Why is existence absurd

Not the end of the story but its beginning. Sartre intuited this though he never got to explicit understanding. Camus did not, and didn't try. He was too full of himself to push the matter to that extremity where it becomes clear how unalone he is. The idea of Western Individualism, the solitary soul in the face of a starkly lonely universe, is a rhetorical gimmick used by very specific power centers to bend us to their designs upon us, to enslave us. The truer origin comes from two facets of European certainly Anglo-Saxon history rendered invisible by the record of that history.

The Reformation was motivated by a nostalgia for that hidden history, but by then it was too late and the result was the naked soul, from which Camus derives his mode of angst.

I could elaborate, but this is enough for now. The gist of it is that Medieval communities were not communal, and Feudal covenants were personal and not hierarchical, as the history would cause us to believe. Your post does a good job of raising many interesting questions. It is what an old friend of mine, the late Ken Knisely, referred to as a "Think Bomb.

Does he illustrate a Sisyphean approach to life, or has he surrendered to the absurdity of the universe and thereby failed to give his own life meaning? Saturday, March 7, -- PM. I did not weep at my mother's funeral. She always liked my brother best. The stranger is time. But it is not trying to be. It is rather over the barrel of the facile term human language, and the side of life it records and regulates, is.

There is no facile term of time. Meursault is a straw-man, not a real one, meant to draw fire away from the real issue, that Camus is not a serious thinker. It is not what we possess or bring into the world that defines us, it is what loss our departure from it is to it. Time is a community in contrariety. It is the infinitesimal which Rationalism, in the calculus, supposes reduced the anomaly it is to negligible. And even its inclusion is nominal cf. The Analyst, by George Berkeley. But this means that what we are not privy to of each other has a double meaning and motive.

It is secret, hidden its motivation while public in its meaning, or as yet unknown though unhidden of its meaning yet intimate though never public of its motive. But if that difference suffers the dynamic the community in contrariety is, then the secrecy is loss only to itself and the unhidden is loss only to all the differing time is.

But if we do endure a while in life the difference acts upon us and through us and through each other and something more real than just persisting in the count of time gets articulated. You see, person is the real differing that comes through us as we diligently serve the idea of constancy.

And like the infinitesimal, that differing is never more within the calculated duration than it is outside it, where number fails to count it.

This is intended as a rigorous approach, though I have yet to convince publishers of this. I regard Eastern thought as lacking in rigor. That is, putting up obstacles to understanding to make the author more secure in his conceit of correctness and pertinence. But I would like your view on Weber's take on Chinese thought. Sources rate him very highly, but I only see a cursory scholar with implacable prejudices.

The loss of the secret is not worth crying over, but the loss of the unhidden is so worthy there can be no calculus of it. Wednesday, March 18, -- PM. The meaning of life is to stay alive. We nowadays have it easy, the ones who struggle to survive don't have these concerns.

Sunday, April 19, -- PM. I think something important being left out of the discussion is Camus' deeper argument that to commit suicide would be a logical contradiction. In The Rebel, which is his political extension of his ontology presented in An Absurd Reasoning, he writes: "Every solitary suicide, when it is not an act of resentment is, in some way, either generous or contemptuous. But one feels contemptuous in the name of something. If the world is a matter of indifference to the man who commits suicide, it is because he has an idea of something that is not or could not be indifferent to him.

He believes that he is destroying everything or taking everything with him; but from this act of self-destruction itself a value arises which, perhaps, might have made it worth while to live.

Absolute negation is therefore not consummated by suicide. The only problem comes in the universe's indifference to our automatic and inavoidable value-giving. The confrontation between this human impulse and the universe's indifference is the Absurd that we must learn to live with. Just my two cents! Tuesday, January 5, -- PM. You claim that if God exists than He must be "either an imbecile or a psychopath", but this in itself is an idiotic statement.

There are numerous possibilities. According to the Bible, man kind was given free will and because of this humans sin. With freedom, there are consequences. Man himself is responsible for evil; it is not God's job to fix everything. If God made everything perfect, then there truly would be no purpose. What purpose does perfection serve? There would be nothing to accomplish or work for.

It is with imperfection that we are given a fulfilling life. Sartre himself said that "even if God exists, that would change nothing" and I agree. No matter what, life is a journey of finding oneself. To me, the Bible presents life as a test. Will you live for yourself or for something bigger than yourself? This is a major reason why people are atheists. They want to live for themselves and answer to no one. I find that to be a very lonely life. Sunday, January 10, -- PM.

