« on: November 30, 2013, 03:20:52 pm »
I know I'm splitting hairs with this response, but I'm fairly sure what you're describing Rex is just plain old existentialism. "Existence has no intrinsic meaning" and all that.
I mean, metaphysical, epistemological and moral nihilism are pretty damn extreme positions. Nietzsche was approaching metaphysical and epistemological nihilism in his last years of writing, of the sort which says while there may be an objective world, we cannot know anything about it, as all our observations are open to interpretation. And, of course, Nietzsche viewed nihilism as something to be overcome (then again, he viewed everything as something to be overcome).
And almost no-one, except certain closeted academics, have affirmed moral nihilism as a position, for it literally states that there are no such thing as ethics, and all acts are beyond moral judgement.
The key word is, of course, intrinsic. It seems to me that nihilists would argue that since there is no instrinsic meaning, there is therefore no meaning at all (and contrary assertions are delusions), whereas an existentialist would argue that since there is no intrinsic meaning, one can either seek for one in trying to understand the ineffable (whether that is God, or the Absurd), or else, in the more atheistic variations of existentialism, forge one's own meanings, based on subjective experience and knowledge.