I have not been able to grasp these concepts. Specifically, I am referring to the third chapter of the Myth of Sisyphus: "The philosophical suicide".

I have understood that Camus's critic on Kierkegaard is relativa to the latter trying to escape the absurd, by divinizing the irrational, with his leap of fate. Is that correct?

About Husserl's phenomology, I interpreted that Camus considers Husserl's thought as very Platonic. I have not quite understood why he affirms that, though.

Last but not least, I have also not understood this passage:

"since a unifying principle is missing, the philosophical thought could still be able to find joy in trying to comprehend every aspect of the human experience."

If I am not wrong, Camus thinks that since there is no rational explanation for the world, then we cannot explain our experience of it. So, he is criticizing this specific aspect of Husserl's phenomenology. Am I wrong?

Thank you.

  • Camus objects to Husserl's claim to open, with his reduction method, the essences in objects; because then, for Camus, non-rationality, opacity of the world would vanish. He finds in Husserl yet another instance of "leap to consolation", in admitting by the latter "universal metaphysical truths" (essesces) of the concrete things.
    – ttnphns
    Nov 21, 2021 at 11:10
  • For Camus, phenomena and experience have only surface and are unique, he objects against attempts to sight in-depth of it, with our abstract wit, in prospects to find unifying principles that would explain universum and thus reconcile us with the world.
    – ttnphns
    Nov 21, 2021 at 11:33
  • @ttnphns thank you for your answer. Now it's clear. What is not clear is if Husserl actually implies that in the universe exists a metaphysical truths.
    – XXJoJo
    Nov 23, 2021 at 19:31


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .