• porcupine
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    Ā·
    7 months ago

    To flip this around as ā€œlol no one and nothing mattersā€ is an abomination, a total perversion of the pale blue dot.

    These people are not well.

    I mean, sure. Art is open to interpretation and all, but I think ā€œlol no one and nothing mattersā€ would be an odd takeaway from pale blue dot. Do you genuinely believe that thatā€™s the message that a generic astronomy account is intentionally trying to communicate? If so, why? Iā€™m not aware of any global political groups with power that are motivated by an adolescent misunderstanding of nihilism.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      Ā·
      7 months ago

      Thatā€™s very clearly the message: you donā€™t matter on the scale of the Earth, everyone disappears when you zoom out far enough.

      And thatā€™s exactly the ethos of so-called effective altruism, longtermism, extropianism, etc. The idea is that you should zoom out and ignore all the individual people because they donā€™t matter on a large scale, instead we should focus on growing the economy for a technological-utopian future where the number of humans can grow exponentially by living in space and trying to colonize all parts of the universe.

      This dominates Silicon Valley and has become a driving force in the tech industry.

      • porcupine
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        7 months ago

        Thatā€™s very clearly the message: you donā€™t matter on the scale of the Earth, everyone disappears when you zoom out far enough.

        Yes. I agree this is what itā€™s communicating. This seems straightforward, empirically correct, and philosophically basic. Things look different when you look at them from a different perspective. Isnā€™t it interesting to look outside ourselves for a moment and consider things from a different point of view.

        the ethos of so-called effective altruism, longtermism, extropianism, etc. ā€¦we should focus on growing the economy for a technological-utopian future where the number of humans can grow exponentially by living in space and trying to colonize all parts of the universe

        Iā€™m sure you can find people in real-life who believe those things, and maybe even some who will admit to knowing what the fuck those specific terms mean. Iā€™m sure some of those people even like looking at pictures of space. Iā€™m sure some of those people look at pictures of space and think to themselves ā€œall that will be mine some day! I shall rise above the puny mortals and claim my rightful place among the stars! galaxies will tremble at my unrivaled splendor!ā€

        I just donā€™t believe that the Venn diagram of people who like looking at space pics and people who are seriously committed to leading a post-human space empire is a circle. I know a lot of people who like looking at pictures of space and considering how small we are on a cosmic scale, and I can think of maybe a few people in real life that are making serious financial decisions about fucking the planet to colonize Mars. For that Venn diagram to be a circle, it would require most of the people Iā€™ve ever interacted with during my life to all secretly hold the same specific and detailed political philosophy that theyā€™ve deliberately kept hidden from me. When I find myself seriously considering things like that, I remind myself to go outside and touch grass. Or look at pictures of space.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          Ā·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Isnā€™t it interesting to look outside ourselves for a moment and consider things from a different point of view.
          When I find myself seriously considering things like that, I remind myself to go outside and touch grass.

          Why are you talking to me like that?

          I just donā€™t believe that the Venn diagram of people who like looking at space pics and people who are seriously committed to leading a post-human space empire is a circle.

          This isnā€™t just a space pic. This is, specifically, a nihilist space meme. I think the venn diagram in this case has a lot of overlap.

          you donā€™t matter on the scale of the Earth, everyone disappears when you zoom out far enough.

          Yes. I agree this is what itā€™s communicating. This seems straightforward, empirically correct, and philosophically basic.

          I reject that!

          Everyone matters. When you zoom out, weā€™re all the same. Weā€™re all connected. An injury to one is an injury to all.

          What this meme does and what you are doing is flipping that around to then say ā€œWhen you zoom out, weā€™re all irrelevant. Weā€™re all nothing. No one matters at scale.ā€ I refuse! Every single person matters to all of us, because weā€™re all the same. When you zoom out you canā€™t tell us apart, all you can see is a pale blue dot. Thatā€™s us. That doesnā€™t mean that no one matters at scale, that means everyone matters as much as everyone else. No one is more important or more valuable or more human, we are all the same, we all matter equally. We are our home.

          I refuse to accept that no one matters, no matter what scale we are talking about. Every single person matters as part of that pale blue dot.

          • porcupine
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            Ā·
            7 months ago

            Why are you talking to me like that?

            I apologize. I was going for levity, not insult. Itā€™s easy, in niche internet subcultures like this, to fall into the idea that everyone outside the subculture all uniformly believes the same specific thing. Iā€™m not immune. Many internet subcultures devote a lot of energy into collectively creating a hypothetical amalgamation of everything they personally dislike, then posting about how everyone else is just like the bad thing chimera. Itā€™s the most reliable way to drive engagement. Look how popular /r/ShitDumpPeopleSay style communities are in every online medium. I find that most normal people tend to have diverse, inconsistent, and largely unexamined beliefs about most things.

