Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > 2+2 Communities > EDF
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-13-2007, 06:13 PM
xorbie xorbie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: far and away better
Posts: 15,690
Default Re: Sisyphus

Ja,

I would argue that existentialism is definitely a school of thought. Nietzsche isn't really properly seen as part of it, although he did lay down some of the precursors to it. He has a very different notion of freedom than do the rest. But Sartre, Heideger (who also used the term "existentials") and a few other contemporary philosophers definitely had some similiar things to say. They had their disagreements, but to say that it's meaningless is to sell it short.

My complaints with existentialism are actually best demonstrated in Sartre. First of all, Sartre claims that purpose and meaning are essentially human constructs, but I disagree to some extent. The reason we invent and create purpose is precisely because the universe around IS ordered and structured to some degree. We see that things are governed by laws and naturally ask "where did these laws come from"? There are things that exist without humanity. Humans are not, as Sartre seems to imply, some tabula rasa that can self-invent at any point.

Sartre, I think correctly, differentiates between the self as subject and as object (i.e. first person vs third person view of self), but then sort of just brackets them off from one another, claiming that freedom is within the self-as-subject and that's that.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-13-2007, 06:38 PM
xorbie xorbie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: far and away better
Posts: 15,690
Default Re: Sisyphus

[ QUOTE ]
I understood what he meant by absurdity, but that last line "One must imagine Sisyphus happy" never made much sense to me. Sure, his actions and thoughts are free in that he can choose anything within the context of his eternal enslavement, but how does this lead to happiness? Just because he lived his life passionately does not mean that he is happy about it after the fact, having to push that boulder up the hill. Seems like Sisyphus would have to be extraordinary for him to be happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's supposed to be extraordinary - he's a hero. It has nothing to do with after the fact: Sysiphus is happy precisely because he is working on the most futile of futile projects. We all have lives without meaning or purpose, but we try to invent meaning and purpose. We are anxious, we dread, we stay up awake at night fearing that we have not found the truest, the greatest of our possible lives. Sysiphus is aware that he is etnerally fated to roll a rock up a hill, a rock which will always come down. There is no way to escape this fate, there is no reason to hope. And yet he is free to scorn it, to be angry at it, but to continue to do it nonetheless. It's the perfect encapusulation of freedom in confinement.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-14-2007, 05:25 AM
Tom Emanski Tom Emanski is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 34
Default Re: Sisyphus

fish.

Stay in Thaliand, lest any decent university phsyc department have to deal with the likes of you. The "For Dummies" guides secure a consistent and niche market for a reason. Stop osting.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-14-2007, 09:53 PM
RJT RJT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 2,568
Default Re: Sisyphus

At first I wondered why you posted your thoughts here rather than in the more appropriate SMP forum. Then I realized that probably it was because you can post an OP here.

But, to address your point:

[ QUOTE ]
What I think Camus is saying is that by not hoping and dealing with only what is real, a person can be happy. That is why The Stranger is not thinking of miraculous ways to escape, but is instead content with his fate.)

I agree with everything Camus states, but I find it impossible not to hope. I mean I try to live as truely as possible, but hope is always there. Honestly, I realize that much of my life is lies, self deception and illusions, but it is still enjoyable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Camus is like Kierkegaard. Both understand angst. Camus decides to take a Zen-like approach to the human condition. He shuns hope. It is from that starting point that he seeks happiness. Once one realizes that the journey is the reward - that there is no particular destination to the path of life - then one is able to live a happy life.

Soren K. instead, upon encountering despair, seeks a different path out. Angst is overcome by taking a leap of faith. He sees that the path of life can be filled with happiness if one is able to see a final destination.

As Camus is like Kierkegaard, you, f2+2, are like the believer. Despite your attempts to shun it, Hope is always there. For the person of Faith, doubt is always there. We all live lives that too often feel phony.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.