Moral, specifically Nietzschean, nihilism for me. While I embrace the non-cognitivist assertion that there are no moral truths, I think that because of the society we have constructed, there is a certain moral code that has to be followed. So murder isn't wrong inherently, but as I have chosen to participate in society, I have to consider it as wrong or, at the very least, consider it as unacceptable. In the end, all actions are equally meaningless but I take the Randian view that the pursuit of one's own happiness is paramount, and while that claim can't be shown to be true, the pragmatic action is to assume it is, and from there decide on the moral code you will live your life by.
I went through a period where I embraced nihilism in its purest form, but I think that nihilism, while 'true' (in as much as anything can be true), cannot be the ending point of any philosophy. Humans, by nature, prefer life to death and because of that, they seek a moral code to live by. Nihilism cannot, almost by definition, fulfill that need, and so they construct alternate systems of morality. At the most basic level, I am a nihilist, but the moral code I live my life by is closest to rational egoism.
Ayn Rand once called Kant a monster and though I think that's extreme, the very notion of his categorical imperative is enough to start a rant from me. His rejection of the self in favour of some universal maxim is simply unacceptable to me. Utilitarianism suffers, also, from a rejection of the self as paramount and also is, in my view, unable to overcome the problem of basic rights. Divine command presupposes the existence of divinity, and relativism is moral and epistemological cowardice.
Menzo (who hopes he was clear...)