"My take on hihilism is that nothing know by humans is true"
... Are you, or are you not, saying this is true? If it is true, then your statement is self-defeating; and if it is false, then humans can know truths. Either way, you lose.
You are just pointing to the underpinning of nihilism, that there is no statement that can be proved true.
All statements are false, would exclude the dichotomy because the dichotomy is false as well. I am not going to defend nihilism beyond saying it is a tool like monism, and in fact they are drawn from the same conclusion.
You are operating under the assumption that if not-p=true then p=false and or some other arrangement which is similar. Nihilism says that all such statements are false from the get go. And therefore all statements are equaly false and equaly true.
It is like the island of knights and knave where all memebrs of the island either tell the truth or always tell a lie. In nihilsism it is assumed that they are all knights and all knaves, equally.
If this statement is false, as you declare, then all statements are not false.
That is true in that all statements are equaly true and equaly false. It is just a position, and nihilsim also aknowledges that it too is a false position, because all positions are false. Isn't that cool!
It can't be self defeating because, there is no 'real' concept of victory or defeat, all concepts are false. And because all concepts are false the correlate is true that all statements are true.
"If this statement is false ,as you declare, then all statements are not false is true" is a false statement because all statements are false, and therefore all are equaly true. It then comes to the observer to decide thier own method for determining truth because all methods are false.
See there is this problem in any absolute position, wether it be nihilism or any absolute position. All positions are false.
Your philosophy is self-defeating DD, like Wittgenstein's and Geoffs. You really need to change it.
My philsophy is a disjointed mish-mash of convenience. I am a materialist, a pagan animist, a buddhist and a nihilsist. I use different tools in different situations to come to different ends in each case. Works for me, but lacks coherence on any level , because I maintain that all are true and that all are false.
Is this statement true? Or is it another statement that is false, like all others?
All statemenst are true, and then for any particular observer there statement may be relativly true, so all statements are true, because all statements are false.
Then there is the grey area where everything is neither false of true, because the statements that everything is true is false and the statements that everything is false is false and the statements that everything is neither is false and the statement that everything is both is false, so
All statements are equaly true and equaly false.
I thought that this was grade school philsophy contained in Heraclites and the observation 'You never step in the same river twice.'
I've got nothing more to say about your nihilism, except that it makes no sense and is a self-defeating philosophy. But it's never too late to change your mind.
