1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Fuckass@hexbear.net to c/philosophy@hexbear.net

The idea is that ultimately there is no god or meaning in this world, but one should rebel against that meaningless and create our meaning. And he even says that accepting religion and god would be a failure instead of just accepting the absurd reality.

But in Sisyphus’ world, there literally are gods. The gods cursed Sisyphus and made his eternity just pushing up a rock, and he chooses to spite them by being happy instead of being upset like the gods hoped for.

There is no angry god to rebel against. No one cursed us with a spiteful purpose. So it seems weird to choose an allegory involving a fictional universe with existing inherent purpose to demonstrate why one should accept the real universe without inherent purpose.

That’s okay. I’ll still keep embracing that trash.

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

philosophy

0 readers
1 users here now

Other philosophy communities have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it. [ x ]

"I thunk it so I dunk it." - Descartes


Short Attention Span Reading Group: summary, list of previous discussions, schedule

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS