5 ms·

Yeah, actually I agree. Rust is one of the very few characters I can think of off the top of my head that successfully bridges the gap between romantic cynicism

by dsacco 9y ago

Yeah, actually I agree. Rust is one of the very few characters I can think of off the top of my head that successfully bridges the gap between romantic cynicism and true nihilism.

tptacek 9y ago
How is Rust a nihilist?
- m12k 9y ago
  In the strict sense, as in "rejects all metaphysics AND all morals", I'm not sure I've ever seen a truly nihilistic character in any medium (the Joker might be one of the closest, though he might also be seen as being driven by highly warped morals instead). So on the subject of Rust: He does reject all metaphysics, but when it comes to morals, while he does not reject them completely, his relativism and pessimism, his struggle to find any sense in them, to justify why he acts like good or bad existed even if he doesn't truly believe that they do, that all leaves him closer to nihilism than we almost ever see in characters even if it is not 'truly' nihilism in the strict sense.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    It's been a couple years since I watched, but isn't Rust an extremely moral character, possibly even more so than Martin Hart? He has a moral code and is driven, to the point of his own self-destruction, by a purpose outside of himself. Nihilism doesn't mean "no believing in metaphysics". Meanwhile: in what possible way is George Costanza not a nihilist?
    - m12k 9y ago
      > Nihilism doesn't mean "no believing in metaphysics" From http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ "While few philosophers would claim to be nihilists, nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history" and "It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence." (I think this actually fits a lot of Rust's character traits - even if I do agree that he is a moral character, but one struggling to justify those morals, and with self-destructive behaviors as a consequence) So I agree that a rejection of morality is the much more central point of the concept of nihilism, but since it comes from radical scepticism, then rejection of religion, metaphysics, and anything else that requires faith, is an unavoidable side effect. On a more personal note: I believe that extreme skepticism will put you in a place that's not sustainable for a mind to be in, and you'll eventually move on from it into 1) Embracing the pointlessness and its destructiveness and derive a sort of purpose from that, aka nihilism 2) Rejecting the pointlessness but acknowledging the fact that the morals you use to escape it are a social construct and not divinely given (aka Sartre's brand of existentialism) or 3) reject the pure skepticism and find meaning in religion after all (Kirkegaard's brand of existentialism). I'd say that Rust as a character is in the deliberation state between these outcomes (and I'd say he seems to go in a sort of 3)-ish way, though maybe more Buddhist than Christian). So no, not nihilist, but brushing up against it nonetheless
      - tptacek 9y ago
        I guess, bringing this back to Rustin, that I'm just saying that there's no such thing as a deeply moral nihilist. To have moral convictions is to reject nihilism. Nihilists aren't "super atheists".
        dsacco 9y ago
        I'd challenge that very strongly. I think morality is very compatible with nihilism, both in the existential and moral nihilistic varieties. In existential nihilism, the only real requirement is that the nihilist rejects any notion of intrinsic meaning to life and existence (at least if I'm not mistaken, I'm rusty on these things). Moral nihilism is a natural extension of that which just requires a rejection of intrinsic morality. I would broadly say that it's really difficult to actually be a nihilist, just as I said elsewhere in this thread that it's hard to realistically disbelieve in free will, even if you intellectually process the arguments and agree with them. There's certainly a hard threshold to pass, but I disagree that it has anything to do with morality or principles. As far as I'm aware, constructing personal moral rules from first principles as a pragmatic matter is allowed so long as the nihilist 1) acknowledges that those principles are arbitrarily chosen and 2) not representative of, or descending from, any objective laws that can be gleaned from the world via deduction or induction. Basically, I'm saying utilitarianism is a valid moral framework, and utilitarianism is compatible with nihilism. The nihilist will face significant challenges in actually living day to day life in congruence with nihilism (i.e. not really believing in anything), but the nihilist can still as a separate matter construct a moral framework that at least seems rational and internally consistent for the purposes of self-preservation. Frankly this seems like sort of a rabbit hole. I can accept a stronger view of nihilism that disallows adherence to any moral framework, but how does that allow a nihilist to behave at all consistently or continue to function? If we take away the word "moral" and instead abstract away the terminology to, "a set of personally principles, consistently applied", what does a nihilist look like who simply doesn't have that? If we go back to Rust, he does have moral principles, but his behavior and words are congruent with the core of existential nihilism: he rejects the notion of meaning in life and existence and admits that he attempted suicide in despair but simply couldn't out of cowardice. From that perspective it seems like nihilism plus a set of consistent principles could coexist as the continual dissonance between conscious hyper-intellectualism (existential despair) and unconscious biological drives (self-preservation).

