An incredible eye opener, thank you so much! Now well into reading the Myth of Sisyphus thanks to your explanations above, and it's directly contributing to my own growing concept of a living philosophy. Great series, please do keep going, thanks!
While I think that absurdism would be a better way of living for me, I find myself acting and behaving as an existentialist. I find it difficult to imagine Sisyphus happy. How can one be happy in misery? How can one be happy in pain, in despair, in agony, in fear.... ? Emotions and feelings are part of our "essence" and to deny them is -so it seems to me- a form of self deception. Can anyone explain to me how to imagine happiness when there is none without resorting to magical thinking?
I think what stops it becoming magical thinking is that it is based in reality. It needs to be a genuine attention to the joy of life around you. It is gratitude. If I was able to lug a massive boulder up a hill every day, I would only have to focus on the true magnificence of the strength of my muscles and I could be quite happy. Imagine how someone in a wheelchair feels about that story? It is all perspective.
The emotions are there, but like the Buddhist philosophy of non-attachment, you don't have to attend to them or dwell in attachment to them. That isn't denying them, it just isn't giving them the centre stage. I think of it like parenting a screaming child. You have to see past the emotional experience to see what is happening for the person underneath. We grow as adults and learn to regulate our emotions (ideally) which isn't the same as suppressing them, it is just giving them their appropriate place.
“There's a difference between the fact that the universe is inherently unfair on a cosmic level, and the fact that life is unfair because people are actively making it so.”
I took a few months to mull over your reply. I keep coming back to the above quote by John Scalzi. You say "It is all perspective" which can also be translated as "it depends on what you think is important; what your values are" which is just another form of magical thinking (value is a construct).
The problem I have with your reply is that some things are inherently natural (reality/the universe) and other things are made up. If someone suffers you should look at what the cause of that suffering is and if it is caused by "the universe" you could try and help them "changing their perspective". But if the cause is a construct (read: other people) then the only help should be to eliminate the cause. Why would mental abuse be treated anything else than physical abuse?
When you have a fever, a doctor will look for the cause and treat it. If you are depressed, they tell you to learn te live with it. To make Sisyphus happy is to take away his boulder. If you don't, you are just enabling his torturer and are part of the problem.
Satisfaction in the moment over a job well done despite pain or sorrow, surety about your place in an objective eternity, and focusing on your locus of control
Precisely miss. Imagining happiness in Sisyphus' state is tantamount to self-deception. Camus said so because he felt correctly that Sisyphus experienced the futility and meaninglessness of his endless struggle. However, doing the same thing only to get the same result (-) amounts to an inherent feeling of despair.
Absurdism is a beautiful philosophy, though quite impractical. Existentialism however is a more preferable idea to me. We exist to seek meaning and that is what makes our subjective world meaningful. Camus however failed to realize that embracing the absurd is also a way to seek meaning,and that meaning which is the only essence in absurdism is to preserve one's existence.
Great article. We could add a fourth option to nihilism, existentialism, and absurdism: nondualism, which is the realization that meaning is not something to be sought externally but already there, effortlessly, in our being
I loved this piece. I kept getting drawn away from it yesterday but finally finished it this morning. So glad I persisted. I agree with Matt...it really flowed in a way that was really understandable. I am curious what influence Buddhism, especially the concept of non-attachment, may have had on Camus in his Absurdism philosophy?
Nihilism is not the answer; Existentialism, well, you exist in a world but that does not mean you are going to like what the world offers, no matter how hard you try to fit in; Absurdism, then, rebellion, being who you are and living life as you see fit, despite what others think, sounds like the way to go. I'm going to go there right now. Catch you later.
Fantastic essay. It’s difficult not to use these terms interchangeably even to describe myself. When I say I’m a Nihilist that connotes hopelessness and ingratitude that I don’t generally experience. When I say I’m an Existentialist, people think I believe the “meaning” I create for myself is the same thing as their Meaning. And most don’t know what Absurdism is. But I agree most with Camus that suicide is the logical choice but to truly embrace the absurd we must choose revolt and live in spite of it. Thanks for writing this; I’ll definitely be restacking.
