The Myth of Sisyphus

[YesNo]

Camus argues that people who don't feel life is monotonous are simple-minded. It is easy to be content when you don't understand the problem.

Of course, he does. He has to discredit the experience of those who disagree with him. He has no other argument. However, it is just as possible that he doesn't understand the problem and his position is simple-minded, indeed, sentimental, as I've tried to argue.

The sentimentallity in his case is real. For example, Phocton claims he said something like:

Recognition of our absurd condition is what makes us free

Consider for a moment what actually makes you free. A reasonable answer would be "the ability to make a choice". Note, freedom doesn't require accepting your absurdity or anything else for that matter. It doesn't require standing on your head to accept some BS ideology or theology or atheology. It doesn't require believing in Christianity or Buddhism or pick-whatever-belief-you-want. What makes you free? Just the ability to make a choice. There are some today who claim you can't even do that, but that's another discussion for a different thread.

So why did Camus link "freedom", a nice mushy sentiment many people in his audience valued, with believing in just what he happened to be preaching? I think for the same reason some Christians might say you would be "siding with the devil" if you didn't agree with them. He was appealing to your sentiment, not your reason. He was being sentimental.

[hypatia_]

A plausible hypothesis, but one just as valid is that he is right. perhaps he is referring to a dimension of freedom more profound than "making a choice." his argument is that the very essence of life prohibits choice, so realizing that gives you it. a form of nonduality.

[YesNo]

A plausible hypothesis, but one just as valid is that he is right. perhaps he is referring to a dimension of freedom more profound than "making a choice." his argument is that the very essence of life prohibits choice, so realizing that gives you it. a form of nonduality.

I don't actually know that Camus said what I quoted Phocton as claiming he said. Do either you or Phocton have a source? However, from what I remember, it wouldn't surprise me that he linked freedom with some belief in his version of the futility of life. That and the quote on "happiness" I mentioned earlier in the thread are the kinds of pronouncements that make Camus sound sentimental to me. What I am trying to say is if he is going to promote the futility of life, he should stop sugar-coating it.

Regarding a "dimension of freedom more profound than 'making a choice'", does it even exist?

What do you mean by "the very essence of life prohibits choice, so realizing that gives you it. a form of nonduality"? The "nonduality" part sounds a bit too mystical for me.

[hypatia_]

What I am trying to say is if he is going to promote the futility of life, he should stop sugar-coating it.

Okay I understand where you're coming from now. That's true, if life is meaningless, it does seem he is trying to extract some meaning from nothing

Regarding a "dimension of freedom more profound than 'making a choice'", does it even exist?

That is the definition of freedom. The problem arises when people think they are making a choice. The illusion of freedom is very powerful. I'm not saying it is the case, but that is Camus' argument.

What do you mean by "the very essence of life prohibits choice, so realizing that gives you it. a form of nonduality"? The "nonduality" part sounds a bit too mystical for me.

At it's most primal level, you are not given a choice to be born or to exist. The nonduality from my understanding arises in giving in to something to obtain the opposite. It's similar to the concepts of good not existing without evil. They depend on each other. In terms of this discussion, freedom depends on constraint. Giving up the pursuit of freedom (realizing the absurd) is what allows you to obtain it. I don't 100% agree with it, but that's what I get from Camus' works.