Nietzsche saw nihilism as something to be overcome: — Pfhorrest
Nietzsche saw nihilism as something to be overcome: that people would rightly reject religious doctrine and traditional beliefs and values, and having nothing left, fall i to nihilism, but that that was a phase which needed to be overcome, building something new and better in the place of those old rejected views.
I imagine most would agree that good philosophy should involve sound reasoning, no? And sound reasoning renders faith superfluous/unnecessary (faith comes in precisely where/when we lack a sound rational or evidential basis for something). — Enai De A Lukal
Well sure, but utterly unquestionable/infallible vs. a matter of faith strikes me as an obviously false dilemma- there is ground in the middle, right? — Enai De A Lukal
And being faithful to a given endeavor is a different matter than having faith in this or that proposition or belief.
Sounds like an oxymoron, and not what I meant in any case- i.e. that it seems fairly obvious (and certainly plausible at the very least) that there can be reasonable (i.e. well-justified) belief that falls short of certain or infallible knowledge, but is also based on more than mere faith. I would expect most beliefs/positions fall into this category in fact.I suppose the middle ground here is faith in one’s reasoning.
Faith in, not faith that, I suppose (though you'd have to be more specific, I'm not sure I understand what exactly you're referring to here)... but again, so what?Pfhorrest spoke of rejection, of two things, and it being core to his philosophy, so if he faltered in his rejection wouldn’t that show a lack of faith?
... is also based on more than mere faith. — Enai De A Lukal
so what?
I doubt that Pfhorrest’s philosophy is based on mere faith.
So don’t be hung-up with the notion of faith. It’s not only about religious belief.
I am interested to hear what you were referring to there- how/where/when did Nietzsche "falter in his rejection" of either faith (in the relevant epistemic sense- i.e. faith-that certain propositions are true, not faith-in) or nihilism, and what do you think follows from this? — Enai De A Lukal
Does nihilists (in Nietzsche's positive sense) believe in objective moral truth, in the sense that it exists but we don't yet know it? — MadWorld1
ou can certainly disagree with Nietzsche's prescriptions on this point, but he actually had a pretty robust and detailed view of what was to come next (the ubermensch and humanity's "highest specimens", amor fati, affirmation of life, etc) — Enai De A Lukal
And of course there is no description of a "superman society", since "the goal of mankind cannot lie in its end, but in its highest specimens"- the overman is an individual who is defined, at least in part, by standing apart from the crowd and going their own way. — Enai De A Lukal
Was Friedrich Nietzsche for or against Nihilism? — hallaellerenna
Nietzsche saw nihilism as something to be overcome: that people would rightly reject religious doctrine and traditional beliefs and values, and having nothing left, fall i to nihilism, but that that was a phase which needed to be overcome, building something new and better in the place of those old rejected views. — Pfhorrest
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.