he’s a narcissistic, egocentric, spiritually hypocritical abusive piece of shit.
i hate him the most.
Anti-nihilism isn't my theme. I'm indifferent to nihilism. Nihilistic people don't keep me up at night, nor does it cross my mind, nor would I particularly dislike someone for being a nihilist.
Is anti-nihilism even a bad thing ?
Gemini said:No, it is not "bad" to be an anti-nihilist; in fact, anti-nihilism is a constructive stance focused on building personal meaning, moral responsibility, and human connection.
I knew that, my question was simply performative.
.
.
.
To some, I am without a doubt a narcissist. That's all based from their perspective, which is from a low angle.
No I'm not going to start handing out agreements to just anyone.
From my point of view, the ones who don't think I'm malignant are happier and more well put together, and not bitter or weak minded with a "need" to curse others. But oh yes, for some I'm a total narcissist, but really that's their fault.
As a catalytic mirror not everyone is going to like what's reflected when they focus on me.
Gemini said:No, it is not "bad" to be an anti-nihilist; in fact, anti-nihilism is a constructive stance focused on building personal meaning, moral responsibility, and human connection.
None of that is gonna change material reality, just entrench people into pointless cycles.
Gemini said:No, it is not "bad" to be an anti-nihilist; in fact, anti-nihilism is a constructive stance focused on building personal meaning, moral responsibility, and human connection.None of that is gonna change material reality, just entrench people into pointless cycles.
You're a self proclaimed nihilist. But in reality things matter to you.
For some reason you feel the need to express nothing and no one matters to you, meanwhile you keep showing up and you're miserable.
If nothing truly mattered to you, you wouldn't be so miserable, complaining about what others may think, nor would it be important for you to run around warning people about me, while in all honesty I'm very sweet.
You're the one who complains and then projects that behavior onto me, along with the misery you attribute to everyone else. You constantly criticize people while showing little awareness of your own behavior, so you end up assuming that anyone you dislike must also be miserable, complaining, or guilty of whatever other negative trait you decide to assign to them.
Even Turncoat or Trypt is willing to hear what I actually say without immediately imposing the defamatory assumptions or premises that you do. Even if they sometimes "laugh at me" with you or disagree with me, that does not mean they share your fixation or interpret everything I say the same way you do. From what I've seen, they don't. They disagree with me at times, but you still treat them as though they belong to your side and necessarily share your conclusions.
More importantly, you repeatedly conflate logical argument or explanation with "complaining" and "misery." You then project that conflation onto me and use it as a reason to dismiss what I say. But labeling an argument as complaining does not address whether the argument is logically sound. It simply replaces engagement with the reasoning itself with a negative characterization of the person making it.
Nothing has inherent meaning, but I am still an organism with preferences, impulses, aversions, and emotional responses. There is no contradiction in that position. You're projecting your own misconceptions about nihilism.
last edit on
10/4/2026 7:35:44 AM
You're the one who complains and then projects that behavior onto me, along with the misery you attribute to everyone else. You constantly criticize people while showing little awareness of your own behavior, so you end up assuming that anyone you dislike must also be miserable, complaining, or guilty of whatever other negative trait you decide to assign to them.
I deny all those allegations.
Even Turncoat or Trypt is willing to hear what I actually say without immediately imposing the defamatory assumptions or premises that you do.
I've communicated with you more than both of them combined though. I always give you multiple chances even after you bite. I'm even doing it right now.
Even if they sometimes "laugh at me" with you or disagree with me, that does not mean they share your fixation or interpret everything I say the same way you do. From what I've seen, they don't. They disagree with me at times, but you still treat them as though they belong to your side and necessarily share your conclusions.
Yes. Tryptamine is mine, and I'm adopting Nathan. I do not control what they think nor do I have any desire to do that. Trypt and myself have disagreed on things in the past, and that goes for Nate even more.
We do not all get together to laugh at you.
The only time you really made me laugh was when you complained about Fix Yer Dog.
More importantly, you repeatedly conflate logical argument or explanation with "complaining" and "misery." You then project that conflation onto me and use it as a reason to dismiss what I say.
After long pages of quarreling I then become dismissive of you.
And yes, I don't exactly think highly of you, so it does come to a point where I'll have to... What's the word ? Cut you loose ? Give up ? Remove myself ? Something like that.
But labeling an argument as complaining does not address whether the argument is logically sound. It simply replaces engagement with the reasoning itself with a negative characterization of the person making it.
Doesn't matter when the label is correct in the first place.
A lot of things you say about me are made up. We've gone pages of you complaining how I doxxed you. That I reveal your personal information, or I do it to others.
You say I dox people simply on the basis that I have their images. Or I say I have their images. Yes, I have images. Images you haven't seen. Images that were shared with me, images that members shared. I know secrets. I deadass know who Legga, and saying this is somehow a dox by your flawed logic. My argument is their secrets are safe with me, and I like it this way, cause I get to see and know more about the people I waste so much time on.
Sadly we'll never get to see some people we've seen around here for a long time, and that has nothing to do with my ethics.
Nothing has inherent meaning, but I am still an organism with preferences, impulses, aversions, and emotional responses. There is no contradiction in that position. You're projecting your own misconceptions about nihilism.
Sure there's a contradiction.
Did you know your brain by design is a super computer ? That your DNA is a code so complex it's said it would take a person 50 years to write it ?
Your hands have a purpose. The wrist twists nicely. Every part of your body down to the last drop of blood has a purpose. Alive like clockwork and if 1 vital part of the cog that keeps you alive breaks, you'll die. YES you had inherent meaning before you got squeezed out of your Mother's stretched out lubricated pussy. Your entire being was prepared to take on assignments for whatever environment you'd spawn into, and that includes adopting all of what has assigned meanings, like language.
You have more ancestors than people you can possibly meet and know and there are parts of them in your DNA. To "inherently" be of them. To be what they are.
Your whole physical being is inherent, and it has the most meaning while the vessel is alive.
Nihilism. No one gives a shit about nihilism enough for it to be the subject of the decade. I don't think it's great, I do understand what it is and it doesn't inspire me.
You still haven’t shown a contradiction. You’ve just confused biological function with inherent meaning. Hands grip, hearts pump blood, DNA carries inherited information. None of that proves existence has an objective purpose. “Function” and “meaning” are not interchangeable.
You even say we “adopt assigned meanings” like language. If meaning is assigned or adopted, then it is not inherent. You undermine your own argument in the same paragraph.
And preferences do not contradict nihilism. An organism can want things, dislike things, and react emotionally without the universe assigning those preferences objective significance. So your argument amounts to: bodies do things, therefore life has inherent meaning. That conclusion does not follow.
last edit on
10/4/2026 10:52:23 PM