Materialism and nihilism

Happy_Killbot

I have wondered substantially the same thing, although I approached it from a completely different angle. Materialism has a huge scientific component to it, or perhaps more accurately it is necessary for any kind of appreciation for science and the scientific method. Religion undermines the basic assumptions about reality that we need to make from a pragmatic standpoint in order to function.

This is the thing that Jordan Peterson misses.

If all it takes is for people to forget that they can do evil because a god is watching, imagine what would happen if that god told them they had to do evil? It's a two way street.

The endowment of purpose onto the lives of the masses is also a major roadblock for critical thinking and progress in general. If all of your needs are met, there is little or no reason for things like self development and increasing one's own position. Happy people do not try to make their lives better because they are already happy. Instead, they seek to conserve what they already have and only take action to prevent a change in the status quo.

Personally I believe this is linked to the fact that conservatives are on the whole happier than progressives, conservatives like where they are and want to stay, progressives don't like where they are and want change.

Religion fills people with artificial happiness, instead of allowing people to develop their own happiness and attempt to make a life and purpose for themselves. That is why I don't think it was religion that founded American values, but rather it was the secular government that allowed people to find their own way rather than force it onto anyone.

Nihilism gets a bad wrap because a lot of people find the idea depressing. The way I see it, it is the final test to see if someone can handle freedom. Anyone who can not stand the idea that there is no purpose or abstract reason for the world can not handle freedom, and will gladly accept a purpose if it makes them feel accepted. For these people, the cosmos are forever closed.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot

I agree with you on virtually everything here. Here are just some extra comments.

I think the matter of happiness of conservatives versus the happiness of progressives is a bit less one-dimensional. The desire to conserve something does not necessarily come from being happy with how things are, and may come instead from the opposite: the fear that the person will become even less happy as a result of progress. And similarly, the desire to have progress may come from the state of happiness and, say, the wish to share that happiness with others, for which progress can be essential.
I would instead say that conservatives may be more content with where things are, rather than happy. Progressives, on the other hand, always look forward and do not see what they have now as sufficient.

I also do not see why conservatism has to be associated with being religious (I am not sure if you implied this association in your comment, so apologies if I am misinterpreting your point). It seems to be the case on the West that conservatism usually coincides with religious values, but, say, in Russia there is a lot of conservative communists, who are very vocal atheists, but who want to go back to the Soviet system, where things were, in their eyes, more stable and sensible. Japan also has its own conservatives, and religion barely plays any role in politics there; there conservatism seems to be mostly based on the desire to preserve the traditional Japanese culture, which some people see as being threatened by the outside progressive influence.

It is also possible to be a religious nihilist. There seems to be quite many nihilists among Buddhists, for example, albeit modern Buddhism is not quite an ordinary religion, and some see it more as a life philosophy than a theistic construct.

Nihilism seems to be a very multidimensional beast, and it can be responded to in many different ways. Peterson, Shapiro and others seem to believe that nihilism is inherently incompatible with some essential human traits, such as discipline and respect for human freedoms, but it does not seem to be the case from the logical perspective; perhaps they are unjustly trying to project their individual experiences on the entire humanity.

Happy_Killbot

@MayCaesar When I say that conservatives are on average happier, I mean that studies have shown this to be the case, via self reporting. I'm still agnostic about the cause, however, because there are more than one possibilities and they all make sense depending on who you ask.

It is possible that:

1. Being happy leads to conservatism
2. Being conservative leads to happiness
3. some unknown factor leads to happiness and conservatism
4. It is a coincidence that conservatives are happier

I don't think that there is enough evidence at this time to say for sure which is most accurate, and of course you can come up with a satisfying explanation for any of these.

1. people who are happy want things to stay the same so they lean conservative
2. people who want things to stay the same are more content and so they seem happier on average
3. stable communities and lives lead to happiness and conservatism
4. Hard work and smart choices leads to happiness, while political affiliation is determined by how you are raised and brain structure

As for the link between religiosity and conservatism, It is heavily implied and statistically true. Conservatives tend to value traditional beliefs over new ones, and oppose things that attempt to change the status quo. So for the US where we have a religious history, it is obvious that the two would share a vital link where in other countries that do not share this past conservatives would not have these traits. It is all about where you are coming from.

Shapiro and Peterson, both as outspoken conservatives have the same weakness, and that is religious beliefs. They equate nihilism with a lack of purpose in ones life, and this is something I see as wrong. Nihilism is not about not having a purpose, it is about accepting that there is no inherent purpose unless you make one for yourself. This misunderstanding is why they cling so strongly to religion, because to them beliefs give a sense of meaning and it has to be true or else there is no meaning whatsoever.

A nihilist accepts this as truth and understands that without a purpose everything is open and you are free to make whatever purpose you please. Conservatives will argue that this is dangerous because what is to stop someone from having some purpose that they don't agree with, to which nihilists will point out that at any time the universe could suddenly and randomly annihilate all life on earth, without reason or purpose, so the answer is other people who want other things, for example to not be annihilated by the universe.

That's it. We do what we can because we can and we want to, there is no need to have an all powerful sky daddy to tell you what to do, because we are all masters of ourselves should we decide to be, and it is better to die free than to live a slave to an imaginary being.