You have very many excellent replies already, but I’d like to add that I see this as a problem arising from deep cultural dynamics. Philosophers such as Nietszche and Heidegger foresaw the probability of nihilism as being the inevitable result of the collapse of faith in the animating principles that had previously informed Western culture (although it should be noted they didn’t analyse it the same way.)
I see the Western cultural malaise as a consequence of the persuasive power of scientific materialism. I’m not singling out any specific version of that, other than the general consensus of seeing life is the consequence of undirected material causation that underlies the process of evolution. This is not to take issue with the actual science but the way it has been interpreted in respect of the human condition. It means that we’re no longer part of a meaningful existential or cosmic narrative. I’m sure that this is a large part of the cultural dynamic of nihilism as it naturally entails a sense of the meaningless of the Universe.
But this is also the culmination of centuries of cultural development so it is not an easy problem to analyse and diagnose. My personal ‘quest’ so to speak has been via comparative religion, philosophy and Buddhist studies. I’m seeking a wide-ranging approach that can restore a sense of significance to life whilst being fully cognisant of scientific fact. To this end, I’ve drawn on a range of thinkers and perspectives from both Eastern and Western sources.
One resource that I’ve discovered is a long (50 hour!) lecture series by Canadian cognitive scientist John Vervaeke called ‘Awakening from the Meaning Crisis’ (YouTube Playlist). I’ve listened to probably 80% of it. It really helps articulate the cultural dynamics behind ‘the meaning crisis.’ I recommend a listen.
I have some experience with the topic, having done an MA in Buddhist Studies (UniSyd). Nāgārjuna, and indeed the Buddha, was often accused of nihilism by his Brahman opponents, on the basis that they reject the authority of the Vedas and the Indian caste system. It’s also a common misconception that the ‘emptiness’ of Buddhism (śūnyatā) is a ‘void’ or ‘nothing’, but explaining why it is not, is quite difficult in a short space. Volumes have been written on it. Perhaps I could refer to an essay of mine which addresses some aspects of the topic, Phenomenology Meets Buddhism. It’s also touched on in a thread in Philosophy of Religion section, Questions the Buddha Didn’t Answer.The first refers to an insightful essay by a Buddhist scholar, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, called What is Emptiness?
“Emptiness is a mode of perception, a way of looking at experience. It adds nothing to, and takes nothing away from, the raw data of physical and mental events. You look at events in the mind and the senses with no thought of whether there’s anything lying behind them. This mode is called emptiness because it is empty of the presuppositions we usually add to experience to make sense of it: the stories and world-views we fashion to explain who we are and to define the world we live in.” Thanissaro Bhikkhu “What is Emptiness?”
For those familiar with phenomenology, the resonances ought to be clear enough.