Great article - very informative. As someone who revels in the freedom I found when I embraced atheism many years ago I think I may enjoy learning more about Absurdism.
Why? The world makes no sense. We have little control or power over events. We are constrained. And we repeat ourselves, daily, hourly to achieve what? To get by. To be happy. Life is utterly absurd.
I would like to think that all three ideologies were born out existential crisis and man’s uncertainties of near or far future. But the cause of existential crisis is fear of death rather than searching for meaning, meaning starts coming replacing fear as you go through process. So nihilism is beginning of the crisis, existentialism is journey through rational structures which is complemented by absurdism underlying structures that rational mind would call irrational, and psychologists as unconscious content that starts to becoming conscious raising self-awareness.
Return from journey to collective is once you start molding it. You regained yourself inside Universe, claimed your place and you are creating in your own right. Your power is always relative and proportional to contribution (it keeps on growing, good seeds will feed your interests for long time infinitely). Resistance is how you murder old things, it’s figurative, literal and physical but activated only by your freshly acquired ego causal soul. Since it transcends all it also affects all, and once you are differentiated from the rest by distinctive features you grow in continuance alone or in partnership you would presume after longer time. Philosophers are like invisible friends always open sourcing realms of reason ideas and forms —true philosopher kings of Universe capable of restructuring energies and optimizing distribution (it sounds industrious, but could be by keeping a vineyard or simple cheese seller in unknown village).
Really well structured article. I've never seen the differences between nihilism, existentialism and absurdism put so succinctly.
Thanks Matt!
An incredible eye opener, thank you so much! Now well into reading the Myth of Sisyphus thanks to your explanations above, and it's directly contributing to my own growing concept of a living philosophy. Great series, please do keep going, thanks!
Ah no way! That's awesome Bruce! Thanks for reading and thanks for the kind words!
Sad boy vs. Bad boy vs. Mad boy
No room for girls, unfortunately we’re actually sane
While I think that absurdism would be a better way of living for me, I find myself acting and behaving as an existentialist. I find it difficult to imagine Sisyphus happy. How can one be happy in misery? How can one be happy in pain, in despair, in agony, in fear.... ? Emotions and feelings are part of our "essence" and to deny them is -so it seems to me- a form of self deception. Can anyone explain to me how to imagine happiness when there is none without resorting to magical thinking?
I think what stops it becoming magical thinking is that it is based in reality. It needs to be a genuine attention to the joy of life around you. It is gratitude. If I was able to lug a massive boulder up a hill every day, I would only have to focus on the true magnificence of the strength of my muscles and I could be quite happy. Imagine how someone in a wheelchair feels about that story? It is all perspective.
The emotions are there, but like the Buddhist philosophy of non-attachment, you don't have to attend to them or dwell in attachment to them. That isn't denying them, it just isn't giving them the centre stage. I think of it like parenting a screaming child. You have to see past the emotional experience to see what is happening for the person underneath. We grow as adults and learn to regulate our emotions (ideally) which isn't the same as suppressing them, it is just giving them their appropriate place.
“There's a difference between the fact that the universe is inherently unfair on a cosmic level, and the fact that life is unfair because people are actively making it so.”
I took a few months to mull over your reply. I keep coming back to the above quote by John Scalzi. You say "It is all perspective" which can also be translated as "it depends on what you think is important; what your values are" which is just another form of magical thinking (value is a construct).
The problem I have with your reply is that some things are inherently natural (reality/the universe) and other things are made up. If someone suffers you should look at what the cause of that suffering is and if it is caused by "the universe" you could try and help them "changing their perspective". But if the cause is a construct (read: other people) then the only help should be to eliminate the cause. Why would mental abuse be treated anything else than physical abuse?
When you have a fever, a doctor will look for the cause and treat it. If you are depressed, they tell you to learn te live with it. To make Sisyphus happy is to take away his boulder. If you don't, you are just enabling his torturer and are part of the problem.