With the term absurd, Camus did not apply a negative connotation. He didn't believe in God or that there was any meaning to life, but he didn't see it negatively and did not intend for anyone to see it negatively either. He simply observed and interpreted an absence of a universal meaning when it came to the idea of religion or spirituality. Camus believed that once we accept that there is no meaning, the conflict between a desire for meaning and not finding one is resolved.

This view is seen through his "Myth of Sisyphus" when he describes Sisyphus as "stronger than his rock" once he has accepted his fate and stops longing for another one. Wednesday, April 11, -- PM. Thursday, December 14, -- PM. The meaning of life is simply to enjoy the fact that you can contemplate it.

We will each get our answer soon enough. Or sooner, that's up to the individual. The hubris to think one can glean the mood of Sisyphus, much less his motivations. All we do is project our own norms, mores, and psycho-scars on this or any character. Wednesday, March 6, -- PM. I suppose nobody here wants pity from a Christian, but I sympathize with those who struggle to find meaning in the world alone.

I myself frequently became depressed before I found God, because I too recognized the futility of living in a world that continued regardless of my contributions. King Solomon, the wisest king of the Bible fits in quite well in this discussion. To the place the streams come from, there they return again. The eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing. It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. Mark my words, those who try to derive meaning from within themselves will quickly find that there is nothing inside you that gives yourself meaning.

You and I are self-serving and cold, unwilling to bend our backs to help strangers when we ourselves are struggling. The 20th century makes it clear that there is no limit to human depravity, and furthermore Hitler's regime successfully demonstrated how a supposedly morally upright, humanistic civilization desired nothing more than blood. Hitler was charismatic and intelligent, and he repeated whatever phrases that successfully riled up the crowds. What the people secretly desired was made known by their cheers, and Hitler weaponized those unspoken and selfish desires to give himself a platform.

From this, I argue that humanity is much darker and cruel than the exterior of modern civilization lets on. When push comes to shove, we are not the compassionate loving creatures we claim to be, at least in the right situation. This is why I put my faith in Jesus. He was able to prove that strength of character didn't need to be derived from terror, but through an unbroken spirit and heart full of love.

That is how I found meaning. For you, I'm not so sure. Tuesday, April 23, -- PM. Where is God? Where am I? What I say makes sense to me What does God think? Is this why I drink?

I try to break in I see in at times. Do you see? Are you me? Thursday, May 2, -- PM. I agree with loganferris. The meaning of existence is not self evident. It is only when you die to self through the serving of others that your existence becomes meaningful.

Thursday, January 2, -- AM. I think the story of pushing the rock up the hill is relevant to the lives that most of us live. We wake up, we go to a job we don't want to go to, come home to houses we will likely never own, and then we rinse and repeat. But for me, and maybe it's the same for the guy with the boulder, I understand that no matter what I'm here and there are things i dont necessarilywant to do.

But we have to. And maybe that's enough. Maybe it's better to be here for no reason at all than to not be here at all.

Sunday, October 11, -- PM. I find this article and subsequent commentary both interesting and disturbing to a certain degree. The article appears written in , hardly an ancient document yet all the same clearly dated to some degree due to the ridiculous advancements of the "modern" world most notably Donald Trump and COVID, both major players on the world stage.

Most interesting, in light of climate crisis, clearly a existential threat even way back in , I see very little progress in philosophical thought in detaching itself from an anthropomorphic point of view. What good is a philosophy or the use of such in any discussion if it does not deal directly with the proper placement of humans in fundamental reality?

A few things are very clear. As a species we decided some time past that we are separate from Nature. Not so true of indigenous cultures, but the vast majority of us conduct our daily lives under this very deadly premise. Our Western-skewed lives, our societies, our cultures and our civilizations are built on this entire premise.

To us, our economies , our philosophies and religions, Nature is an externality, not a centrality, and certainly not a "higher" being of any sort. The story we tell ourselves about fundamental reality is finally becoming unhinged.

