The absurdity of life

2. the absurdity of life 6.19.06 I will start posting less and less notes. you should by now have a sense of the sorts of things which are significant; if not, you�re welcome to ask as many questions as you�d like to make sure you�re clear about what�s crucial. at any rate, never underestimate the importance of class lectures and discussions on this score � that�s where the action is!I will start posting less and less notes. you should by now have a sense of the sorts of things which are significant; if not, you�re welcome to ask as many questions as you�d like to make sure you�re clear about what�s crucial. at any rate, never underestimate the importance of class lectures and discussions on this score � that�s where the action is!

3. is life absurd? three questions: 1. what does it mean to say that �life is absurd�? 2. are we justified in believing that life is absurd? 3. what is the connection, if any, between absurdity and nihilism?

4. the schopenhauerian absurd famous 19th cent German pessimist �Unless suffering is the direct and immediate object of life, our existence must entirely fail of its aim�� Buddha�s 1st Noble Truth life is suffering absurd: unnecessary/purposeless pain Schopenhauer claims that the fact that pain outnumbers pleasure is made worse by the fact that death is very real to us (397-398). Of course, Schopenhauer admits that a certain amount of pain is necessary/purposeful (394).Schopenhauer claims that the fact that pain outnumbers pleasure is made worse by the fact that death is very real to us (397-398). Of course, Schopenhauer admits that a certain amount of pain is necessary/purposeful (394).

5. arg from suffering p1. life is meaningful only if there is not unnecessary/superfluous pain (i.e., only if life is not schop-absurd). p2. there is unnecessary/superfluous pain (i.e., life is schop-absurd). c1. so, life is meaningless.

6. vs. p1 p1. life is meaningful only if there is not unnecessary/superfluous pain (i.e., only if life is not schop-absurd). cf. a movie with one mediocre scene is not horrible if the rest of the movie is great.

7. pascal 17th cent mathematician writer/philosopher/theologian reflected on the human condition wretchedness death diversions belief in God & afterlife �Infinites� Pascal invented the first calculator, made advances in conic sections and projective geometry, and helped lay the foundations for probability theory.Pascal invented the first calculator, made advances in conic sections and projective geometry, and helped lay the foundations for probability theory.

8. arg from infinity p1. we are tiny specks in the infinite vastness of the universe. p2. if we are tiny specks in the infinite vastness of the universe, then our lives are meaningless. c. so, our lives are meaningless.

9. vs. p2 (nagel) p2. if we are tiny specks in the infinite vastness of the universe, then our lives are meaningless. how would size help? wouldn�t that just increase the absurdity?

10. arg from the future p1. nothing we do now will matter 1 million years from now. p2. if nothing we do now will matter 1 million years from now, then our lives are meaningless. c. so, our lives are meaningless.

11. vs. p2 (nagel) p2. if nothing we do now will matter 1 million years from now, then our lives are meaningless. how would that help? if life doesn�t matter now, how could it�s mattering then make it matter now?

12. the camusian absurd �There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide� (533). �You continue making the gestures commanded by existence for many reasons, the first of which is habit. Dying voluntarily implies that you have recognized�the ridiculous character of that habit, the absence of any profound reason for living, the insane character of that daily agitation, and the uselesness of suffering� (534). In other words, you have recognized the absurdity of life. absurd: without reason (�an incomprehensible condition�) �one day the �why� arises�Belief in the meaning of life always implies a scale of values�Belief in the absurd�teaches the contrary� (534-535).

13. arg from no-justification p1. there is no ultimate justification for our actions and pursuits in life. p2. if there is no ultimate justification for our actions and pursuits in life, then our lives are meaningless. c. so, our lives are meaningless.

14. vs. p2 (nagel) p2. if there is no ultimate justification for our actions and pursuits in life, then our lives are meaningless. what is �ultimate justification�? justifications must come to an end somewhere � what exactly is wrong with them coming to an end within life, as they do? in fact, non-ultimate justification justifies our actions and pursuits in life just fine aspirin example besides, if a finite chain cannot justify our actions and pursuits in life, how would an infinite chain help?

