What is the difference between existentialism and nihilism?

TELL ME ABOUT YOUR FOOT.

Nihilism // Existentialism

Though nihilism isn’t existentialism, and existentialism isn’t nihilism, these two philosophies are often confused. While a sort of nihilistic existentialism does indeed exist, it isn’t as radical as pure nihilism. Another reason why these philosophies are often confused is that Friedrich Nietzsche is a central philosopher in both. What sets existential nihilists apart from pure nihilists is the fact that, while nihilists don’t believe in any meaning at all, existential nihilists only believe this in relation to any sort of meaning to life (though this position is implied in “regular” nihilism, and existential nihilists may also subscribe to the full nihilistic view, existential nihilism is a separate view). While other existentialists will allow for meaning in people’s lives (that meaning they themselves inject into it), existential nihilists will deny that this meaning is anything but self-deception. Existential nihilists could thus seem to be more pessimistic than the other existentialists, but even here, conclusions vary. Some will claim that the best thing to do is to commit suicide while others will claim that the lack of objective meaning of life means you should just do as you wish – a hedonism of sorts. There also are those who hold that nihilism is both a necessary burden of the authentic thinker and a source of dread, pushing them to hold in suspension his tendency to accept the reality of values while maintaining the unfulfilled desire for their discovery.

~Wikipedia

So, in other words…they’re both pretty damn depressing, eh?

In other words, yes. :’(

/wrists

Existentialists share the belief that philosophical thinking begins with the human subject—not merely the thinking subject, but the acting, feeling, living human individual. In existentialism, the individual’s starting point is characterized by what has been called “the existential attitude,” or a sense of disorientation and confusion in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world.

existentialism: a chiefly 20th century philosophical movement embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad

-Based on Wikipedia’s entry and Webster’s, respectively.

Nihilism is a philosophical position that argues that existence is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Nihilists generally assert that objective morality does not exist, and that no action is logically preferable to any other in regard to the moral value of one action over another. Nihilists who argue that there is no objective morality may claim that existence has no intrinsic higher meaning or goal. They may also claim that there is no reasonable proof or argument for the existence of a higher ruler or creator, or posit that even if higher rulers or creators exist, humanity has no moral obligation to worship them.

Again, according to Wikipedia.

I suppose one of the main differences is that nihilists believe that there is no truth and since truth doesn’t exist, nothing does. Period. The end. As to where existentialists might not be as quick to point out what truth IS, or for that matter ISN’T. Instead they don’t rely as much on logic and deduction, truth and fallacy, but instead more on a persons inherent valuation of things. One’s intuitive responsiblity and will towards things.
Very similar in their initial perspectives, but they differ very much in how they progress from one rationale to the next.

Look, also, to the root words themselves: Existence and Nothing. Pretty much sums them up.

Across, you just want attention. With, you’re serious.

Don’t hurt yourself over a philosophy, we love you!

Existentialism is not depressing, it is liberating. We are are all alone in the darkness, groping for a meaning that does not exist, but that does not mean that actions and ideas are meaningless, and that life is not worth living. Hedonism seems like an obvious choice, but Sartre and de Beauvoir have superbly explained why it’s not the best choice.

Plus, let’s not forget that both Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky were Christian Existentialists. There writings are some of the most interesting and logical interpretations of religion and Christianity that I have ever read.

What’s the difference between existentialism and reality?

Existentialism is tangible, reality is not.

tinyfaery summed it all up wonderfully. Our concepts our merely feeble attempts at understanding, often times. We try and ‘package the sky’ into our neat little ‘cubbyholes for minds’ so that we can ‘know’ this, and ‘know’ that. The question I pose to anyone is: How can we know anything? And how is the answer to that question known? ... Of course we can believe in any of our conceptions, but ideas are just poor attempts at communication of an intangible reality – it seems. For a deeper explanation of what I am trying to convey, I suggest Alan Watt’s video – A Conversation with Myself (4 parts):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aufuwMiKmE

Existentialism and nihilism are both philosophys through which the world can be interpreted. And the difference, in one sentence is:

Nihilists believe that life has no meaning, existentialist believe life has no inherent meaning.

So as an existentialist I don’t think life is meaningless, but I don’t think that there is a single universal meaning of life either. You have to find your own.

As an Existential Nihilist, what fascinates me is the use of categorisation, rather than separating terms, what about a possible amalgamation? Just to move things beyond the Wikipedia-n or Webster quibbling of dictionary definitions. What if nihilism and existentialism is an attempt to explore meaning by using the same idea of Nothingness.

Most Existential writers, such as Sartre or even Heidegger, use Nothingness (“nothing” = nihil) to express what is not meaning or specifically outside our Being. I found this to be at the heart of nihilism. As a case on its own terms, it investigates this notion expressed by existentialism. That one can find meaning within oneself and not from the outside. This is infinitely hopeful.

If anyone is interested in the post-modern possibility of nihilism within existentialism, as a special case, then Simon Critchley’s “Very Little…Almost Nothing” is a spectacular account. I find within these newer writers not so depressing, as poetic, hopeful, and sometimes darkly funny.