i have a job and mostly a happy life

which takes me back on my posting regarding nihilism, what do you think of this @Deleted User

I'm not sure your point.

Nihilism is neutralising, but it still neutralises and causes a loss of preconceptions you have.

It is an interesting characterisation 'emotional weakness' to mourn to loss of physiological scaffolds. Every human being has an incomplete view and prone to loss of worldview. This process is not always healthy, but some brave souls attempt it anyway, under the impulse of reason.

Maybe this is a step to far, but if you have a drive to get to the bottom, or the 'final stop' as you say, then this is the consequence. Sure, some people may be prone to pessimism, some optimism, but the process itself leads to neither, but are a preference and a reflection of secondary personal traits.

no, it's not the same as being an atheist and saying "there is no god, full stop." it is only the skepticism it gives to you, the insight of knowing whatever meaning you can reach might be pointless too, but it still doesn't stop you from looking for a meaning

i mean, this is not really what's in that text, yeah, i can see why you have reached that

Have I misunderstood something?

There is difference between 'might be meaningless' and 'meaning is objectively null, we must construct our own'.

no, what i am saying is the text was only about the pessimism/optimism side of the spectrum

and we are talking about something else now

Okay.

I think reading Max Stirner pushed me into the latter.

"'meaning is objectively null, we must construct our own" is what absurdism stands for

So have I just been using the wrong term?

and yeah, i can actually understand how stirner can make your pursuit for meaning centralized on your own consciousness

which is not wrong or anything at all

like anything in philosophy

different ideas, different views

I followed this view in good faith, building on philosophy and following its conclusions.

i totally get your view and sympathise

that's a side i've thought being on too

The interesting part about '...we must build our own', is that is essentially returns you to your starting point, only now you are conscious of the implications of meaning.

And so to constantly try to reinforce this cycle is kind of redundant. This opens up the possibility of God, but maybe not in the same authentic way, at least not in the materialist framework, which post-Hegelian thought still holds onto.

I mean, it is internally consistent, but in a way I now feel dominated by it.

Having walked through the gates of meaning, I am now free to assert a much more rigorous faith than I would have ever been previous able to, totally unchained by reason and materialist thought. Which is an interesting paradox.

by eliminating the other possible 'meanings'?

Yes, exactly.

now what i need to state here is, this is where I reach too, a god, maybe not in the same concept with yours, mine is mostly a pantheist/taoist belief with centralizing on every**thing**, this is what my logic and pure reason reaches with all the accumulated knowledge from thousands of pages of different dialects and schools of thought, but i just acknowledge this is just the same with other 'meanings' too, might just be as pointless and might not be the truth at all, because at the end of the day, i can never be truly sure of **anything** existing, including the existence of myself

A supreme meaning is Absolute and singular.

just to give you a better view of where I stand

Thanks, very interesting.

*Indeed, the philosophers have no other proof than the observation of the occurrence of the burning, when there is contact with fire, but observation proves only a simultaneity, not a causation, and, in reality, there is no other cause but God.*
This blows my mind.

yes, that is where i reach and what basically structures my belief of a pantheist concept of **god**, i prefer to call it the **chaos**

Why would you settle for any meaning less than the Absolute?

no, what i reach is the absolute, if we are talking about the hegelian concept of absolute spirit

What I mean is why would you settle for pantheism over monotheism, when one is more ultimate than the other?

however this doesn't make my *meaning* any *less* than any others, this is only where i stand right now and it might change in time, i can just reach another station during one of my meditations because there is no end to this pursuit of meaning, so where i stand right now is just valuable as the meaning of a guy who believes the meaning of life is chocolate

no, pantheism is grander than monotheism in my opinion