Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Of the above (nihilism, existentialism, absurdism), only existentialism is fully independent philosophical direction as such. Absurdism, perhaps, can be considered just one of several elements or aspects of existentialism. Absurdity is just one of the themes that existentialism touches upon. Nihilism is better known as a kind of cultural movement, the essence of which was to deny the truth of traditional social attitudes and values.
meaning… Without it, there is nothing in nature, whether you want it or not. Everything in nature moves and therefore has a purpose. And you can only turn your back to her… out of fear for what they've done or said. And you are such a fucking cloud, and you make a huge garbage dump, communism, for example, I'm not talking about fans of the afterlife, homeland and football…
The emergence of nature, and even more so of life, is the result of the existence of meaning. Meaning (first define this concept) is a goal organized by a construction of its own elements. At the same time, it turns out that the elements of this construction are the result of meaning, goals that are implemented before their own elements. That's the whole rebus. See origin-of-nature.RF
Eternity, pre-defined space, and so on. beliefs are false, the result of divergence of meaning, meaning of terms at each step of logical follow-up. So everything is generated, unprovable and irrefutable. But a simple sequence of events is impossible in principle, because each of them is contained by a construction of their own relations. Here we will prove this in the Theorem on the exhaustively constructive foundation of mathematics, mathematical physics.
But also beyond this proof…
Meaning (for example, the direction of activity) appears before its own elements. If on the contrary, if there are elements earlier (some eternal ones), then changing their relations is impossible (dichotomy paradox). This is a paradox of meaning, it is impossible in the second place. And eternity, the result of this very inversion of ideas, backwards, with all the consequences…
Think, my friends, and oppose, for this is not a description of everyday life, this is about the mechanisms of nature on which you are sitting, let's say, https://возникновение-природы.рф/forum/index.php. Paradoxes are man-made and only criminals need them. And this is the only source of beliefs, homeland, faith, communism, and so on. We do not see their savagery and the horror of what comes out of it because of the limitations of the mind, the limitations forced by paradoxes.
I would add that absurdism is part of the philosophy of existentialism or one of the directions of development. I would also like to add that these schools do not deny the meaning of being or human life, they use their own methods to search for sources and suggest filling these ( and not only these) concepts with meaning. In existentialism, everything starts from concepts: existence – existence and essence-essence. It is their interaction that determines the possibility of a person to know his own essence and the essence of being. Absurdism in this regard defends the point of view that everything that comes through the mind is a distortion and does not correspond to reality. On the one hand, it can be argued that if we cannot know the world, because it is absurd and our instrument of knowledge (and the very desire to have clarity, to know the truth) is absurd, then there is no meaning to Being. On the other hand, the recognition of the absurdity of the world, its irrationality, the irrationality of human life is already a recognition of the meaning of Being, giving it meaning. Nihilism as a theory of negation, in my opinion, follows from absurdism (for example, in Camus): if the world and human life are absurd, there is no objective, then there is no God, morality, universally recognized values, foundations, and in the end-there is no meaning of being. Nihilism, as a worldview concept, does not offer its own insight into the essence of things, but rather speaks of the denial of any concept of looking at these things, which denies the formulated and claimed attitude of people to something. However, nihilism does not deny the essence of Being, but denies our idea that this essence is present.
Absurdism and existentialism are very similar – both philosophical trends imply that a person is a “creator of signs” and himself gives life and the world around him artificial meanings. In these concepts, the universe and human life are nothing more than an accident. At the same time, the existence of God is not denied, although it is not confirmed. The world, if it was created by God, then without any intention and in fact, for the creator there is no difference-a person or a stone, both are equally indifferent to him.
One of the main concepts of absurdism is a paradox, to which the ideologists of the current refer both faith and the desire to live and achieve some goals in an initially meaningless world. For existentialists, the person is still important, and they respect her right to “take place” in anything. For absurdists this desire is a paradox
Nihilism, in contrast to existentialism and absurdism, p
It's more of a social concept than a philosophical one. It does not deny the meaning of existence as such, but simply denies the generally accepted moral foundations, social order, traditions, rules of decency and other conventions.