tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post1822675606451029374..comments2023-04-13T02:45:50.515-07:00Comments on The Ends of Thought: The Meaninglessness of Life: Camus vs. NagelRoman Altshulerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06570099479055051251noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post-60837768943434312482018-04-07T08:47:30.497-07:002018-04-07T08:47:30.497-07:00I am certainly aware of what Nagal trying to impin...I am certainly aware of what Nagal trying to impinge on, but honestly his criticism is already something Camus has done to his text in detail. I am not saying that Camus is flawless or infallible but i just think Nagal's argument is sort of blurred and not touching the cornerstone argument that Camus has made, for Camus the revolted man or the absurd hero is the one that defy the meaning and works his best despite the the infinite silence to his attempts to find a meaning, and although Camus argument is done in a world that lack a divine intervention or a ebing as God, yet his last syllable when he says "one must imagine Sysiphus to be happy" that is revolt not just against the world'd silence but also a cheeky answer to God when he is punishing Sysyphus to roll that boulder up then trying from scratch ad infinitum when it goes downSupernova99https://www.blogger.com/profile/15009923227243254991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post-89049675684932295192016-12-15T18:37:43.276-08:002016-12-15T18:37:43.276-08:00Hi Unknown. Yelling "WRONG" is always fu...Hi Unknown. Yelling "WRONG" is always fun, but at whom are you yelling? Certainly not at me, since I said exactly this. Or almost exactly this. Camus does claim that the world is irrational. He also denies (his own earlier claim) that the world is absurd. So, does he hold that the world could have meaning? I don't think that's obvious from this combination of claims.Roman Altshulerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06570099479055051251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post-21989921865401792532016-12-15T17:13:42.398-08:002016-12-15T17:13:42.398-08:00WRONG.
Did Camu insist in absurdity of the World?...WRONG. <br />Did Camu insist in absurdity of the World? No, he didn't he assured as and showed that absurd is something that could be found just in comapring of uncomparables. World by itself coul and have meaning, Human by himself could and have meaning, but when these two concepsts interract, Absurd is appeared. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18381710880654630735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post-53079920038315641402015-05-23T11:14:12.194-07:002015-05-23T11:14:12.194-07:00Wrong. Camus openly took on a supernatural framewo...Wrong. Camus openly took on a supernatural framework, similar to Tolstoy himself. Whereby he argued that God is necessary for there to be cosmic purpose and transcendental meaning, but the fact that God DOES NOT exist means that there is no such meaning. This is what gives rise to the absurd, whereby it is human nature to seek such purpose and meaning yet we cannot have it . Subsequently, this is why we should "revolt" against such meaninglessness and we can ONLY revolt in a world where there is no such cosmic purpose. Meaning that if there WAS A GOD then we would not have to revolt for our lives would already have meaning. Therefore, Camus IS IN FACT saying that there must be a God for life to have meaning, it just so happens that there isn't one and this is precisely what brings about "the absurdity of the human condition".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4639421058590597640.post-11355184259298981642011-06-16T09:31:55.487-07:002011-06-16T09:31:55.487-07:00I do not think Nagel is saying anything Camus didn...I do not think Nagel is saying anything Camus didn't already say. Camus is not saying that there must be a God for life to have meaning: Camus is saying that we must BE God for life to have meaning. It is the impermanence of our lives crossed with the flawed "godliness" of our minds (NOT the biological body, but the consciousness) that creates the Absurd. That is why Camus can start the Myth of Sisyphus with a firm base of "God is Dead," IE: the question of God is not relevant to this argument.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14612910101193774513noreply@blogger.com