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.
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
As I see it, the American pragmatism is a another way of answering the collapse of the old systems of belief caused by Darwin, Newton etc. Especially the philosophy of Charles Peirce is tackling all of these issues while still retaining meaning and purpose as real things in the universe. I wrote about these same topics in my recent post on nihilism.
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?
"Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich." - Lenny Bruce All three are points of view, belief systems, faith with some overlap. "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough they're yours." - Richard Bach
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!
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.
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
As I see it, the American pragmatism is a another way of answering the collapse of the old systems of belief caused by Darwin, Newton etc. Especially the philosophy of Charles Peirce is tackling all of these issues while still retaining meaning and purpose as real things in the universe. I wrote about these same topics in my recent post on nihilism.
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?
"Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich." - Lenny Bruce All three are points of view, belief systems, faith with some overlap. "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough they're yours." - Richard Bach