Here's a rather seductive argument that I just read in Barth's The Floating Opera, a wonderfully nihilistic novel about Todd Andrews intellectual descent into the wrath of his own mind.
I recommend it as a read if you're into cynicism. Anyway, his logic, in the final chapters, is certainly noteworthy:
<-- begin -->
<-- abyss -->
I. Nothing has intrinsic value
II. The reasons for which people attribute value to things are always ultimately irrational
III. There is, therefore, no ultimate "reason" for valuing anything (including life).
IV. Living is an action.
V. There's no final reason for action (just as there is no final reading for valuing anything).
VI. There's no final reason for living.
II. The reasons for which people attribute value to things are always ultimately irrational
III. There is, therefore, no ultimate "reason" for valuing anything (including life).
IV. Living is an action.
V. There's no final reason for action (just as there is no final reading for valuing anything).
VI. There's no final reason for living.
<-- abyss -->
Questions raised:
1. Is 'value' a valuable concept?
1.1 Do we need 'value' to have will? In other words, does Andrew's rhetoric destroy our will to power? Our will to anything?2. What are intrinsic qualities of anything? Mustn't intrinsic qualities be ascribed by the very people who claimed those qualities to be intrinsic?
3. What is an "ultimate reason" at all if there are no "intrinsic qualities"?
3.1 Ultimate reasons are indeed meaningless if there is nothing to be ultimate about them (this isn't a question I realize)4. Can reasons for actions be relative instead of ultimate?
5. If there's no reason for living, is that necessarily a good reason for not-living?
The first to refute this argument, on logical or rational grounds, gets a present.
Posts
vii. because we never hear from the nihilists who went for it...that's the reason...
ReplyDeletenice work, buddy...keeping chipping away. and who would want a present with no value to it anyway?
good try; you still don't get the present =)
ReplyDeleteRegarding #1, I wonder if emotions or some collection of emotions that I possess or have exhibited or that move me to act can somehow have intrinsic value. Off the cuff, I think the term intrinsic value must somehow be connected to an emotion(s) or the acknowledgment of being in a state(s) that possesses or promotes the right beliefs and emotions. When I think of my own identity, I can't help but think about my responses to people and events (what I did, should have done, and will do or try to do in the future), and those responses are deeply tied I think not simply to desires I have but possibly more importantly, also to my emotions and my ability (or lack there of) to navigate or mediate or acknowledge them. If there is an example of something having intrinsic value, it seems "friendship" (of the right kind) is an example or as close as one might get. Friendships or relationships that contain love (of the right kind) seem to be good, not simply for utility or because I desire them, they seem to be good in and of themselves. At the core, these relationships may be good in and of themselves and thus said to have intrinsic value because of the psychological state of affairs that obtain within them.
ReplyDeleteRegarding #2,wow every attribution of a reason is always irrational? This seems much too much. It seems to sneak way too much into what could be considered "irrationality." Who is irrational?
Keep up the posts. I'll try to stop by again.
Steve
I recommend you read "Intention" by G.E. Anscombe. Its a short read going through the true meaning of "intention" vs. "intent to do".
ReplyDeleteAlso, there is there anything of intrinsic value in the world? No, its all what we as humans give to it--the value we attach to it, which is tied with intention.
*Hope you're well!!
Aurora