Hot answers tagged

6

The allusion to the expression "the Nietzschean criterion" is, I think, merely internal to the present text (The Myth of Sisyphus). It is not something we the readers are supposed to know if we read this expression without having read the previous pages in The Myth of Sisyphus. And its understanding does not even require a previous familiarity with ...


5

There is not room to quote the whole essay here, or even the whole last paragraph. They explain Camus' point pretty well. The last two sentences are: The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy. So, no, Sisyphus is struggling, not content. He is happy because his heart is full. What would ...


4

Why is Absurdism against Nihilism? Absurdism, as presented by Camus in the Myth of Sisyphus, allows the individual to have belief systems. These belief systems are formed by consciously appropriating elements of preexisting philosophies. Also by observing the consequences of actions, a moral code can be built. I've not as well read on Nihilism, but I think ...


4

Much of the answer to this depends on what you mean by 'atheism.' As the opposite of 'theism,' that form of atheism is just as dogmatic as what it seems to reject. The existential project looks at the event in the present in all its contingencies, so our relationship to a deeper or 'divine' reality might well be part of that. This a/theism does not affirm ...


4

Try reading it and see! There’s probably not a really satisfying answer for the general case. It’s one of the great works of literature as well as philosophy, a cultural monument and apex and touchstone in its own right; and it is as open to you as it is for anyone for an immediate encounter. I would really suggest that in general don’t be worried about not ...


3

The question Camus is asking is whether life is worth living, which, he believes, is equivalent to the problem of suicide. For the equivalence, Camus establishes such auxiliary assumptions as living is absurd and man should act upon his belief. Camus says there are more than two immediate answers: Yes and No. A third possible answer, according to Camus, is, ...


3

For existential philosophy, failing to grapple with the paradoxes of death (in that it explicitly limits our ability to perceive the world in its totality) and the Real (that, because our perception is limited, we are unable to find universal knowledge about the world) constitutes a harm to our ability to live to our fullest (in that we live thinking that ...


3

You have to keep in mind that "rolling the rock" purposeless, was Sisyphus' punishment. If, instead, he rolls it over wheat, he will make flour, which could be used to feed people, thereby giving purpose/value to his efforts (life). Life is not a punishment, but rather an opportunity to help others and enjoy their company, to go through the different ...


3

The dichotomy of the question (Communism vs. Capitalism) and the dichotomy actually mentioned in the quote are very different. The quote says Camus saw oppression in the Soviet Union (and the Soviet system in general) as the "primary problem for the left" post-war. That is hardly the same thing as him feeling forced into a choice between Communism and ...


3

In general, A Happy Death (1936-38), as well as the following Camus' novel : The Stranger (1942), which share with the previous one the title character : Mersault, revolves around the attempt to make sense of life, despite its absurdity (i.e. llack of sense, of meaning). The basic questions are : are money, love, success, the way to "give sense" to life ? ...


3

One of the weaknesses of the Western philosophical tradition - something that Existentialism and Absurdism tried to address — is that Western philosophy discounts psychology (broadly put). It implicitly presumes that things must have reasons in the analytical, intellectual sense, and that leads to some unnatural conclusions. For instance, one might wonder ...


2

So is existentialism basically "pratical" nihilism? No, they are not the same. Existentialism is not as narrow as it sounds, but always seems to have two major tenets --the first mentioned in the other answer (but not elaborated)-- which is that the argument that consciousness is the ultimate undeniable proof of existence (Descartes), is rejected, (or ...


2

For Kierkegaard, and by extension Christian existentialists in general, it is precisely the primacy of the personal relationship with God that releases the individual from all other bindings of religion, law, custom, morals and tradition (while at the same time laying on the existential "yoke" of absolute direct obedience to God). Although this clearly ...


2

We are all men. All our thoughts are anthropomorphic. If we try to imagine thoughts in animals, we will imagine them to have anthropomorphic thoughts. It is beyond our realm to understand how an animal would actually think. We interpret the universe through our human mind and senses. We have no other choice. Charles Darwin, when asked if he believed in God, ...


2

This is an example of what can be called associative narration, that is common in the texts of continental tradition in philosophy to which Camus belongs. Its aim is to foster understanding rather than to pass information, to invoke what one has in mind in the reader, and to help them explore it for themselves. The text is often structured as a search for ...


2

If life is absurd, immortality might be a continuation of the absurdity - and worse, because life ends but immorality goes on for ever. An eternity of absurdity! What a prospect. However, if immortality provides an extension of our ability to 'focus on other things and personal human projects', then it looks attractive - unless the other things and projects ...


2

The question is a tough one because it is very hard to know what Camus had in his mind while writing that. Many interpretations are possible. However, there is one way to look into it. Camus starts from presupposition that life is absurd and meaningless. This is important to remember. Camus also considers the philosophers that mitigate or eliminate the ...


2

One way of looking at guilt is to acknowledge that the experience of moral guilt is real, but that it does not mean anything. That is, the human moral faculty is not reliable although it is tempting to believe there is more meaning there than there is. Alternatively, if one wants to take the experience of guilt more seriously then everyone is guilty as ...


2

From a purely logical perspective, the question is not answerable. The desirability of immortality does not stand in any necessary connection with whether life is absurd or meaningful. Syllogistically, you are asking if A=B, does C=D follow? So what is necessary is to add some premises which link meaning or lack of it to desirability or undesirability of ...


2

(I don't have formal training in philosophy; I'm a physicist who really likes The Myth of Sisyphus; other commenters on this forum will no doubt give you a better placement of this sentiment in philosophical traditions. This is how I understand that passage in relation to the rest of the work.) Camus's Myth of Sisyphus is concerned with what he calls the ...


2

The quote is not Camus'. But, apparently, misquoting Camus, or even fabricating quotes is something of an enterprise. Gaetani even has papaer on it The noble art of misquoting Camus. They include "I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't, and die to find out there is", "Don't walk ...


2

If 'the World is absurd - without any meaning or end result' then if caring is absurd, so is not-caring. 'Why should I care about anyone?' and 'Why shouldn't I care about someone - or everyone?' - both questions are themselves absurd as are any answers to them. 'Why should I care?' has no special salience; it's just itself one more absurd question among all ...


1

seek out the truth. search for it in all places. explore all religions and all philosophies. don't leave any stone unturned.


1

We all know that 'Man is mortal'. We need not desire for mortality. So the thing we can desire is to become immortal. There may be personal difference in the idea of immortality. We can't deny this even if the truth is something else. It may be an immortality that transcends this absurd life. But only those who believe that there is something immortal ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible