Camus, Suicide and the Myth of the Sisyphus
Most of you will know Albert Camus` - The Myth of the Sisyphus, if you dont google it for a second, its not all that complicated or long.
Something from a Wikipedia page that explains it pretty well:
In the essay, Camus introduces his philosophy of the absurd: man's futile search for meaning, unity and clarity in the face of an unintelligible world devoid of God and eternal truths or values. Does the realization of the absurd require suicide? Camus answers: "No. It requires revolt." He then outlines several approaches to the absurd life. The final chapter compares the absurdity of man's life with the situation of Sisyphus, a figure of Greek mythology who was condemned to repeat forever the same meaningless task of pushing a rock up a mountain, only to see it roll down again. The essay concludes, "The struggle itself...is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy."
Now this is what I dont get. So many great philosophers like Camus start deconstructing until they arrive at the conclusion above. THEN they start constructing some sort of approach to what they just discovered on a completely nonexistent basis. There is an actual chapter about suicide in TMotS and its completely free from any sound argument of why Camus thinks "revolt" is required.
Its not actually the first part where he says that suicide ISNT the answer, because thats true. Its not the answer just like living a live like mother Theresa isnt the answer. Its when he says "It requires revolt. (...) One must imagine Sisyphus happy."
WHY?
It almost seems like hes trying not to be offensive and just state that suicide is as much of an option as living is. Which is the only valid conclusion you can draw if you accepted that what he says earlier on.
Why does everyone try to keep going once they reached end? Worse than that, why do people turn around and start running the other way again?
