On Camus
Quote: But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads?
Agree. What is a man? His software and hardware. Hardware is the pleasure and pain circuits. The involuntary part. Software is the somewhat conscious part what we typically like to call the mind. What is harmony? Activating the relevant pleasure circuits or at least not activating the pain circuits. The harmony thing becomes specific to a person because of the difference in circuits. Although still being objective in the bigger frame of reference, it becomes subjective in the smaller frame of reference.
Quote: Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy
The circuits come into play again. The circuits will always have a tendency for survival. So the default mode is to live. If you don't live in suffering, then the question doesn't arise because default mode takes over. Doesn't necessarily mean that life is worth living if you do not suffer. If not, life is worth living if you gain new experiences, if you grow. Stagnancy is not the way of life. If life is stagnant or full of suffering, then it is not worth living. The ups and downs of life make it worth living. A flat line is not worth living (spiritual people will disagree with this).
Quote: There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide
It is the same quote as above
Quote:So long as he accepts that there is nothing more to life than this absurd struggle, then he can find happiness in it, says Camus.
Disagree a little. I think camus has a different definition of happiness than pleasure circuits. We have an evolutionary drive to seek out new things, new experiences. This is what makes the loop bearable because although different experiences are still pleasure and pain loops in the bigger frame of reference, they are different loops in a different frame of reference. It is only because these experiences are different, that we can bear going through life.
Agree. What is a man? His software and hardware. Hardware is the pleasure and pain circuits. The involuntary part. Software is the somewhat conscious part what we typically like to call the mind. What is harmony? Activating the relevant pleasure circuits or at least not activating the pain circuits. The harmony thing becomes specific to a person because of the difference in circuits. Although still being objective in the bigger frame of reference, it becomes subjective in the smaller frame of reference.
Quote: Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy
The circuits come into play again. The circuits will always have a tendency for survival. So the default mode is to live. If you don't live in suffering, then the question doesn't arise because default mode takes over. Doesn't necessarily mean that life is worth living if you do not suffer. If not, life is worth living if you gain new experiences, if you grow. Stagnancy is not the way of life. If life is stagnant or full of suffering, then it is not worth living. The ups and downs of life make it worth living. A flat line is not worth living (spiritual people will disagree with this).
Quote: There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide
It is the same quote as above
Quote:So long as he accepts that there is nothing more to life than this absurd struggle, then he can find happiness in it, says Camus.
Disagree a little. I think camus has a different definition of happiness than pleasure circuits. We have an evolutionary drive to seek out new things, new experiences. This is what makes the loop bearable because although different experiences are still pleasure and pain loops in the bigger frame of reference, they are different loops in a different frame of reference. It is only because these experiences are different, that we can bear going through life.
If camus is referring to all humans as Sisyphus, then maybe yes. Else no.
Sisyphus's hardware cannot be happy because of the above. Sisyphus can only be happy if his software overrides the hardware. It is not about merely accepting it. Accepting it doesn't override the hardware. Overriding the hardware is far more difficult when it is accompained by physical pain. Sisyphus has got nothing going for him.
Hence, it should be concluded that sisyphus cannot be happy.
Quote: The only really committed artist is he who, without refusing to take part in the combat, at least refuses to join the regular armies and remains a freelance.
Agree. A very beautiful line. True freedom lies in this. If life is an art, such lines are the tools of an artist.
Quote:The gods had condemned Sisyphus to ceaselessly rolling a rock to the top of a mountain, whence the stone would fall back of its own weight. They had thought with some reason that there is no more dreadful punishment than futile and hopeless labor.
We are all Sisyphus in the bigger frame. But our loops are different each time, hence we don't feel the labor is futile and hopeless.
Overall, I think Camus is more on the poetic and abstract side. He makes sense. I like him. But he misses the science of life. I think traditional philosopy is less relevant than before. Not entirely, because science still can't answer everything. It will be replaced by scientific philosophy. The caveat is the limit of knowledge and reasoning. Then we have to resort to the abstract again.
The most fundamental answer to life is that nothing matters. But this has got many layers. If you have uncovered all the layers of this essence, you will have understood life
Quote: The only really committed artist is he who, without refusing to take part in the combat, at least refuses to join the regular armies and remains a freelance.
Agree. A very beautiful line. True freedom lies in this. If life is an art, such lines are the tools of an artist.
Quote:The gods had condemned Sisyphus to ceaselessly rolling a rock to the top of a mountain, whence the stone would fall back of its own weight. They had thought with some reason that there is no more dreadful punishment than futile and hopeless labor.
We are all Sisyphus in the bigger frame. But our loops are different each time, hence we don't feel the labor is futile and hopeless.
Overall, I think Camus is more on the poetic and abstract side. He makes sense. I like him. But he misses the science of life. I think traditional philosopy is less relevant than before. Not entirely, because science still can't answer everything. It will be replaced by scientific philosophy. The caveat is the limit of knowledge and reasoning. Then we have to resort to the abstract again.
The most fundamental answer to life is that nothing matters. But this has got many layers. If you have uncovered all the layers of this essence, you will have understood life
Comments
Post a Comment