Witness the rise of Donald Trump. Trump is a living, walking, breathing example of Camus' Absurdist philosophy. Like Camus' Sisyphus we can surmise that Donald Trump is some wacky form of happy. This is what happens when we allow our philosophies and beliefs to become unglued from fundamental reality. It will not end well for a species bent on such illusions. Like a Leviathan-Nietzshe we will drive ourselves insane attempting to believe the illusion.

Our technocrats preach: More! In what can one have faith? Some commenters point out religion and Jesus as an example. True to a certain degree, but Jesus was no ecologist and man-made climate disaster wasn't exactly an issue back in the day.

That story too needs expansion. Coronavirus has been an excellent opportunity to reexamine our world and its inter-connectedness. Few it appears will pause to take in the lessons. Our existence relies implicitly on Nature. Our air, our water, our food, as well as our collective megalomania and technological follies are all derived from Nature and depend upon Nature. Why not our philosophical faith as well? Is this because we are "separate" and of a "higher" order than other life forms?

Thus, the conclusion that is disturbing. Humans cannot continue on the road we are traveling, telling ourselves the same old lies, the same old story. The facts are all against us. One commenter noted: "The meaning of existence is not self-evident. Yet, is this not, as well, a Christian preaching? But is it not, as well, a teaching that has many forms in many cultures around the world since humans first began gathering in societies?

Humans now need more artists, "preachers" and indeed more philosophers that embrace and embody this universal truth that expresses fundamental reality in a grim honest truth - fear, death, the conditions of all life - yet proves that the interconnectedness of life is what is not only necessary but in essence gives something nasty, brutish, and short a larger context and true "meaning".

Skip to main content. Search form Search. Camus and Absurdity. Laura Maguire. So, what do you think? Is life truly absurd?

If so, can there be any point in living? Camus and the Absurd. Related Shows Existentialism May 07, Simone de Beauvoir Mar 09, Simone de Beauvoir is often cast as only a novelist or a mere echo of Jean-Paul Sartre. Camus and the Absurd Mar 01, Albert Camus is most famous for his existential works of fiction including The Stranger as well as his philosophical essay The Myth of Sisyphus.

Jean-Paul Sartre Jan 17, Jean-Paul Sartre was one of the first global public intellectuals, famous for his popular existentialist philosophy, his works of fiction, and his rivalry with Albert Camus. Tags Existentialism. Blog Archive October Persons, Community, and the Akan. Why Is Math So Useful? On Awesomeness. Is Facebook Morally Responsible? Microaggressions and Intention.

The Slow Miracles of Thought. Literary Minds. Summer Dylan Reading. Unnecessary Necessities. The Philosophy of the Vienna Circle. Cracking Down on Disinformation.

What Montaigne Knew. Is Meritocracy Possible? A Solution. What Makes A Man? Replacing Freud. What Tech Says. The Mathematics of Democracy. When Do False Beliefs Exculpate? Gaining Knowledge without Learning. December The Year in Poetry. Finding Minds in a Material World. Should the Arts Be for All? Whose Fault Is It Anyway?

Why We Argue About Fiction. Why Games Matter. Reasons to Hate. Abortion and Humanity. Skepticism and Trust in Science. Philosophy for the Apocalypse. Who Gets to be a Citizen? Does Meritocracy Have Merit? Discriminating Streets. Abortion and Dehumanization. On Jerks and Ethicists. A Cat's Life. The Value of Metaphor in a Pandemic. Benjamin and Modern Enchantment. The Ethics of Pet Keeping. Celebrating Our th Episode.

Covid and the Veil of Ignorance. Your Racist Mental Habits. Demonizing Black Men. Listener Covidundrums. Puzzle 3: Kant on Lying to Robots. Can Philosophy Help in a Crisis? Narrative Burnout. A Pandemic of Dreams. More Money Matters. FrancisOnFilm: Crip Camp.

Money Matters. Proust and Social Distance. Puzzle 2: What is an Identity? Philosophy and the Superhero. Trying to Let Go of the Past. Thinking and Mental Action. Puzzle 1: Are Beliefs Voluntary? Viral Xenophobia. Sorry, Critics: Parasite is a Good Movie. Anti-Sacred Spaces. Is the Self Real? FrancisOnFilm: Dionysus for Docs. Rough Humor. Comedy on the Edges. What the Future Holds. How Much Thought Is Inactive? A Tribute to Ken Taylor. Nonhuman Persons, Nonhuman Rights.

