Avatar
bitcoin cowboy
b24aa95011955ca860625260b40125ff4f35c9e321ec0354a4782376f5b1ddb5
hospice nurse with a family who creates nature art.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

- Friedrich Nietzsche

Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of a party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always the freedom of the one who thinks differently. Not because of the fanaticism of "justice", but rather because all that is instructive, wholesome, and purifying in political freedom depends on this essential characteristic, and its effects cease to work when "freedom" becomes a privilege.

- Rosa Luxemburg

🧵 quotes that inspire me

Replying to Avatar jimmysong

The Godless Existential Burden

--------------------------------

ā€œGod is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers?ā€

Thus wrote Nietzche in The Gay Science. The character making this statement is known as the Nietzchean madman. What he talks about in the dialogue is replacing the meaning that God provided. The consequences of eliminating God, in Nietzche’s view, are pervasive and not easily dealt with.

This is in contrast to Humanist philosophers from the Enlightenment like Rousseau and Spinosa who removed God, but kept Christian morality. They claimed reason as their foundation for their morals instead of God. The scene takes place in a bar with Humanists, so they make fun of the madman who keeps saying ā€œI seek God.ā€

The smart-alecky people in the bar, representing Enlightenment thinkers, suggest God is hiding, or is afraid or that He’s lost. They insult God since they don’t believe in Him. The madman’s answer, that God is dead, is the apex.

Base Layer Belief

------------------

"You have unchained the earth from the sun, a move of incalculable significance."

The madman’s lament is really about how God is a foundational belief. Removing God removes a whole host of beliefs which depend on God. If God doesn’t exist, what does morality look like? What gives life meaning? For what purpose does anyone do anything? To remove God is to remove the basis for all of those things, as Nietzche recognized, but Enlightenment thinkers did not. Philosophically, there was a gaping hole left by removing God.

Let’s look at morality, for example. In a philosophy that has no God in it, how do you determine what is a good or bad action? Can you go from descriptive statements like ā€œall men are mortalā€ to imperative statements like ā€œthou shalt not murderā€? In philosophy, this is known as the is-to-ought problem and there aren’t any good solutions. The intellectually honest solution, according to Nietche and many others, like Hume, is that such a derivation doesn’t exist.

In other words, without God, there is no basis for moral imperatives. The very concept of good and evil requires re-examination, which is what Nietche considered in his books. Even seemingly obvious moral imperatives like ā€œwe should not torture childrenā€ or ā€œwe should not commit genocideā€ need to be questioned once you remove God from the equation.

Nietzche argued that the Enlightenment thinkers were wrong in keeping Christian morals. They couldn’t logically generate morality, or meaning or purpose through facts, because of the is-to-ought problem. Therefore, the morality they espoused was intellectual cowardice. They wanted the comfort of a Christian world view while rejecting the God that undergirds it all. With God, the oughts come naturally. Without God, there requires a whole new set of justifications for any sort of ethics.

The madman was pointing out that they had killed not just God, but all the things dependent on God, including morality, meaning and purpose.

Will-to-power

--------------

Nietche’s conclusion was that if you really removed God and all the morals, meaning and purpose that depend on God, then you are left with strength. The philosophy he espoused is one of being honest about that massive metaphysical hole and facing it with courage.

If God is dead, one has the daunting task of filling that hole, of creating meaning, purpose and ethics. If you reject God, you must also reject everything built on God and come up with another way to live, wholly different from how Theists live.

For many, removing God from their lives is an attractive proposition. They have the freedom to change morals to suit their needs. Indeed, humanism, a child of the Enlightenment, has very similar morals as Christianity, except a few changes, mostly around sex. Yet as Nietzche points out, such arbitrary tweaking is cowardly and intellectually lazy because it doesn’t go far enough. All morals have to be thrown out with the denial of God and a brand new form of godless morality, one that is philosophically consistent, has to take its place.

Nietzche’s morality comes down to the strong ruling over the weak, a might-makes-right philosophy. It can only be described as sociopathic, where anything is permissible and nobody has any inherent worth.

Burden of Meaning

--------------------

Few people have sociopathic morals, but the influence of Nietzche continues to the present day. The default societal assumption is godlessness and each person has the burden of finding meaning.

For example, modern people see jobs as the source of meaning. They are presumed to be where individuals can find self-actualization and metaphysical fulfillment. Jobs have taken on an additional burden and are no longer a place to just make money.

Without God in the picture, each person has to find meaning and many try to do so through their jobs. Success in a job takes on existential significance and there are two godless ways to measure it.

The first way is essentially some sort of status game where doing better than others is the metric. This could be salary, honors, recognition or something else. The meaning comes from others’ approval, which is not easily earned and is at best temporary even when you get it.

The second is a subjective metric based on internal feeling. Being subjective, the metric can and does change and is like a compass pointed in towards yourself. There’s no real direction or progress and a lot of meandering. A subjective measurement is unstable because what makes you happy one day might not the next.

Neither of these measurements are ultimately satisfactory.

Which brings us back to the beginning. Removing God means having to define meaning ourselves. Defining meaning for ourselves is an enormous burden, a gargantuan task and is a heavy existential load to bear. The ubiquitous questions of moderns like ā€œWhat should I do with my life?ā€ and ā€œHow can I be happy?ā€ are really presenting symptoms of this underlying philosophical disconnect.

The madman’s question shines a light on the gaping hole of godless meaninglessness. How shall we comfort ourselves?

as an ex-fundamentalist christian, who is now an atheist, i stared into the void and definitely experienced an existential crisis. removing the belief that a force is in charge, that there is intrinsic meaning, is a huge burden, and it’s scary. but having done so i (and this is definitely an ā€œn of 1ā€ experiment) have experienced love, compassion, meaning, and transcendence. it takes work.

IYKYK. david foster wallace died before bitcoin, but he had bitcoin vibes.

ā€œBecause here's something else that's weird but true: in the day-to day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship

-be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles-is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It's the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It's been codified as myths, proverbs, clichĆ©s, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.ā€

awesome. full disclosure: some time in the next 20 years my goal is to develop a bitcoin philosophers conference to be held in my family’s forest. good news, it’s within a podcast drive from troy cross so i feel confident i can eventually convince him to come down, bad news… it will take me 20 years to build the cabins, infrastructure, etc.āœŒļøšŸ»šŸ˜‚

so much about identity. and meaning. and motivated reasoning to justify life choices, suffering, opportunity cost etc.

yeah, that’d be cool. i really wish i had mysterious secret knowledge about death. the fact that i don’t, even though i’m around it a lot, makes me feel a little sheepish. it really seems pretty mechanical. death (for me) tends to be much less illuminating to the human condition than observing people taking care of their dying loved ones. now THAT is an education.

well now you have me curious, do you have any worries of existential risks?

this perhaps makes me a bad person or a psychopath (or, and this is the actual reason: i am very privileged), but i think i can honestly say i do not worry… about anything.

i CAN make a hierarchy of things that will kill me. and thinking about being dead kinda sucks because i dig this life and have a lot of things on my list to do, and i experience anticipatory grief for my children not having a father. but if i’m being honest, that’s mostly counterbalanced with my curiosity re: there being an afterlife + the fact that in the absence of an afterlife i’m not going to even care about the above…

so i ask, do people ACTUALLY worry about this stuff?

i hypothesize no. and this is informed by my experience with working with tons of dead/dying people and their families. i have a strong suspicion that what we call existential dread is mostly a performative signal to our tribe. it allows us to say, ā€œhey look at me, i know the stuff that will kill us, so put me in a position of power within the tribe.ā€

or simply competitive victimization. or perhaps the ennui of a westerworldian epiphany where we get to the center of the maze and realize we were deluding ourselves into believing there’s actually a meaning to our sacrifice.

just a thought.

so this is this billionaire trad-fi equivalent of a bitcoin boating accident? gotcha, well done player!

this is fantastic. have you read ā€œInvariances: The Structure of the Objective Worldā€ by Nozick i keep looking for a trusted voice to give me a take on it.

šŸ»

you go through life feeling like ā€œnobody gets meā€, because you look around at others and see a purposeful and consistent worldview that many other people share, and then you introspect and take inventory of your own worldview and find a set of inconsistent and sometimes hypocritical beliefs that change with the seasons, and then you see a video like this and say, ā€œhow is it possible that there is another person on earth that sees the world the way i do?ā€

šŸ˜‚ so cool šŸ»

i have never felt so seen šŸ˜‚