            No one is more important or more valuable or more human, we are all the same, we all matter equally. We are our home.

            I agree in spirit with all of this. ā€œWe all matter equallyā€ doesnā€™t mean ā€œno one mattersā€. I donā€™t believe not individually ā€œmatteringā€ on a planetary scale means that humans donā€™t ā€œmatterā€ at all: I see it as a rejection of anthropocentrim. Iā€™m not the most important thing in the world. It came before me. It will be here after Iā€™m gone. It wasnā€™t created to service my personal desires. Itā€™s the only home of uncountable living creatures, older and more numerous than me, and they all have value too. I am not so much more important than every other living thing on this planet that destroying our shared home is acceptable just because I got what I needed out of it. Other things live here too, and because I donā€™t have any more inherent value than any of them, I have a responsibility to be a good neighbor and steward of the only home any of us have.

            Iā€™m pretty far removed from taking Philosophy 101 so forgive my ignorance, but I wanted to speak on nihilism. I also havenā€™t read a ton of any specific nihilist philosopherā€™s work, so Iā€™m going off the broad strokes as I understand them. Most people use ā€œnihilismā€ in the way that most people use ā€œanarchyā€: as an epithet that broadly means chaotic, disordered, or without purpose. Nihilism, like Anarchy, means a lot of specific and conflicting things depending on which particular author youā€™re reading. My reductive understanding of the broad umbrella of nihilist philosophy boils down to two points. Point 1: Life has no intrinsic meaning. Thatā€™s about as far as most people get. They hear that and go, ā€œSee, that sounds bad! [insert supernatural thing here] gives life meaning and tells us the one correct way all must live!ā€ The ignored second part as I understand it is Point 2: Because life has no intrinsic meaning, we must create our own meaning. Some people hear that second part too and decide that, on the whole, itā€™s not for them. They prefer to believe that something outside themselves gives their life meaning and defines how they should live. Fine by me! Iā€™m not the philosophy police! Iā€™ve just genuinely never heard of a self-described nihilist (outside of literal children) who claimed their own understanding of nihilism to be the first point, but not the second. The only adults I have ever seen use ā€œnihilismā€ that way are using it as an epithet to explain what people they donā€™t like must believe in order to be so evil.

            Itā€™s the same way most people use Anarchist. ā€œThat person doesnā€™t care about anything, and they just want the world to burn because theyā€™re an anarchist!ā€ Iā€™m a Marxist-Leninist, so have some significant disagreements with Anarchist political philosophy as I understand it. That said, I donā€™t believe any self-described anarchists would characterize their belief system as ā€œbasically just, like, the Joker, manā€, even if thatā€™s what most people probably think. When someone says ā€œthe problem with society is thereā€™s all these anarchists that donā€™t care about anything and just wanna fuck shit upā€, I donā€™t think thatā€™s a very accurate way to explain the world, both because there arenā€™t that many Anarchists shaping world politics, and the ones that exist wouldnā€™t describe their own beliefs as ā€œfuck everything! nothing matters!ā€

            Coming back to nihilism, I think plenty of people can find the idea that life has no intrinsic meaning beyond what we make for ourselves to be freeing. They can know being their authentic self and doing what makes them happy is just as valid as anything else, and that theyā€™re not ā€œfailingā€ at life by not conforming to the mold that their family, or god, or society sets for them. A woman isnā€™t ā€œfailingā€ at her ā€œintrinsic purposeā€ as a wife and mother if she doesnā€™t want to do any of that shit, for example. Any way she chooses to live is an equally valid way of being a woman. I can see why that might not resonate with some people, or that some might be frightened rather than hopeful at the idea of defining your own purpose, and I think thatā€™s fine. A philosophy is only useful if it helps you navigate your own life. People have different perspectives, and I generally think we should try to understand one anotherā€™s differences rather than imposing our own on others.

            joke: please do not yell at me

            ā€¦except when it comes to the immortal science of Marxism-Leninism, the one true path to proletarian liberation! All revisionists get the wall!

            tl;dr Nihilism: itā€™s about perspective

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              Ā·
              7 months ago

              It sure has been a long time since Philosophy 101 huh? Iā€™m pretty sure you are confusing existentialism with existential nihilism.

              Existentialism is the belief that we construct the meaning of our lives through our own awareness, will, and reason. Nihilism, on the other hand, is the assertion that there is no meaning to life including whatever meaning we try to make for ourselves and that it is pointless to try to give life meaning. The man climbs the tree because he wants to, thereā€™s no deeper meaning behind it because meaning doesnā€™t exist. Heā€™s not making a new meaning for himself, heā€™s just doing what he wants because thereā€™s no reason not to and nothing is stopping him.

              Iā€™m sympathetic to the nihilist view, but rather than reject giving life meaning as pointless I just recognize that it is absurd and then do it anyway.

              One must imagine Sisyphus happy, yeah?

              And now we return to that pale blue dot. Thatā€™s home. Thatā€™s us. I choose to give that meaning and acknowledge that I am choosing to do so, despite the meaningless universe in which we find ourselves. I am part of something bigger than myself, and so are you, and together we give the world meaning. Nihilism rejects meaning, and I donā€™t think youā€™re actually a nihilist.

              • porcupine
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                Ā·
                7 months ago

                Iā€™ll confess, youā€™re probably right that Iā€™m conflating some stuff from nihilism, existentialism, and absurdism. Itā€™s been a while, and my understanding is that they were always very overlapping and informed by one another. Iā€™ve just never met or even heard of a real person explaining their own beliefs in literal ā€œWe believe in nothing, Lebowski!ā€ terms outside of memes or epithets, so itā€™s difficult for me to jump to the conclusion that it must be what someone intends from one instance with plausible ambiguity. Accepting the premise that someone does strictly believe ā€œnothing means anything; full stopā€, I donā€™t see how that would be an action motivating belief. If ā€œnothing means anythingā€ is the full scope of how you relate to the world, then whereā€™s the benefit in persuading anyone else? If nihilism definitionally prohibits a ā€œthereforeā€ after the proposition that ā€œnothing mattersā€, then I donā€™t see how itā€™s not self-excluding. Nobody can exist in the world in a perfect state of inaction, and if ā€œnothing matters so make your own meaningā€ leaves the definitionally pure confines of nihilism, then I donā€™t see how ā€œonly I matterā€ or ā€œonly I and [subgroup]ā€ matter isnā€™t just as much a departure from that definition.

                Iā€™ve never called myself a nihilist because to me the ā€œnothing mattersā€ or ā€œnothing has intrinsic meaningā€ part of the equation always seemed like an immaterial meta-issue. If you canā€™t objectively test for whether or not something matters, or quantify the degree to which one thing matters over another, then ā€œnothing mattersā€ and ā€œeverything matters an infinite amountā€ are functionally indistinguishable to me. Itā€™s what you materially do with the motivation that Iā€™m interested in. I donā€™t think ā€œbully more people on the internetā€ is a particularly worthwhile thing to do or encourage generally, no matter the thought process behind it. To the extent that oneā€™s ā€œpolitical actionā€ is limited to online bullying, I feel like ā€œpeople that talk about scienceā€, ā€œpeople that talk about philosophyā€, and ā€œpeople that donā€™t believe a godā€ are pretty poor proxy groups for the people in real life that actually have the political power to make the world worse, unless youā€™re identifying ā€œintellectualsā€ rather than ā€œcapitalistsā€ as the final boss of class struggle. It just feels like, if you want to make a reasonably safe materially insignificant net positive contribution to the class struggle without working too hard or thinking too much, youā€™d be better off shoplifting a pack of gum from a business, or throwing a rock at the most expensive house in your neighborhood or something.

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  Ā·
                  7 months ago

                  Youā€™re right, ā€œonly I matterā€ and ā€œonly I and [subgroup] matterā€ are not nihilistic either, but thatā€™s thatā€™s not what this meme is implying or what Iā€™m rejecting. A truly nihilistic stance is ā€œI donā€™t matter, no one matters, nothing matters, and thereā€™s no reason to create meaning because that doesnā€™t matter either.ā€ If I ask ā€œshould I kill myselfā€ then nihilism can not provide me a reason to survive. Earth before, Earth after, nothing changes. Thatā€™s why Camus considered suicide to be the only really serious philosophical problem.

                  Now of course, nihilists arenā€™t necessarily suicidal (although itā€™s not uncommon). The nihilist philosophy tells us to reject meaning and to pursue personal pleasure and satisfaction and self actualization i.e. the Will to Power, not because that is the meaning of life, but because in a meaningless universe thereā€™s no reason to do anything else. The person who can achieve this becomes the Ɯbermensch, able to overcome the limits of religion and reason to pursue ambition and no longer burdened by the sorrows of ordinary people.

                  And again, this isnā€™t something that gives life meaning. Itā€™s a supposedly rational solution to the question ā€œshould I kill myselfā€ i.e. the Ɯbermensch wants to live for life itself and does not need a reason to do so or to find meaning for life to be worth living.

                  All of this is to say that, yes, real people believe this stuff and they should be discouraged from doing so whenever possible.