Please clarify.

There's nothing to clarify, you're just not reading what I'm saying charitably, and misinterpreting things.

If everything I have the world just gave me, then I have no individual worth and therefore my input is not even worthwhile, so again, why bother? — Noblosh

It doesn't follow from everything you have being given to you that you have no individual worth for example. These are two distinct ideas. You who prise "logic" should know that.

It's logical: if I never earned anything because everything was given to me, then I have no individual worth.

if I never earned anything because everything was given to me, then I have no individual worth. — Noblosh

No this doesn't follow.

1) I didn't earn anything
2) Therefore I'm not worth anything

That's an incomplete argument right there. (2) doesn't follow from (1).

Of course it does, worth is derived from what has been earned.

Of course it does, worth is derived from what has been earned. — Noblosh

Who says so?

That's another premise you're trying to smuggle in without justification.

Now who's being purposefully obnoxious?
earn: to come to be duly worthy of or entitled or suited to; to make worthy of or obtain for

You can't even recognise a syllogism?

1) I didn't earn anything
2) Worth is derived from what has been earned
3) Therefore I am not worth anything.

Your so called definition is nothing but premise 2. It's not a certainty, it's a premise. I'm asking you what justifies that premise? The conclusion is only as strong as the premises.

There are words and there are definitions for them. Do you want me to justify language?

There are words and there are definitions for them. Do you want me to justify language? — Noblosh

Yes there are definitions you make up in order to hide behind your nonexistant philosophy.

1.
to gain or get in return for one's labor or service:
to earn one's living.
2.
to merit as compensation, as for service; deserve:
to receive more than one has earned.
3.
to acquire through merit:
to earn a reputation for honesty.
4.
to gain as due return or profit:
Savings accounts earn interest.
5.
to bring about or cause deservedly:
His fair dealing earned our confidence.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/earn

Since when is earning (in any of the above definitions) necessarily tied to what someone is worth? Is a baby worth nothing because they haven't earned anything? Really this BS is hardly worth discussing. You either put in proper effort to defend your positions or there's really nothing to talk about.

Deny definitions all you want but it's your position that I owe the world anything at stake here.

With all due respect... would you two mind taking your verbal wrestling contest elsewhere please? Making this thread sad and depressing to read is unfortunately not an example of "Depression and Philosophy". Thank you.

On the contrary, determining our relation(s) with the world is at the core of assessing depression.

On the contrary, determining our relation(s) with the world is at the core of assessing depression. — Noblosh

Seems pretty uncontroversial to me to say that we owe our lives to the blind watchmaker, or Nature, or God, or chance, or history, or whatever as long as we don't claim to have earned it already. And given that our lives will be taken from us at some point, it does not seem that the ecological and moral economy allows us to earn more than our keep from the world, at best. Accumulating worth like profit seems out of the question.

Owing implies an obligation to reciprocate so unless you consider worship valid, there's no way to reciprocate so then owing a conceptual entity our selves makes no sense. Also, life is a condition, it can't be literally exchanged. If you're speaking figuratively, then please clarify.

Owing implies an obligation to reciprocate — Noblosh

Owing to the categorical stupidity of this declaration, I will not be attempting to engage with it.

Owing implies an obligation to reciprocate — Noblosh

Owing to the categorical stupidity of this declaration, I will not be attempting to engage with it. — unenlightened

Then why do it?

to owe: to be under obligation to pay or repay in return for something received
to reciprocate: to make a return for something

If you have nothing valuable to say, please don't.

Common man... why are you purposefully being such a sophist? It's crystal clear that you're making absolutely no effort to engage in discussion, and because of that it's difficult to reply to you.

verb (used with object), owed, owing.
1.
to be under obligation to pay or repay:
to owe money to the bank; to owe the bank interest on a mortgage.
2.
to be in debt to:
He says he doesn't owe anybody.
3.
to be indebted (to) as the cause or source of:
to owe one's fame to good fortune.
4.
to have or bear (a feeling or attitude) toward someone or something:
to owe gratitude to one's rescuers

Take a look at 3. (from dictionary .com)
To take their example, one might owe one's fame to good fortune, but one does not have either the obligation or the means to repay it. In the case of life, which one owes in the same way to the world, the world will reclaim its gift in due course, one is not obliged to hasten to repay.