by dsacco 9y ago

Yeah, actually I agree. Rust is one of the very few characters I can think of off the top of my head that successfully bridges the gap between romantic cynicism and true nihilism.

tptacek 9y ago

How is Rust a nihilist?

m12k 9y ago
In the strict sense, as in "rejects all metaphysics AND all morals", I'm not sure I've ever seen a truly nihilistic character in any medium (the Joker might be one of the closest, though he might also be seen as being driven by highly warped morals instead). So on the subject of Rust: He does reject all metaphysics, but when it comes to morals, while he does not reject them completely, his relativism and pessimism, his struggle to find any sense in them, to justify why he acts like good or bad existed even if he doesn't truly believe that they do, that all leaves him closer to nihilism than we almost ever see in characters even if it is not 'truly' nihilism in the strict sense.
- tptacek 9y ago
  It's been a couple years since I watched, but isn't Rust an extremely moral character, possibly even more so than Martin Hart? He has a moral code and is driven, to the point of his own self-destruction, by a purpose outside of himself. Nihilism doesn't mean "no believing in metaphysics". Meanwhile: in what possible way is George Costanza not a nihilist?
  - m12k 9y ago
    > Nihilism doesn't mean "no believing in metaphysics" From http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ "While few philosophers would claim to be nihilists, nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history" and "It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence." (I think this actually fits a lot of Rust's character traits - even if I do agree that he is a moral character, but one struggling to justify those morals, and with self-destructive behaviors as a consequence) So I agree that a rejection of morality is the much more central point of the concept of nihilism, but since it comes from radical scepticism, then rejection of religion, metaphysics, and anything else that requires faith, is an unavoidable side effect. On a more personal note: I believe that extreme skepticism will put you in a place that's not sustainable for a mind to be in, and you'll eventually move on from it into 1) Embracing the pointlessness and its destructiveness and derive a sort of purpose from that, aka nihilism 2) Rejecting the pointlessness but acknowledging the fact that the morals you use to escape it are a social construct and not divinely given (aka Sartre's brand of existentialism) or 3) reject the pure skepticism and find meaning in religion after all (Kirkegaard's brand of existentialism). I'd say that Rust as a character is in the deliberation state between these outcomes (and I'd say he seems to go in a sort of 3)-ish way, though maybe more Buddhist than Christian). So no, not nihilist, but brushing up against it nonetheless
    - tptacek 9y ago
      I guess, bringing this back to Rustin, that I'm just saying that there's no such thing as a deeply moral nihilist. To have moral convictions is to reject nihilism. Nihilists aren't "super atheists".
      - dsacco 9y ago
        I'd challenge that very strongly. I think morality is very compatible with nihilism, both in the existential and moral nihilistic varieties. In existential nihilism, the only real requirement is that the nihilist rejects any notion of intrinsic meaning to life and existence (at least if I'm not mistaken, I'm rusty on these things). Moral nihilism is a natural extension of that which just requires a rejection of intrinsic morality. I would broadly say that it's really difficult to actually be a nihilist, just as I said elsewhere in this thread that it's hard to realistically disbelieve in free will, even if you intellectually process the arguments and agree with them. There's certainly a hard threshold to pass, but I disagree that it has anything to do with morality or principles. As far as I'm aware, constructing personal moral rules from first principles as a pragmatic matter is allowed so long as the nihilist 1) acknowledges that those principles are arbitrarily chosen and 2) not representative of, or descending from, any objective laws that can be gleaned from the world via deduction or induction. Basically, I'm saying utilitarianism is a valid moral framework, and utilitarianism is compatible with nihilism. The nihilist will face significant challenges in actually living day to day life in congruence with nihilism (i.e. not really believing in anything), but the nihilist can still as a separate matter construct a moral framework that at least seems rational and internally consistent for the purposes of self-preservation. Frankly this seems like sort of a rabbit hole. I can accept a stronger view of nihilism that disallows adherence to any moral framework, but how does that allow a nihilist to behave at all consistently or continue to function? If we take away the word "moral" and instead abstract away the terminology to, "a set of personally principles, consistently applied", what does a nihilist look like who simply doesn't have that? If we go back to Rust, he does have moral principles, but his behavior and words are congruent with the core of existential nihilism: he rejects the notion of meaning in life and existence and admits that he attempted suicide in despair but simply couldn't out of cowardice. From that perspective it seems like nihilism plus a set of consistent principles could coexist as the continual dissonance between conscious hyper-intellectualism (existential despair) and unconscious biological drives (self-preservation).