Francis-on-Film: Parasite. Sanctuary Cities. Part II. Hobbes and the Absolute State. Real Horror. Machine Consciousness. FrancisOnFilm: Downton Abbey. Should We Trust Polls? The Appeal of Authoritarianism. Music as a Way of Knowing. Explanation at Its Best.

What's In a Picture? Changing Minds on Climate Change. The intense and glistening present tells us that we can fully experience and appreciate life only on the condition that we no longer try to avoid our ultimate and absolute death. After completing Nuptials , Camus began to work on a planned triptych on the Absurd: a novel, which became The Stranger , a philosophical essay, eventually titled The Myth of Sisyphus , and a play, Caligula. These were completed and sent off from Algeria to the Paris publisher in September Although Camus would have preferred to see them appear together, even in a single volume, the publisher for both commercial reasons and because of the paper shortage caused by war and occupation, released The Stranger in June and The Myth of Sisyphus in October.

Camus kept working on the play, which finally appeared in book form two years later Lottman, — Deciding whether or not life is worth living is to answer the fundamental question in philosophy. For him, it seems clear that the primary result of philosophy is action, not comprehension. Camus sees this question of suicide as a natural response to an underlying premise, namely that life is absurd in a variety of ways. As we have seen, both the presence and absence of life i.

But Camus also thinks it absurd to try to know, understand, or explain the world, for he sees the attempt to gain rational knowledge as futile. Accepting absurdity as the mood of the times, he asks above all whether and how to live in the face of it. But he does not argue this question either, and rather chooses to demonstrate the attitude towards life that would deter suicide. In other words, the main concern of the book is to sketch ways of living our lives so as to make them worth living despite their being meaningless.

But if this temptation precedes what is usually considered philosophical reasoning, how to answer it? In order to get to the bottom of things while avoiding arguing for the truth of his statements, he depicts, enumerates, and illustrates. Appealing to common experience, he tries to render the flavor of the absurd with images, metaphors, and anecdotes that capture the experiential level he regards as lying prior to philosophy.

As this continues, one slowly becomes fully conscious and senses the absurd. Camus goes on to sketch other experiences of absurdity, until he arrives at death.

Our efforts to understand them lead nowhere. Avi Sagi suggests that in claiming this Camus is not speaking as an irrationalist—which is, after all, how he regards the existentialists—but as someone trying to rationally understand the limits of reason Sagi , 59— For Camus the problem is that by demanding meaning, order, and unity, we seek to go beyond those limits and pursue the impossible. We will never understand, and we will die despite all our efforts. There are two obvious responses to our frustrations: suicide and hope.

By hope Camus means just what he described in Nuptials , the religion-inspired effort to imagine and live for a life beyond this life. What is the Camusean alternative to suicide or hope? In short, he recommends a life without consolation, but instead one characterized by lucidity and by acute consciousness of and rebellion against its mortality and its limits.

At the same time Camus argues against the specific philosophical current with which Nietzsche is often linked as a precursor, and to which he himself is closest—existentialism. The Myth of Sisyphus is explicitly written against existentialists such as Shestov, Kierkegaard, Jaspers, and Heidegger, as well as against the phenomenology of Husserl. Camus shares their starting point, which he regards as the fact that they all somehow testify to the absurdity of the human condition.

In the process, the absurdity of Nausea becomes the contingency of Being and Nothingness , the fact that humans and things are simply there with no explanation or reason. Having rooted human existence in such contingency, Sartre goes on to describe other fundamental structures of existence, core human projects, and characteristic patterns of behavior, including freedom and bad faith, all of which arise on this basis.

For Sartre absurdity is obviously a fundamental ontological property of existence itself, frustrating us but not restricting our understanding. For Camus, on the other hand, absurdity is not a property of existence as such, but is an essential feature of our relationship with the world.

Camus, on the contrary, builds an entire worldview on his central assumption that absurdity is an unsurpassable relationship between humans and their world Aronson As discussed above, Camus views the world as irrational, which means that it is not understandable through reason. According to Camus, each existentialist writer betrayed his initial insight by seeking to appeal to something beyond the limits of the human condition, by turning to the transcendent.

And yet even if we avoid what Camus describes as such escapist efforts and continue to live without irrational appeals, the desire to do so is built into our consciousness and thus our humanity. But it is urgent to not succumb to these impulses and to instead accept absurdity. These philosophers, he insists, refuse to accept the conclusions that follow from their own premises. Kierkegaard, for example, strongly senses the absurd.

