RE: Nietzsche vs Christianity: Are Christians Nihilists? (The Meaning of Life Series, #5)
Very good post. Two critiques: I always understood Nietzsche being critical of Christianity and viewing it as non-life affirming having to do with it's reliance on its followers to live this life only with the anticipation of the after-life. I recognized it, not so much as literally non-life affirming, but as his disgust with the Christian religion "sacrificing" living in this life, on Earth, in order to appease God and transition into the next life, which he viewed as living only partially now, with the hopes of being granted a better life, after death?
The second question is on nihilism. I always viewed nihilism as empowering the individual instead of adhering to the moral sanctity of idols (such as priests and even God). It's not that nihilists do not believe in anything (and that true nihilists should not care about getting side-swiped by a car), but that they can embrace the values that they choose and deem worthy; as opposed to the antiquated Europe culture and moral structure of NIetzsche's epoch. Nietzsche is a tough read though and I will welcome any input. I have upvoted and will follow. Great piece.
You're right that I'm not representing Nietzsche's views very accurately. In the book, I am merely using his ideas to talk about mine: about whether nihilism is even possible, about the idea that any value can be life-affirming or life-negating depending on external factors, etc. What you're saying is a spot-on (but partial, given the multifacetedness of Nietzsche's critique) interpretation of what he was saying about the followers of Christianity.
About nihilism: It's true that there are many kinds and definitions of nihilism out there. I'm using a very specific definition of my own (though it's not by any means idiosyncratic; Daniel Dennett for instance says, in his book Elbow Room, "if it were true that we ought to take the possibility of nihilism that seriously, then nihilism would be false, for if we ought to do anything then nihilism is false", and that's usually how professional philosophers view nihilism: as a starkly negative and absolute denial of X - and X can be anything). The first thing you must do when you attempt to give a positive account of the meaning of life, is to deny nihilism. That's a tall order. So my "trick" - the way I circumvented this issue - was to outright deny there are any nihilists. (I do believe it's impossible for any living thing to be a nihilist, it's not really a trick!)
The way you define nihilism, I got no problem with that, and in that sense I might even be a nihilist. You could call that kind of person a rebel or an existentialist just as easily.
I'm following you too, you have some good stuff in there!
I think you are right, it is hard to understand what a life that believes in nothing, literally nothing, would even consist of. Thanks for the follow!