Satisfaction in the moment over a job well done despite pain or sorrow, surety about your place in an objective eternity, and focusing on your locus of control
Precisely miss. Imagining happiness in Sisyphus' state is tantamount to self-deception. Camus said so because he felt correctly that Sisyphus experienced the futility and meaninglessness of his endless struggle. However, doing the same thing only to get the same result (-) amounts to an inherent feeling of despair.
Absurdism is a beautiful philosophy, though quite impractical. Existentialism however is a more preferable idea to me. We exist to seek meaning and that is what makes our subjective world meaningful. Camus however failed to realize that embracing the absurd is also a way to seek meaning,and that meaning which is the only essence in absurdism is to preserve one's existence.
Great article. We could add a fourth option to nihilism, existentialism, and absurdism: nondualism, which is the realization that meaning is not something to be sought externally but already there, effortlessly, in our being
That would be the opposite of the others.
idk why this article just popped up randomly on my feed but i’m happy it did :) thank you so much for this well structured post <3
Reading this with the satisfied smile of one who has found his people. 🙂
I loved this piece. I kept getting drawn away from it yesterday but finally finished it this morning. So glad I persisted. I agree with Matt...it really flowed in a way that was really understandable. I am curious what influence Buddhism, especially the concept of non-attachment, may have had on Camus in his Absurdism philosophy?
Nihilism is not the answer; Existentialism, well, you exist in a world but that does not mean you are going to like what the world offers, no matter how hard you try to fit in; Absurdism, then, rebellion, being who you are and living life as you see fit, despite what others think, sounds like the way to go. I'm going to go there right now. Catch you later.
https://open.substack.com/pub/tonyholloway/p/the-girl-who-threw-bricks-at-people?r=55ufbu&utm_medium=ios
I just started a new Substack. I write absurdist and philosophy inspired short stories and poems. I invite you to read.
Fantastic essay. It’s difficult not to use these terms interchangeably even to describe myself. When I say I’m a Nihilist that connotes hopelessness and ingratitude that I don’t generally experience. When I say I’m an Existentialist, people think I believe the “meaning” I create for myself is the same thing as their Meaning. And most don’t know what Absurdism is. But I agree most with Camus that suicide is the logical choice but to truly embrace the absurd we must choose revolt and live in spite of it. Thanks for writing this; I’ll definitely be restacking.
Great article - very informative. As someone who revels in the freedom I found when I embraced atheism many years ago I think I may enjoy learning more about Absurdism.
Well i’ll write about those topics too! Very interesting and useful.
Absurdism makes no sense tbh😭
Why? The world makes no sense. We have little control or power over events. We are constrained. And we repeat ourselves, daily, hourly to achieve what? To get by. To be happy. Life is utterly absurd.
I would like to think that all three ideologies were born out existential crisis and man’s uncertainties of near or far future. But the cause of existential crisis is fear of death rather than searching for meaning, meaning starts coming replacing fear as you go through process. So nihilism is beginning of the crisis, existentialism is journey through rational structures which is complemented by absurdism underlying structures that rational mind would call irrational, and psychologists as unconscious content that starts to becoming conscious raising self-awareness.
Return from journey to collective is once you start molding it. You regained yourself inside Universe, claimed your place and you are creating in your own right. Your power is always relative and proportional to contribution (it keeps on growing, good seeds will feed your interests for long time infinitely). Resistance is how you murder old things, it’s figurative, literal and physical but activated only by your freshly acquired ego causal soul. Since it transcends all it also affects all, and once you are differentiated from the rest by distinctive features you grow in continuance alone or in partnership you would presume after longer time. Philosophers are like invisible friends always open sourcing realms of reason ideas and forms —true philosopher kings of Universe capable of restructuring energies and optimizing distribution (it sounds industrious, but could be by keeping a vineyard or simple cheese seller in unknown village).
Yeah, you don’t want any of them if you want a happy life.
Yeah. If you want a happy life you need illusions.