4 ms·

The irony of calling Theil a "nihilist," for taking stances on issues based on his principles and beliefs whether one agrees with them or not is a bit rich. The

The irony of calling Theil a "nihilist," for taking stances on issues based on his principles and beliefs whether one agrees with them or not is a bit rich. The most nihilistic thing anyone believes in tech and other establishments is that truth is personal and subjective, or whatever lacks conseqeunces, as in, there is no truth - the sufficient and necessary condition for the definition of nihilism. I can see why they're projecting it though, people are catching on. A head full of jargon and thought terminating cliches, and an utter lack of durable convictions is what nihilism is. Theil and other billionaires need no defense from me or anyone, but journalistic integrity needs every ally it can find.

clairity 5y ago
> "A head full of jargon and thought terminating cliches, and an utter lack of durable convictions is what nihilism is." doesn't seem to be a incorrect description of thiel. he's single-mindedly self-serving, trying to lay claim to often mundane ideas, in search of personal esteem, wealth and power. had he not been so lucky with paypal, he'd probably be as obscure as the rest of us.
hwers 5y ago
Very well said
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
arcticbull 5y ago
Is "taking a stand on issues based on principles" not nihilistic if the principle on which he is taking a stand is that nothing particularly matters and therefore he should pursue personal wealth at the expense of the rest of humanity? I'm asking this as a question by the way, I found your take really interesting.
- zepto 5y ago
  That isn’t Thiel’s position.
  - fumar 5y ago
    Can you expand on what is Theil’s position?
    - ALittleLight 5y ago
      I don't know that he's ever offered a position on life philosophy or nihilism. I've read Zero to One and listened to multiple talks from him on YouTube. My impression is that he thinks we need to create new things and that innovation is slowing, partly due to regulation and partly due to people not believing they can create innovations that society needs to progress. Thiel tells a story about how he got a job at a law firm and soon decided to leave and a colleague says "Wow, I didn't know anyone could leave Alcatraz". The point, to me, comes across as something like "Society tells you what the track to success is, e.g. become a lawyer at a fancy law firm, and because you believe this you are trapped in a prison of other people's expectations, but you are always completely free to walk out the door and follow your own path, you just have to be willing to do it. On YouTube he has a talk called "You are not a lottery ticket" that covers his world view a bit. He also has a debate with Eric Schmidt from a few years back where he argues that Google isn't a tech company and investing in Google is a bet against innovation in search. In the debate he also talks about his ideas relating to innovation.
      - fumar 5y ago
        I see. Using that logic wouldn’t any investment on large established entities be anti-innovation. That applies to Palantir, right? Is the most libertarian act to fund as many unique thus potentially innovative teams, people, or companies as possible? What do you do when one of those people or companies stagnate in their research or become another established entity? I read Zero to One upon its release. It was short after the start of my career in tech. I think now as I did then, there is always room for improvement and the need for critical inquiry (critique) applied evenly to all things. I didn’t fully grasp the momentum of life. That includes governing bodies, corporations, markets, relationships, your own body. The concept of disruption and innovation to improve oneself or the world or a job or a tool is addicting. Where I get stuck is thinking through the consequences from innovation or large scale disruption. Back in 2014, FB was a good societal thing and now in 2021 not so much. Was it worth it? I lost my train of thought here.
lalos 5y ago
It could be related with being identified as a libertarian, this random blog has one portrayal as such: https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/libertarianism-form-nihilism https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/libertarianism-form-nihil... But not sure what the author meant, just guessing here.
phkahler 5y ago
>> there is no truth - the sufficient and necessary condition for the definition of nihilism... nihilism isn't about there not being truth, it's about there not being meaning, or more specifically long-term relevance. XXX may be true, but to a nihilist that's OK we're all going to die anyway and the universe will wind down to its heat death. In that sense the truth isn't relevant long term.

clairity 5y ago

> "A head full of jargon and thought terminating cliches, and an utter lack of durable convictions is what nihilism is." doesn't seem to be a incorrect description of thiel. he's single-mindedly self-serving, trying to lay claim to often mundane ideas, in search of personal esteem, wealth and power. had he not been so lucky with paypal, he'd probably be as obscure as the rest of us.

hwers 5y ago

Very well said

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

arcticbull 5y ago

Is "taking a stand on issues based on principles" not nihilistic if the principle on which he is taking a stand is that nothing particularly matters and therefore he should pursue personal wealth at the expense of the rest of humanity? I'm asking this as a question by the way, I found your take really interesting.

zepto 5y ago
That isn’t Thiel’s position.
- fumar 5y ago
  Can you expand on what is Theil’s position?
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    I don't know that he's ever offered a position on life philosophy or nihilism. I've read Zero to One and listened to multiple talks from him on YouTube. My impression is that he thinks we need to create new things and that innovation is slowing, partly due to regulation and partly due to people not believing they can create innovations that society needs to progress. Thiel tells a story about how he got a job at a law firm and soon decided to leave and a colleague says "Wow, I didn't know anyone could leave Alcatraz". The point, to me, comes across as something like "Society tells you what the track to success is, e.g. become a lawyer at a fancy law firm, and because you believe this you are trapped in a prison of other people's expectations, but you are always completely free to walk out the door and follow your own path, you just have to be willing to do it. On YouTube he has a talk called "You are not a lottery ticket" that covers his world view a bit. He also has a debate with Eric Schmidt from a few years back where he argues that Google isn't a tech company and investing in Google is a bet against innovation in search. In the debate he also talks about his ideas relating to innovation.
    - fumar 5y ago
      I see. Using that logic wouldn’t any investment on large established entities be anti-innovation. That applies to Palantir, right? Is the most libertarian act to fund as many unique thus potentially innovative teams, people, or companies as possible? What do you do when one of those people or companies stagnate in their research or become another established entity? I read Zero to One upon its release. It was short after the start of my career in tech. I think now as I did then, there is always room for improvement and the need for critical inquiry (critique) applied evenly to all things. I didn’t fully grasp the momentum of life. That includes governing bodies, corporations, markets, relationships, your own body. The concept of disruption and innovation to improve oneself or the world or a job or a tool is addicting. Where I get stuck is thinking through the consequences from innovation or large scale disruption. Back in 2014, FB was a good societal thing and now in 2021 not so much. Was it worth it? I lost my train of thought here.

lalos 5y ago

It could be related with being identified as a libertarian, this random blog has one portrayal as such: https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/libertarianism-form-nihilism https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/libertarianism-form-nihil... But not sure what the author meant, just guessing here.

phkahler 5y ago

>> there is no truth - the sufficient and necessary condition for the definition of nihilism... nihilism isn't about there not being truth, it's about there not being meaning, or more specifically long-term relevance. XXX may be true, but to a nihilist that's OK we're all going to die anyway and the universe will wind down to its heat death. In that sense the truth isn't relevant long term.