15. vs. p2 (nietzsche) p2. if there is no ultimate justification for our actions and pursuits in life, then our lives are meaningless. ultimate justification = ultimate aim (purpose or goal), unity (system or whole), or truth (the real)

16. psychological stages of nihilism (nietzsche) ask, what is the ultimate justification for life? posit a source of ultimate justification. existence of source becomes unbelievable. result: nihilistic *attitude* solution: stop asking life to justify itself life (the world) is innocent don�t seek meaning externally create your own meaning ? existentialism

17. the nagelian absurd x is absurd iff it is impossible to avoid taking x seriously and it is impossible avoid doubting whether x merits seriousness. three solutions: 1. stop taking x seriously 2. make it so that x undoubtedly merits seriousness 3. avoid x or remove oneself from the situation involving x in the case of life, (1) � (3) are either not available or not at all attractive, making the absurdity of life inevitable. consider Nagel�s examples on p. 31. note that if Nagel is right, the life of many human beings cannot be absurd. QUESTION: Why is this?consider Nagel�s examples on p. 31. note that if Nagel is right, the life of many human beings cannot be absurd. QUESTION: Why is this?

18. arg from perceived discrepancy p1. x is absurd iff it is impossible to avoid taking x seriously and it is impossible to avoid doubting whether x merits seriousness. p2. it is impossible to avoid taking our lives seriously. p3. it is impossible to avoid doubting whether our lives merit seriousness. c. so, our lives are absurd. support for p1: see examples on p. 31. support for p2: see especially the top of p. 33. support for p3: see especially the last two paragraphs of section 2 on p. 33, as well as the last paragraph on p. 34 and the example of the mouse on p. 38. Nagel considers 2 objections: vs. p3: we can adopt concerns which when viewed properly, cannot be doubted or regarded as arbitrary. See Nagel�s reply on p. 34, in particular the claim that we can step back from these concerns and ask about their point in just the same way. vs. p3: the standpoint from which these doubts are supposedly felt does not exist. See Nagel�s reply on p. 35.support for p1: see examples on p. 31. support for p2: see especially the top of p. 33. support for p3: see especially the last two paragraphs of section 2 on p. 33, as well as the last paragraph on p. 34 and the example of the mouse on p. 38. Nagel considers 2 objections: vs. p3: we can adopt concerns which when viewed properly, cannot be doubted or regarded as arbitrary. See Nagel�s reply on p. 34, in particular the claim that we can step back from these concerns and ask about their point in just the same way. vs. p3: the standpoint from which these doubts are supposedly felt does not exist. See Nagel�s reply on p. 35.

19. two absurds seeming/feeling absurd vs. being absurd Nagel has reduced being absurd to seeming/feeling absurd: �the situation is not absurd until the perception arises� (39). Question: is a non-reductive account of absurdity preferable, according to which being absurd is distinct from seeming/feeling absurd? For example: x is absurd iff x ought to (or must) be taken seriously and x is in fact arbitrary.

20. does the nagelian absurd imply nihilism? the absurdity of life is �the dragooning of an unconvinced transcendent consciousness into the service of an immanent, limited enterprise like a human life� (38). yet �absurdity is one of the most human things about us: a manifestation of our most advanced and interesting characteristics�it is possible only because we possess a certain kind of insight�the capacity to transcend ourselves in thought. �[So,] it results from the ability to understand our human limitations. It need not be a matter for agony unless we make it so� (39).

21. nagel�s arg against Camus p1. if sub specie aeternitatis there is no reason to believe that anything matters (i.e., if nihilism is true), then that does not matter either. p2. if that does not matter, then we can approach our absurd lives with seriousness laced with irony rather than heroism or despair. c. so, if nihilism is true, then we can approach our absurd lives with seriousness laced with irony rather than heroism or despair.

22. today we looked at four arguments for nihilism suffering infinity the future no-justification Nietzsche�s psychological stages of nihilism Camus on the absurdity of life Sisyphus, the �absurd hero� Nagel on the absurdity of life

23. for tomorrow read (CP) Conee, �Fatalism� focus in particular on (pp. 22-30 & 39-42): Introduction The Sea Battle God Knows A Final Note (CP) Sider, �Free Will and Determinism� both essays are from Riddles of Existence