I've never heard of this and tbh I'm not well read as I don't really read much that isn't online posts, websites, and the occasional law or scientific document. I've known there is no meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning I can produce when the question comes up is simply "reproduction." Maybe I'm confusing "purpose" and "meaning", but that's the only reason we have for existing I can think of. We are just a byproduct of the natural process of evolution. That is how we continue, and most have a compulsion to do so via instinct. In the end it wouldn't matter if that happened or not, because nothing really matters. Depending on the theory, we may just end up here again without knowing it, or rather the particles that were part of us in the previous universe will be here. By "here" I just mean it exists, I'm not sure how well absolute coordinates would work after all. And, I definitely care about things unlike the story you mention. I am odd though, people are often perplexed by the things I say and the behaviors I have. I don't care about a lot of things, but I care about a lot at the same time. My neurochemical processes haven't yet figured out how to relay this information. But yeah, of course I have "meaning" that I have created, but it just revolves around what I have found to be important for me to have a happy life. Is this dishonest? Well, yes. I have already determined there is no meaning, yet I create one for myself. I am a hypocrite, but to what degree am I to blame? I wasn't given a choice in my sentience. Humans themselves are inherently contradictory. We are just "intelligent" enough to think, but not "intelligent" enough to be logically consistent. Even typing this, I am fighting myself wanting to erase what I have written. I know nothing matters, but my emotions are tugging on my tendons as if they are trying to convince me otherwise. Did I decide to overcome this? Let's not get into free will in this already lengthy UA-cam comment lol. Anyway, interesting video. Thanks.
So if I find meaning in my life, I'm just fooling myself. If I hitch my wagon to a fantasy God, then yes, it's self-deception for the sake of avoiding reality. But if I gain what I experience as meaning based upon my interactions in the world, who is to say I have not? The fact that everything is transitory doesn't negate any meaning in the moment.
@@ethanbenson i'm remembering from 55 years ago. i also remembered that i felt the same way as meursault, distant. camus's books were more historical in a sense than fiction. historical can be at an individual level. what would that be called?
@jensonee I definitely also related to Meursault when I first read The Stranger in feeling kind of distant. I read it in school and I was an atheist in a catholic high school so it was quite a cathartic book to go through. I’m not quite sure what you mean in terms of if being historical though beyond it being set in a very clear time period
@@ethanbensonmy favorite book in tenth grade, high school, was the invisible man, by ralph ellison. i failed 13 classes in high school, between 14 and 34 i was in jail 8 times, a few hours to a week, no long term. there's a whole section of society that is never recognized by history books we get in school. well, from when i was in school, i'm 80. so, camus, virginia woolf, betty smith/Wehner wrote fiction but they were people's history. they explained who we are, that we exist, not just i exist but that there is a we that's like me. it's 12:30
I accept Sartre's practical, existential approach..we are here for a time ; being; let's get on with being then.. by doing ..giving ourselves the satisfaction of the experience of being and all that it entails..all the phases of our lives , the developments, the evolutionary phases.. ..we play the game of being among all the zillion other forms of life, animal, vegetable mineral.etc.. 18:09 ; it's fascinating co-habiting with it all and surviving in the game of life for as long as we can..that gives us plenty of occupation, fulfilment and purpose..and teaching our progeny to continue the same for themselves..it might be absurd but its a mighty game as we all trundle our way thro' the magnificent puddle of lifes mystery; and gleaning a glimmer of insight along the way..of ❤ ..
I think that’s definitely somewhat the case, however, I think Camus would argue that perhaps the complete detachment of a psychopath is a coherent response to taking the world in honestly
Sociopath* Sociopaths tend to ascribe meaning to things too, perceived meaning although intertwined with emotion is not inherent to emotion. For example sociopaths are more likely to pursue material endeavours and act narcissistic as instead of inheriting meaning from emotional connection they envelop the meaning of status, power, control, security, etc. I ask you this, if you have person A (a sociopath) and a bear in a cage and the bear attempts to eat person A but person A can kill the bear with just a word, would they do it? The answer is almost certainly yes however a truly Absurd man would not, as they would not ascribe any meaning or value to their lives and thus their life would be equal to the bears life and death is not to be feared. It is basically impossible for one to be truly absurd and it's probably not desired either, this is why existentialism is better in practice, living contrary to nature and our fabrication will only cause mayhem. The meaning paradox is also an important thing to note in this philosophy, to be meaningless is to have the meaning of meaninglessness.
Thanks for watching! Make sure to subscribe for more philosophy videos, and let me know what you think about the concept of the Absurd Man
Great video and analysis of Camus.
Thank you!
"The absurd man's R͟e͟f͟u͟s͟a͟l͟ to HOPE is his singular ability to live in the present with passion."
