Nihilists are hypocrites

~Counterarguments~ "Rejecting all meanings of life means rejecting social norms." --> How exactly can this even make sense? Social norms are the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit. Failure to stick to the rules can result in severe punishments, the most feared of which is exclusion from the group. [1] Rejecting all OBJECTIVE meanings to life is totally irrelevant to rejecting social norms. Once again, my opponent's understanding of objectivity FAILS. "First of all, I was addressing purpose in that contention... " --> Objective meaning and objective purpose to life are the same. " The mind is a nonmaterial thing" --> When I said "mind", I clearly meant human thinking, consciousness, cognition, etc. "Secondly, I could argue that all goals are independent of the mind. They are all sparked by the instantaneous collision of physical atoms... How can you show what goals are objective and which are not, and how can you show a link?" --> Once again, my opponent's understanding of objectivity fails. Objective truths are everywhere, and independent of human thinking. For example, 2+2=4. This will remain true throughout the universe EVEN if humans never existed. Subjective truths are true for some people and situations, but not for all. Saying "this song is awesome" is subjective. You have yet to show that there is an OBJECTIVE meaning/purpose to life. "The rest of these points are moot. Objective goals are to be discovered? All goals are discovered during life. When you are suddenly inspired to do something, you discover a goal." --> I have adequately shown why my opponent's understanding of objectivity is quite wrong. "Every human being has the inherent goal to protect his or her life and to protect members of the species. These are intrinsic goals." --> Untrue. It is part of our evolutionary psychology. Many animals are also "programmed" to protect his or her life and to protect members of the species. "Why do humans create societies? It's an inherent goal to establish groups with other members of the species." --> Evolutionary psychology. "Furthermore, nihilists believe that morals do not exist. They believe that everything should be legalized because no action is logically preferable to another in regard to moral value. Think about that. If nihilist actually followed these ideas, society would be chaos. Nihilists don't obey their own philosophy. They don't kill for no reason." --> There are repercussions for murdering people. One might go to jail, be fraught with guilt, etc. However, if I could kill someone I hated and no repercussions were to follow? Then sure, I would do so if I wished. "Also, this implies logical ability, and killing for no reason is not logical." --> What the heck does this even mean? Killing for no reason is not logical: well duh by definition it isn't; killing for NO reason. Nihilism never stated we should kill for no reason. ~Conclusion~ This is quite possibly the worst argument I've ever heard against nihilism. Not only does my opponent's understanding of objectivity fail at the seams, his understanding of why humans make society or what not also shows a lack of knowledge on his part. His argument concerning morals and nihilism is laughable. True, nihilism states morality is an illusion. But does it demand that we kill for no reason? Heck no. ---References--- 1. http://en.wikipedia.org...(sociology)