Yeah, it’s all in the facial expressions.

I was gonna say the same! That's what makes it so difficult to interpret it, because we cannot say how they feel except by reading the subtle hints in their body language, which is vague and easily misunderstood. I guess that's why these philosophical topics are so difficult, because really there's a lot going on in the emotions (that tells us how to feel about something, whether to like or dislike a theory) and a lot of it is very subtle, which makes it challenging, also to agree on stuff with other people.

And then there's this thing:

You and Me, the kind of creatures who want to be our own masters and would rebel even against the universe itself, are a rare kind. Most have to be talked into independence.

Why do you think that other people have to be "talked into" independence? What if you don't do that? What advantage does it make?

that kinda doesn't really answer the question at all

I fail to see how, true or false, that would be relevant.

Nihilism carries plenty of hope; it carries the hope that the values we make for ourselves, our subjective experiences, are the highest basis we have to judge ourselves on, that we are not a cog in somebody elses cosmic machine, or at least that if we are, that someone ultimately has no more valid a claim to us than we do. A universal meaning, if one exists, has a potentially infinite number of things that it could be, so if one exists, we almost certainly will fail to live up to it, despite any effort we make, and that notion I find horrifying. But you cannot fail if there is no goal, you can do what you want, and as humans are a social species, what we want, on average, is to live well, to be kind and experience kindness. Absent some other mission, this is what people try to do, without really needing to think too much about it.

I do not get this "nihilism means you feel everything is hopeless" notion, despite it being commonly repeated, because if nothing matters, nothing requires you to give up. There is no reason not to keep going, and since humans are ultimately wired to want and need and care about things, hope for the future is the default state. The people that tell you to not vote, or not be kind, or similar, on the grounds that things are all pointless, are not actually following nihilism, because they act as if that implies there is a universal mandate for inaction, not simply no mandate.

Beyond that, theres the matter that, well, I simply dont see a mechanism from which a universal meaning and purpose could arise (short of an actually omnipotent entity existing and using its power to decree such a purpose, but since I also believe such entities are self-contradicting and impossible, I cant accept that one). Purpose to my use of the term implies artificial creation to fulfill some role, an ultimate purpose then would somehow have to mean that the sum total of all things was created by some intelligent entity, except that entity would also be a thing that therefore would have to have retroactively created itself, which is paradoxical. Even if, for the sake of argument, I did think that the idea of a meaningless universe was mentally unhealthy, I cannot simply decide that idea is factually wrong simply because I didnt want it to be true, my brain just does not let me consciously change my beliefs without being convinced to the contrary like that. There are a great many things that I wish werent true, and yet think are regardless. This isnt one of them, but that isnt the reason I think it.

transhumanism isnt transcendent of material reality though, its literally just the idea of using technology, which runs on the rules of nature to modify humans into some more desired state, its not that it does impossible things so much as that the limits of what the material universe allows are actually much grander than our current abilities are up to.

What actually has “intrinsic value [in the] universe” and what difference does it make if my experiences are “intrinsically valuable” or not?

i think what donald is referring here is the concept of the universal, which is a very important concept throughout all of humanity's history. it says that there are ever-lasting, always-present laws (the so called universal laws) that everything is derived of. As such, there are clear ways to act and that distinguish right from wrong. This is the basis of all morality and therefore also of the legal code, politics, philosophy, and everything that guides our societies.

This is also frequently brought into connection with natural law, which states basically the same thing.

The reason why it is important is because it is really the only thing holding society together. You can't have a country of a billion people if the people think that you can just make your own laws and do whatever you want. The reason why world-spanning connections exist is because we believe in coherency, i.e. that things are the same way, more or less, everywhere, and it is therefore possible to establish communication and provide something like a connectivity tissue across the whole globe. Without that, you wouldn't really have one humanity at all but a whole lot of very small tribes all probably fighting each other, no state building or higher society. So it's a really important concept to think of.

I am being silly for sure.