When you have nothing valuable to say, please don't. — Noblosh

I had something valuable, but you did not take advantage. Instead, you thought you could argue from the meaning of words, to the nature of the world. This is known in the trade as 'magical thinking'.

All this talk about value...

What a subjective thing value is.

Depression is a form of nihilism, which in of itself is quite an objective conclusion to arrive at.

Only the insane are never depressed.

One can be happy and depressed, methinks.

There is truth to depression.

You made no argumentation and you're still the one complaining.
What makes me a sophist? What do you expect from a discussion?
Clarification would indeed help the discussion and you avoid it. Case in point:

It's crystal clear that you're making absolutely no effort to engage in discussion — Agustino

That's just a wild claim and so is this:

I had something valuable — unenlightened

Which is continued from yet another such claim:

Owing to the categorical stupidity of this declaration — unenlightened

Also cherrypicking and nitpicking don't make for strong arguments but silly ones:

Take a look at 3. (from dictionary .com)
To take their example, one might owe one's fame to good fortune, but one does not have either the obligation or the means to repay it. — unenlightened

From the same dictionary:

indebted: committed or obligated to repay a monetary loan; obligated for favors or kindness received

Agustino's comments:

you didn't create yourself nor are you responsible entirely for who you are - so you have a duty to the world (which gave you everything) — Agustino

The world owes you nothing because it has already given you everything. — Agustino

But one can't have a duty to good fortune, in fact the context in which the example is used as a phrase is when its subject is precisely deem not worthy which just strengthens my argument that:

If everything I have the world just gave me, then I have no individual worth and therefore my input is not even worthwhile — Noblosh

So we were not using a figurative variant for to owe that means tracing the source of but the literal one.
Still if you'd stubbornly and unreasonably argue that I deny a dictionary's definition by dismissing its poor example then you'd have misunderstood, I don't deny owing one's fame to good fortune is a valid usage but that because of its figurative nature you can't subject it to reasoning in its literal form.
But that situation would be off the point anyway.

So... do you people really want a better discussion or do you just want me to stop challenging your beliefs?
Ah, relax, that was just a wild claim.

But what's nihilism value for you then?

But what's nihilism value for you then? — Noblosh

Of it being True, what can have greater value than truth?

Of it being True, what can have greater value than truth? — Question

Usefulness?

So... do you people really want a better discussion or do you just want me to stop challenging your beliefs? — Noblosh

>:O Why do you think you've challenged my beliefs? You think you've made me doubt them?

A gun can be useful. How is it's use the greatest philosophical value?

Alternatively, what is the value of truth, per se?

Or, how is value true?

I don't know. It seems as if truth is just truth and value is just value. Truth certainly seems to be valuable in some situations. I mean if you are ill with a condition that can be treated then a true diagnosis is of great value.

My question, though, is as to whether truth just in itself is somehow valuable, and not merely for practical reasons.

So, I clearly understand the question as to the value of truth (even if there seems to be no easy answer to it) but the question as to the truth of value is by no means so clear. If it is clear to you, then perhaps you could elaborate?

My question, though, is as to whether truth just in itself is somehow valuable, and not merely for practical reasons. — John

That clarifies what you meant, for me. But, still...I have trouble with the whole thing; the language of the whole situation. Truth being "somehow valuable", "not merely for practical reasons"? So, how is value predicated? Why are practical reasons things we should try to pursue? I don't understand these sorts of questions and arguments because I don't understand how you can use language to predicate things you think are significant and then afterwards ask questions about the word "truth".

The question for me is not to do with pursuing practical reasons. Not even in the Kantian sense; I never found the idea that we are warranted in believing in Freedom, Immortality and God for practical (in this context meaning 'moral') reasons convincing.

It's more to do with whether it is valuable to believe (in the sense of 'live according to') what is genuinely believed to be true just on account of the fact that we do genuinely believe it is true, or is it just that we cannot help believing what we genuinely believe to be true. Is it more important to be authentic than it is to be happy in, for example, believing what we know to be comforting but quite likely false (given that we are capable of doing that)?