Question
What would a moral nihilist say about The Holocaust?
Answer
Moral nihilists deny the meaningfulness of categories like good and evil. That does not mean they necessarily deny the reality of pain and suffering or condone acts that cause pain and suffering.
Pain and suffering are visceral, sensory realities that we can vicariously experience in diluted forms via our (biological) capacity for empathy. Most animals can.
Good and evil are metaphysical primitives defined and invoked to make sense of those realities. And sometimes, to create those realities. Only humans seem to use these categories.
Moral nihilists would (if they've thought their position through) deny any imperative to take a position on the matter. It's like asking an atheist "Is God an Angry God or a Loving God?"
Which means the more interesting question is what they would do if put in an holocaust-like situation, on either side (Nazi enforcer or concentration-camp resident). Moralists can infer and impute metaphysical positions on such behavior if they choose.
The behavior of the character of Dr. Gregory House in the television series House (TV series) is a good illustration of how a moral nihilist would react to things like the holocaust: ignore the metaphysics and possibly respond to basic sensations of empathy (a biological phenomenon, not a metaphysical idea) by trying to alleviate pain and suffering.
If you put Dr. House on the suffering side, he'd try to escape and/or help others escape. If he were a doctor forced to do horrendous things under the threat of death, he would likely scheme a way out or accept death himself rather than inflict pain on others.
House is a character with a strong capacity for empathy, modulated by a very clear-eyed awareness of his own ability to influence events. Including using himself as an instrument. He has a self-destructive/masochistic streak, so he is often able to act in ways that seem altruistic and take on pain himself instead of inflicting it on others.
How would a House-like moral nihilist behave if he had less empathy and a self-preservation and/or sadistic streak instead of a self-destructive/masochistic streak?
I suspect that is behaviorally the description of an ordinary person. Such a person would respond to being on either side of a holocaust situation as ordinary Christian Germans and Jews actually did (see Art Spiegelman's Maus for a good depiction of the latter; can't think of a good German viewpoint). The only difference is that they wouldn't be wracked by guilt afterwards.
Pain and suffering are visceral, sensory realities that we can vicariously experience in diluted forms via our (biological) capacity for empathy. Most animals can.
Good and evil are metaphysical primitives defined and invoked to make sense of those realities. And sometimes, to create those realities. Only humans seem to use these categories.
Moral nihilists would (if they've thought their position through) deny any imperative to take a position on the matter. It's like asking an atheist "Is God an Angry God or a Loving God?"
Which means the more interesting question is what they would do if put in an holocaust-like situation, on either side (Nazi enforcer or concentration-camp resident). Moralists can infer and impute metaphysical positions on such behavior if they choose.
The behavior of the character of Dr. Gregory House in the television series House (TV series) is a good illustration of how a moral nihilist would react to things like the holocaust: ignore the metaphysics and possibly respond to basic sensations of empathy (a biological phenomenon, not a metaphysical idea) by trying to alleviate pain and suffering.
If you put Dr. House on the suffering side, he'd try to escape and/or help others escape. If he were a doctor forced to do horrendous things under the threat of death, he would likely scheme a way out or accept death himself rather than inflict pain on others.
House is a character with a strong capacity for empathy, modulated by a very clear-eyed awareness of his own ability to influence events. Including using himself as an instrument. He has a self-destructive/masochistic streak, so he is often able to act in ways that seem altruistic and take on pain himself instead of inflicting it on others.
How would a House-like moral nihilist behave if he had less empathy and a self-preservation and/or sadistic streak instead of a self-destructive/masochistic streak?
I suspect that is behaviorally the description of an ordinary person. Such a person would respond to being on either side of a holocaust situation as ordinary Christian Germans and Jews actually did (see Art Spiegelman's Maus for a good depiction of the latter; can't think of a good German viewpoint). The only difference is that they wouldn't be wracked by guilt afterwards.