Does this make any sense at all or am I too dumb to read The Myth of Sisyphus?
yes
yes
>>7792821
It does make sense. It's quite simple, actually
Back to /r9k/. I think anime and 'vidya' is more your speed, la.
>>7792821
Isn't it just saying how humans need to relate things to thought (therefore put things on a human level) to understand them? Also that humans crave the absolute but it isn't always achievable.
I haven't read The Myth of Sisyphus nor am I well versed in Existentialism so correct me if Im wrong (I probably am)
It's not from myth of Sisyphus
>>7792879
It is tho
>>7792879
you've never read it, have you
>>7792879
Ahahahahahaha it's in the first 10 pages you fucking poser
>>7792821
It makes perfect sense. I'm guessing you don't have much of a philosophy background. It's not hard once you understand the terms and the people he references (especially at the start where there is way more of that kind of thing). Come back to the book later.
>>7792821
limitation of man due to his individuality.
he strives for unity because he is but one, and anything besides this sophistry becomes incomprehensible to him. the unity isn't only hoped for in a nostalgic sense, but is assumed by all of us to continue on with our lives.
it's the presupposition of order, perhaps god, whatever you like to call it.
>>7794023
ur dum
Sisyphus is stuck pushing the rock nomatter what he does.
We're stuck living life despite being unable to change it.
Sisyphus takes pride in pushing the rock.
We can enjoy life despite its inherent and omnipresent absurdism.
>>7794161
no u
>>7793997
Yes, don't ever take writers and humanities folk calling you stupid seriously, their criteria for smarts is completely based on how well read you are, not on your processing speed.
Humanities are not very g-loaded, so don't take them seriously.
>>7794227
That's A) Not on that page
B) What you could get on wikipedia on this book
The myth of sisyphus itself is only a small part of the book, most of it is explaining what an absurd life is and why you might consider it. (Plus some examples in art and literature, like the absurd novel)
>>7792821
we can only see things our way
the reality of things is not necessarily understandable in that way
we would really like it to be understandable
>>7794023
replace solipsism with sophistry. le whoops
>>7792821
>"All thought is anthropomorphic" has no other meaning. Likewise, the mind that aims to understand reality can consider itself satisfied only by reducing it to terms of thought. If man realized that the universe like him can love and suffer, he would be reconciled.
this is just repeating what he has said before, that human perception begets it's own universe.
>If man realized that the universe like him can love and suffer, he would be reconciled.
we need to move past our perceptions and thoughts and realize things for what they are, rather than our attributed labels and thoughts of them.
>If thought discovered in the shimmering mirrors of phenomena eternal relations capable of summing them up and summing themselves up in a single principle, then would be seen an intellectual joy of which the myth of the blessed would be but a ridiculous imitation.
Thought that is taken from real events is never quite as simple as the line of thought we've extrapolated.
>That nostalgia for unity, that appetite for the absolute illustrates the essential impulse of the human drama. But the fact of that nostalgia's existence does not imply that it is to be immediately satisfied.
There's a human deep desire, or nostalgia, for a thought and the object of that thought to be the same thing. But only because there is a desire doesn't make it true.
I took me a minute to understand this. I don't read a lot of philosophy. Don't rush. Read a page, come back to it, think on it. It will eventually make itself clear.
>>7792821
it makes sense. You are, unfortunately not apt enough to quantify its meaning.
It made sense to me immediately. I put it into my own words and it was logically sound. Its a unique and creative ideal, but its true. Though, its not perfect. let me put it into laymens.
>the cats universe is not of the anthill
This means that the world of a cat is Outward and expansive; Open and free. The world of ants is inward and confined, but equally valid in the sense that it is controlled by the ants, much like the cat can choose to climb or not climb a tree. the ant can choose which tunnel it travels through
>all thought is anthropomorphic
>thought is a variable and can be applied to more than a conscious human. though ive never heard this term myself, this is my understanding of it
>reality is a concept of what an onlooker, one who perceives it, is aware of. and all of our thoughts is what composes reality for without though, reality as perceived does not exist
>if a man can see himself as more than himself and the actions of a single man can reflect the nature of the universe in its necessity to act rather than be idle he would see a greater meaning in his and others actions
>one might find joy in this
>im slightly too tipsy to think straight after "that nostalgia for unity..."
the point is, we create our reality based on our own perception, but we need to recognize that all the thoughts in the world cant undermine the thoughts of an individual because we all suffer the same consequences if similar choices are made, and we shouldnt feel bad for wanting things in a selfish way, but we must also be selfless in the sense that one may WANT something, and one may TAKE something, but the reward of each depends on the methods of acquisition and the demeanor of oneself in the moment of ones understanding and purpose of ones own desire for the inherent reason for ones own actions to achieve it. And in this, also see that we are not alone in our endeavors.
>>7797654
i appreciate them friendo
>>7792821
1: humans perceive and experience the universe thru "human" apparatus, hence, all observations will be colored by that, making our universe "human".
2: we cannot comprehend or experience the universe as it is, we reduce our observations into thought forms that are only representations of reality
3: basically all we want is for the universe to make sense, "summping them up and summing themselves up in a single principle", & "nostalgia for unity"
4. "the fact of than nostalgia's existence does not imply that it is to be immediately satisfied. for if, bridging the gulf that separates desire from conquest..." basically what is "want" anyway? you want something that you don't have (in this case, "nostalgic unity"). which is "the essential impulse of the human drama". no want, no drama.
remember that this is translated from french and in french the train of thought and the leaps in logic are expressed far better
>>7792821
Well that excerpt makes some rhetorical sense but I would say, on the whole, the conclusions the book draws do not.
>>7792821
the purpose is that life is the struggle against the void of meaning, so it's good if you don't understand it immediately.
Go away and approach it again when you need it
like Sisyphus
dumbfuck
>>7792821
I've never read this book, but from that picture I think he's arguing that different species' have different perspectives on reality, and that in order for a person to understand their reality, they have to realize what Human Reality is. And from that, as a starting point, we should look for a fundamental, single principle that unites all other realities. And that people have an inherent need to feel that sense of unity among all other species'.
>>7792821
We simplify to ascertain an understanding of something not understandable. It seems that perhaps nostalgia means here that we simplify complexity into a feeling of the past and let go of the true whole beast -much like that shitty and incongruent passage.
What a horrible thread
>>7799985
okay then. reiterate with your grand wisdom.
>inb4 plagiarism
