maybe some examples are needed

-Depression can be caused by chemicals in the brain
-Sex is a meld of physical pleasure and love (hopefully)
-When one stubbs their toe it is immediately followed by fustration
-When one is nervous they feel sick in the stomach

However arguments could perhaps be made that our rational being can indeed transcend our physical and emotional being equally arguments can also be made that the rational being is as much inter conected as the other two forms of being

I might also advocate that wisdom can transcend even reason itself but this does not mean i am advocating religous transcendance

Last thing: i noticed some dualism present in your argument but i am not familiar with the arguments agaisnt dualism perhaps someone more knowledgeable than myself might help me in this regard.

Some advice from a misathrope

Just leave them alone that is what they prefer. Dont try and be nice or to act altruisticly, they dont care.

And why am i misathropic?
Certainly nit because of war, inequality, greed, sexism. Shallowness perhaps
And your arguments against misanthrope a poor. Why?

My dogma arises from moral nhilism, rejection of good and evil which leads to a veiw of indifference. Humanity and life i general is indifferent. So that is how i am, indiffernt.

But indiffernce is differnt from "a dislike of humankind". well indiffernce is offten mistaken for disike it is not that i wish people to be unhappy so to speak im merely indifferent to wheter they are happy or not

That is my dogma

I feel like a quote is needed from Schopenhauer. Someone whos wisdom you would instantly dismiss because he is a wild mysoginist, slightly racist and generally hypocritical. At least he has a response

"It is therefore just as little necessary for the saint to be a philosopher as for the philosopher to be a saint; just as it is not necessary for a perfectly beautiful person to be a great sculptor, or for a great sculptor to be himself a beautiful person. In general, it is a strange demand on a moralist that he should commend no other virtue than that which he himself possesses."

Tolstoy is perhaps one of my favourite authors, i find it a great shame that one should overlook his great wisom (In my opinion one of the wisest men in histoy) because he treated his wife poorly. We are all hypocrites in some way, i am, you are. no one is perfect, so we should not dismiss great ideas because of the mistakes people have made. If you are looking for someone who has allways maintain their morality the only person i can point you too is christ. That is if you believe the Christians when they say he never sinned (i dont).