I've never heard of this and tbh I'm not well read as I don't really read much that isn't online posts, websites, and the occasional law or scientific document. I've known there is no meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning I can produce when the question comes up is simply "reproduction." Maybe I'm confusing "purpose" and "meaning", but that's the only reason we have for existing I can think of. We are just a byproduct of the natural process of evolution. That is how we continue, and most have a compulsion to do so via instinct. In the end it wouldn't matter if that happened or not, because nothing really matters. Depending on the theory, we may just end up here again without knowing it, or rather the particles that were part of us in the previous universe will be here.
By "here" I just mean it exists, I'm not sure how well absolute coordinates would work after all. And, I definitely care about things unlike the story you mention. I am odd though, people are often perplexed by the things I say and the behaviors I have. I don't care about a lot of things, but I care about a lot at the same time. My neurochemical processes haven't yet figured out how to relay this information.
But yeah, of course I have "meaning" that I have created, but it just revolves around what I have found to be important for me to have a happy life. Is this dishonest? Well, yes. I have already determined there is no meaning, yet I create one for myself. I am a hypocrite, but to what degree am I to blame? I wasn't given a choice in my sentience. Humans themselves are inherently contradictory. We are just "intelligent" enough to think, but not "intelligent" enough to be logically consistent. Even typing this, I am fighting myself wanting to erase what I have written. I know nothing matters, but my emotions are tugging on my tendons as if they are trying to convince me otherwise. Did I decide to overcome this? Let's not get into free will in this already lengthy UA-cam comment lol.
Anyway, interesting video. Thanks.
42
Hahaha brilliant
Stories. Everyone tells stories.
So if I find meaning in my life, I'm just fooling myself. If I hitch my wagon to a fantasy God, then yes, it's self-deception for the sake of avoiding reality. But if I gain what I experience as meaning based upon my interactions in the world, who is to say I have not? The fact that everything is transitory doesn't negate any meaning in the moment.
I tend to agree with you on this point
and when meursault attacks the priest? that's not realization rather than just acceptance?
I think it’s a verbalisation of what he already embodied. Not a realisation of a truth
@@ethanbenson i'm remembering from 55 years ago. i also remembered that i felt the same way as meursault, distant. camus's books were more historical in a sense than fiction. historical can be at an individual level. what would that be called?
@jensonee I definitely also related to Meursault when I first read The Stranger in feeling kind of distant. I read it in school and I was an atheist in a catholic high school so it was quite a cathartic book to go through. I’m not quite sure what you mean in terms of if being historical though beyond it being set in a very clear time period
@@ethanbensonmy favorite book in tenth grade, high school, was the invisible man, by ralph ellison. i failed 13 classes in high school, between 14 and 34 i was in jail 8 times, a few hours to a week, no long term. there's a whole section of society that is never recognized by history books we get in school. well, from when i was in school, i'm 80. so, camus, virginia woolf, betty smith/Wehner wrote fiction but they were people's history. they explained who we are, that we exist, not just i exist but that there is a we that's like me. it's 12:30
I accept Sartre's practical, existential approach..we are here for a time ; being;
let's get on with being then..
by doing ..giving ourselves the satisfaction of the experience of being and all that it entails..all the phases of our lives , the developments, the evolutionary phases..
..we play the game of being among all the zillion other forms of life, animal, vegetable mineral.etc.. 18:09 ; it's fascinating co-habiting with it all and surviving in the game of life for as long as we can..that gives us plenty of occupation, fulfilment and purpose..and teaching our progeny to continue the same for themselves..it might be absurd but its a mighty game as we all trundle our way thro' the magnificent puddle of lifes mystery; and gleaning a glimmer of insight along the way..of ❤
..
How is the Absurd man different from a psychopath?
I think that’s definitely somewhat the case, however, I think Camus would argue that perhaps the complete detachment of a psychopath is a coherent response to taking the world in honestly
Sociopath* Sociopaths tend to ascribe meaning to things too, perceived meaning although intertwined with emotion is not inherent to emotion. For example sociopaths are more likely to pursue material endeavours and act narcissistic as instead of inheriting meaning from emotional connection they envelop the meaning of status, power, control, security, etc.
I ask you this, if you have person A (a sociopath) and a bear in a cage and the bear attempts to eat person A but person A can kill the bear with just a word, would they do it? The answer is almost certainly yes however a truly Absurd man would not, as they would not ascribe any meaning or value to their lives and thus their life would be equal to the bears life and death is not to be feared.
It is basically impossible for one to be truly absurd and it's probably not desired either, this is why existentialism is better in practice, living contrary to nature and our fabrication will only cause mayhem.
The meaning paradox is also an important thing to note in this philosophy, to be meaningless is to have the meaning of meaninglessness.