[MD] Nihilism

[Ham Priday]

Hi Marsha, SA --

[Marsha said]:
> This, to me, is an interesting subject.  I have read
> both RMP and the Dalai Lama reject nihilism.
> I have called myself a happy nihilist, but I am really
> confused regarding this term.  Is the rejection a
> rejection of nihilism, or the depression that is so
> often associated with the word.  My dictionary
> defines it in the philosophical sense as:
> _extreme skepticism, esp. with regard to value
> statements or moral judgements._
> But this word also seems to carry a whole lot of
> negative connotation.  Should it?  Does 'nothingness'
> or understanding that absolute truth is beyond human
> knowledge_ still deserve such a negative connotation?
>  I think some acceptance is in order.

[SA said]:
> I also have tried to understand this term.  I believe I
> know what it means according to Ham, but I'm not
> understanding how what I'm about to say can be
> contrived to mean nihilism.  Maybe I've got Pirsig's
> MOQ all wrong, but this is how I view some of his
> metaphysics.  I'd appreciate any collabration to clear
> up any misleadings as to how I've decided what Pirsig
> means.

I'll defer to the the Pirsigians as to whether the MoQ is nihilistic.

My Webster's Collegiate Dictionary provides the following definition:
"'nihil' nothing -- more at 'nil'.  a: the viewpoint that traditional values
and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless."

Runes' Dictionary of Philosophy says:
"The doctrine that nothing, or nothing of a specified and very general
class, exists, or is knowable, or is valuable.  Thus Gorgias held that (1)
Nothing exists; (2) Even if something did exist it could not be known; (3)
Even if it were known, this knowledge could not be communicated.
Schopenhauers's pessimism and denial of the Will [this was his "alternative"
position] expresses a nihilistic attitude toward the so-called values of the
world.  As a social doctrine, Nihilism is the belief that progress is
possible only through the destruction of all social and political
organizations."

In my opinion, the denial of a primary source or cause of Existence is
tantamount to a rejection of cosmic purpose and human meaning.  To assert
that Nothingness is the ultimate reality is to deny ultimate reality and the
essential value that it holds for man.  Pirsig makes Quality exclusive to
the material universe and (its "intellectual byproduct") the collective
society.  Thus for him, Morality is innate in the universe, and value or
purpose (teleology) is a function of natural evolution rather than
contingent upon human sensibility and free choice.  From my essentialist
point of view, any philosophy that rejects the value of the individual
relative to a non-existential source is amoral and nihilistic.

I welcome your thoughts on this matter.

Regards,
Ham