Well, the 'numero uno argument' would be that something is better than nothing? Am I missing something here?! ;-)

i dont get it???? can you explain it a little more???

Other than "its kinda depressing," I don't think there are any.

There are none. Just as there are no arguments against, say, Christianity. Both are ways of positing that, "this is the way the world is". Do you mean, "What are some reasons that people prefer not to take a nihilistic approach to life"? Because it is much harder than other world views. Nihilists have to find the answers within themselves, using experience and judgment as a guide. They have to do all of the work of figuring out for themselves what are their best choices. They don't have the answers spoon-fed to them from some dusty old book written by other people.

The argument against nihilism is simply that things do have a purpose. A simple example is heat's purpose is to be hot.

I got stuck on this one a few yeas back. I had a huge existential crisis, and it caused a bit of a breakdown! Honestly, I don't think there are any good working arguments against nihilism. I think things don't have any intrinsic value, and that still makes me feel empty inside sometimes. But in saying that, I try and remind myself that even if nothing exists for a purpose, including me, we still DO exist, and so we need to make up our own values. They don't mean anything on a bigger scale, no. But they are important purely because we make them important so we can live fulfilling lives. If we are going to be alive, we may as well enjoy it, I think, and we need to put meaning into the world around us to do that.

Depends on what sort of Nihilist you are! If you say "life has no inherent meaning or purpose", I would say "sure, but so what?". It doesn't change the basic dynamics of what makes life *work*, which is the true basis of morality. If you say "life has no inherent meaning, and therefore there's no basis for morality", I would say you're wrong: that's making the meaninglessness of life MEAN something, yes? That's screwed up: life doesn't mean anything, and it doesn't MEAN anything that it doesn't mean anything. It doesn't mean you get to shoot your neighbor or steal his Rolex. That's giving meaning to the meaninglessness. Bad philosopher! If you say "life has no meaning, and therefore I'm depressed", I'd say "you've missed the personal responsibility aspect of this song". Life has no *inherent* meaning, that doesn't mean there's no meaning to MY life. It means that without the subject, in a purely objective perspective, there's no meaning. But put subjects in, and voila! Life is rich and abundant with meaning: it drips and spins and refuses to be capped off. Anybody who is depressed or justifying selfishness and crime because of life's lack of inherent meaning isn't doing philosophy, they're just malfunctioning.

Interesting, the struggle for arguments against nihlism are very real. Truly, I do not believe that there are any solid arguments against Nihilism which thoroughly pisses me off. Who here wants to have no value? Unfortunately, Nihilism works in the same way that Christianity works. Me, being a Christian, cannot disprove the existence of God, but I also cannot disprove that anything here has no intrinsic value. To Nihlism's creator, I hope you realize what you have made.

I never know how to define nihilism, but that is mandatory if one wants to debunk it. Nihil means nothing, while ism implies a worldview based on the belief in nothing. I don't know how accurate an etimological definition is, as I'm betting there are lots of self proclaimed nihilists that believe in, for example, objective reality, meaning, they trust their senses, ie, they trust that the mug they're holding while drinking their coffee is real... Now nihilism tens to be associated with a certain number of propositions: 1 - The impossibility of meaning; 2 - The impossibility of value; 3 - The absurdity and impossibility of morality; Now, about 1, that's pretty easy to debunk. We find all sorts of examples of meaning, namely, in the meaning of concepts, in the possibility of communication, which demands an intersubjective meaning for words. Meaning can also relate to what we "mean to", so intentional actions are a proof of the existence of meaning. About 2, there are people who like to say nihilism is the belief in the absence of intrinsic value. That, IMO, is false. If nihilism was the belief in the impossibility of inherent/intrinsic value, then moralists, like objectivists, desire utilitarians, heck, me, we would all be nihilists. These moral theories claim that value is objective but an objective relationship that can be seen in the world. For example, desire utilitarianism, talks about value as a relationship between a given state of affairs and desires, and something is assigned value to the degree it is an objective means to bridging that real and objective gap. So I think nihilism would be a denial of ALL value, not just inherent one, if it is to be a workable concept, distinguishable from many systems of morality, which it clearly rejects... On 3, a defense of morality on objective terms, provides us a clear refutation of the impossibility of morality as such. We need to define morality, see what is it's object of evaluation, the end it aims to achieve, and then it will be clear that morality is not only possible, but it's kind of inescapable. Hope this helped. Sal http://youtube.com/dakshinamurti