But rather than respecting it as the inevitable human ailment, he seeks to be cured of it by making it an attribute of a God who he then embraces. Along with Sartre, Camus praises the early Husserlian notion of intentionality. The Myth of Sisyphus finds the answer by abandoning the terrain of philosophy altogether. After the dense and highly self-conscious earlier chapters, these pages condense the entire line of thought into a vivid image.

For Camus, Sisyphus reminds us that we cannot help seeking to understand the reality that transcends our intelligence, striving to grasp more than our limited and practical scientific understanding allows, and wishing to live without dying. Like Sisyphus, we are our fate, and our frustration is our very life: we can never escape it. But there is more. After the rock comes tumbling down, confirming the ultimate futility of his project, Sisyphus trudges after it once again.

At each of those moments when he leaves the heights and gradually sinks towards the lairs of the gods, he is superior to his fate. This is how a life without ultimate meaning can be made worth living. Sisyphus accepts and embraces living with death without the possibility of appealing to God. His fate belongs to him. He has lived his existence from one moment to the next and without much awareness, but at his trial and while awaiting execution he becomes like Sisyphus, fully conscious of himself and his terrible fate.

He will die triumphant as the absurd man. The Myth of Sisyphus is far from having a skeptical conclusion. In response to the lure of suicide, Camus counsels an intensely conscious and active non-resolution. Rejecting any hope of resolving the strain is also to reject despair. Indeed, it is possible, within and against these limits, to speak of happiness.

It is not that discovering the absurd leads necessarily to happiness, but rather that acknowledging the absurd means also accepting human frailty, an awareness of our limitations, and the fact that we cannot help wishing to go beyond what is possible.

These are all tokens of being fully alive. First of all, like Pyrrho, Camus has solved his pressing existential issue, namely, avoiding despair, by a kind of resolution entailed in accepting our mortality and ultimate ignorance. But there are two critical differences with Pyrrho: for Camus we never can abandon the desire to know, and realizing this leads to a quickening of our life-impulses.

This last point was already contained in Nuptials , but here is expanded to link consciousness with happiness. But how is it possible that, by the end of The Myth of Sisyphus , Camus has moved from skepticism about finding the truth and nihilism about whether life has meaning to advocating an approach to life that is clearly judged to be better than others? How does he justify embracing a normative stance, affirming specific values? This contradiction reveals a certain sleight of hand, as the philosopher gives way to the artist.

It is as an artist that Camus now makes his case for acceptance of tragedy, the consciousness of absurdity, and a life of sensuous vitality. He advocates this with the image of Sisyphus straining, fully alive, and happy. And it is often forgotten that this absurdist novelist and philosopher was also a political activist—he had been a member of the Algerian branch of the French Communist Party in the mids and was organizer of an Algiers theater company that performed avant-garde and political plays—as well as a crusading journalist.

In June he wrote a series of reports on famine and poverty in the mountainous coastal region of Kabylie, among the first detailed articles ever written by a European Algerian describing the wretched living conditions of the native population. The spectacle of Camus and his mentor Pascal Pia running their left-wing daily into the ground because they rejected the urgency of fighting Nazism is one of the most striking but least commented-on periods of his life.

New York: Feedbooks. Cambridge [Cambridgeshire]: Cambridge University Press. Human, all too human. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Book Google Scholar. The gay science. Schopenhauer, A.

The world as will and representation, volume 1. New York: Courier Corporation. Parerga and Paralipomena: A collection of philosophical essays. New York: Cosimo. Setiya, K. The midlife crisis. Sigrist, M. Death and the meaning of life. Philosophical Papers, 44 1 , 83— Wolf, S. Meaning in life and why it matters. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Young, J. The death of god and the meaning of life. Download references. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar.

Reprints and Permissions. Holmes, B. Is Human Life Absurd?. Philosophia 47, — Download citation. Received : 27 April Accepted : 06 May Published : 31 May And this requires that we at least understand how we came to be so driven. Portsmouth Climate Festival — Portsmouth, Portsmouth. Edition: Available editions United Kingdom.

Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in. Human self awareness is an evolutionary outcome, but where has it brought us? Lonnie Aarssen , Queen's University, Ontario. Discovery of self.