Growing up in a Christian-dominant family, in a dominantly Muslim country, it was easy to let myself fall into the false sense of deterministic nature of things. That there is an order, and there is peace in this order. Suffering as a big part of the western-Christian belief system, is a necessity. However, outside my home, the country I grew up in was pre-dominantly Muslim, and while these two beliefs disagree on a lot of shit, they agree on one thing: the existence of free will and fate. When you take these cocnepts at the face value, it gets confusing.
So you are like.. destined to live through the suffering that was pre-destined by this high and mighty entity, but you also have the freedom to choose for your own self? Like I said, quite the confusing dilemma. And I know there are some explanations in the beliefs of these religions, but honestly at least from what I learned from having education in both of these belief systems, it cheats itself by simply saying “your feeble human minds cannot grasp it”
Then again, even the view of God is not the same for the two people praying next to each other in a church or a mosque or any other spiritual or religous belief system.
So, the existential crisis and cosmic depression seeps in. How do you deal with it? My personal choice is philosophy, and each time, i find myself in either one of these philosophical concepts below:
Nihilism-Determinism-Absurdism-Existentialism
Except for Determinism, though you could also argue otherwise, all of these beliefs start from life’s lack of inherent meaning, yet they all takes a different path forward/
I regard these 4 pillars as the philosophy’s ultimate foundations, or rather, and more accurately, my favorites. And as a literature graduate, it’s one pof my favorite subjects to yap about how literature and today’s media confronts these concepts in the attempt to make sense of the spiritual existential dilemmas we find ourselves in.
Nihilism – “God is Dead, and We Killed Him”
The foundational crisis Nihilism finds itself is the ultimate collapse and inherent utter meaningless of external value that leaves the conscious mind so devoid of the meaning it so desperately yearns for. Potentially, probably, it leads to despair. There are counters to the nihilistic belief system as it undoubted lead to depression, by opposing with such branches as optimistic nihilism, but I find the existentialism and existential absurdism more interesting as a coping response.
Nihilism and Absurdism are the ones that are the most misunderstood by people. I swear to the God, whom apparently we killed, if I hear another person calling Nietszche a “nihilist” I’m throwing hands because he the fuck was not! He was an existentialist in his core, desperately searching a way out of the nihilism he so found himself in. And same for Camus, he is nowhere near an existentialist. The point is, in nihilism, the meaning and search for the meaning collapses into itself while absurdism invites you to embrace this meaningless instead.
But anyway, I’m getting ahead of myself as I will go into details for each philosophical system below.
Existentialism – “Existence Precedes Essence”
Existentialism initially emerged as a counter argument to Nihilism by affirming that existence precedes the essence at its core. Through authentic choices one makes for themselves, we create our own meaning which is equally valuable and real. The found meaning is the real point. The connections you make, the bonds you share with the others. It’s as real as it gets. And, that’s what keeps you going.
I guess out of not only limited to these beliefs but in the grander responses to the universe’s indifference, existentialism is one of the most personal ones out there. You understand that there is no inherent meaning to the universe but in an almos transcendentalist way, it insists one can define their own values, actions and create purpose that is equally if not more valuable.
Absurdism – “You will never be happy as long as you search for a meaning”
Then we have the infamous and often misunderstood, Absurdism. Per Camus, the absurd is a clash between human’s inherent desire for order and the cosmic indifference and the tension in between. Absurd instead rejects existentialism’s rejection of self-created “escapism” and nihilism’s “no meaning” by instead focusing on this tension between humanity’s quest for meaning and the universe’s silence, however, it instead advocates a rebellion over resignation. It embraces the meaningless-ness. Rather than sinking into apathy, the absurd is a call for you to embrace life in its full glory anyway. In spite of it even. I can totally see the strange joy in defying the meanignlessness, seeing the world for what it is and laughing in it’s face.
And as the header quote states, according to Camus chasing a meaning or contemplating on it’s lack is what keeps us from embracing the absurd yet beautiful life we find ourselves in.
Determinism – “Free will is an illusion”
Determinism on the other hand believes in a pre-destined state for every and each human being, opposing the all preceding three that agrees to the lack of meaning.
Except for this one, all preceding three eventually intersect with one another and I believe these are such fascinating philosophical concepts is because they represent our everyday existence so well, and a lot of us when we find ourselves drowning, find solace in one of these systems from time to time in an effort to make sense of our existence.
Let’s start with the easiest one to understand, Determinism.
All events, including all human actions are ultimately determined by causes external to will. Free will is simply an illusion, and every single one of the events is the inevitable result of preceding events and the laws of nature.
Determinists like to use this scientific analogy to make their claim: A perfect scientist with a perfect understanding of all natural laws and initial conditions of the universe, could predict everything that would ever happen, including every single choice you had and will make.
When the religious beliefs are questioned with the ideas I have presented with this dilemma, they suggest Compatibilitism, the idea that suggests determinism and free will can co-exist. But that feels like cheating… a deus-ex-machina idea that really doesn’t say much, nor is interesting. So I will not go into any detail.
But determinism is still quite interesting. Take the scientist analogy as a fact, can that scientist guy really predict such human decisions? Is it possible to finally reach to a point where the irregularities and instabilities are understood in such a level they just… make sense? Science when developed enough will eventually blur the lines between magic and science, or religion and witchcraft. It is still a debate if determinism has a God or not, but can the determinist God be a very advanced scientist or an artificial intelligence with inordinate levels of calculation? You as a human being are lying to yourself if you claim you know everything about your existence, or your actions or the others around you. So my question is, can this notion ever exist if techonology had no limit?
I have no clue. The fact that entertaining this train of thought does not feel too much of a stretch, the plausability of it is terrifying. But oh well, it is fun to think about, no? Now that we explained Determinism, let’s look at the other side of the umbrella, the lack of meaning, the lack of order and well, a lack of a God figure that pre-determines your existence and everything else.
Nihilism, is the preposition that suggests life is without any objective meaning, purpose or intrinsic value. Well, so does absurdism and existentialism, but they all respond to it very differently. Nihilism eventually delves into a many branches suggesting cosmic realism or existential nihilism to explain the lack of meaning and to explain the indifference of the universe. In nihilism’s core, there is no objective or moral truths, values and absolutely no inherent meaning to existence. When you move away from your humanly body, we move into a cosmic perspective. And in this perspective, everything is ultimately pointless. For the grand scheme of things, your existence is nothing but a speck of dust. Perhaps even less.
You, are a mere accident. Your consciousness was a huge misstep in the evolution. And your inherent search for a meaning is the result of this accident. It’s a flaw.
For the longest time I saw nihilists as lazy. But, as I grew up and understood nihilism as the philosophical belief it is, I realized a lot of self-identified nihilists misunderstand it and infantilize the idea to diminish it to the lack of moral and ethical values of nihilism to justify their actions of hedonism. (note to self–Jax of TADC!)
Nietzsche’s nihilism is different. The ultimate goal of IS to overcome nihilism. Some academics even suggest that he should not be regarded as a nihilist at all and that he was a ahead-of-his-time existentialist instead, much like Kierkegaard, an idea I also agree with.
A lot of self-identified post-modern reddit nihilists separate the “God is dead, and we killed him” from the context itself and the self-identified nihilism haters (be teenage me calling it “lazy”) react against that misunderstanding. He seemed to be searching a way to cope with the existence itself and make a sense out of it through his interpretation on why are things the way they are, and nihilism is not one of these ways to cope with this notion. He is well aware of it. And that’s where the tragedy in his mind stems from.
New Year or Christmas do happen to be a random date. So is your birthday. So is the day of a person passing. No need to do anything out of ordinary to celebrate or reminisce, eh? I find this whole idea sort of useless. Sure they all are random days, but, I mean does that run the whole meanings we so happen to attribute to them also meaningless? But, that’s the entire point. If you attribute any sense of meaning, then it’s not nihilism anymore. And that’s no way to understand the true nihilism.
When you let yourself fall into this rabbit hole all the way to its core, you basically find a rejection of meaning, morality and knowledge all together. Nothing matters. Absolutely nothing matters. And the dread of nihilism is, any sense of idea or meaning you so were trying to attribute will catastrophically fail.
Think of Nihilism as the core, like the mother, or an abusive parent. Now Absurdism and Existentialism are the two brothers who were born to same family but respond to their traumas all so differently.
Let’s continue with Absurdism. Absurd, is the idea that not only sees the universe as irrational and meaningless, but also does not give up and picks the flag thrown by nihilism in defeat or rejection and continues where it left. It’s the rebellion against the meaningless and uncaring void, to which nihilism dares you to stare back to it and lose your mind because you will find nothing there. Absurdism is the rebelling teenager. It takes this inherent meaningless-ness of the cold void, and continues in spite of the utter lack of inherent meaning, of this absurd, universe.
The point is, you will never truly live as long as you are looking for the meaning of life because there is no meaning to be found. And as long as you stop and embrace the meaningless, you will never truly experience living. Instead of rejecting it like Existentialism or accepting in defeat like Nihilism, go above and beyond. The search for meaning is what exactly causes this conflict. The inherent tension between humanity’s futile search for a meaning is paradoxical and that’s exactly what is meant by the “Absurd”. It clashes with one another, yet rather than giving up, it suggests we embrace it and face it with a brave smile.
Camus believed “Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy’, as outlined in the opening sentences of the essay, Myth of Sisyphus. In essence, what is the meaning of life and does it make it worth living in an absurd world?
According to Camus one is left with 3 choices;
- Suicide.
- A Leap of Faith (Kierkeegard)
- Recognition of, and revolt against, the absurd.
By opting for suicide, one eliminates human existence and, consequently, eradicates the absurd rather than confronting it. In the story of Sisyphus, where the task not only appears but is truly futile, Sisyphus finds a semblance of peace and, perhaps, even happiness. According to Camus, despite life’s absurdity, a genuine revolt against it can lead to happiness. Hence, choosing suicide contradicts the possibility of rebelling against the absurd and discovering authentic happiness.
And according to Camus, again, religion is also nothing but a suicide in its own way.
He argues that turning to religious beliefs provides solace by offering ready-made meaning and answers to life’s existential questions. In embracing religious faith, individuals may find comfort in the notion of a higher purpose or an afterlife. However, Camus sees this as a denial of the inherent absurdity and an avoidance of the responsibility to create personal meaning. By relying on religious doctrines, individuals risk forfeiting their freedom and authentic engagement with life’s absurdity. A true rejection of philosophical suicide and the pursuit of genuine meaning through honest conversations with the absurd.
How interesting. Absurd is such a weird concept, and I guess this is also why people sometimes have a hard time grasping it. That in its own way is also absurd. How will you rage against the meaningless universe and find your own happiness in that revolution… well this is exactly what it teaches you. It redefines the utter lack of inherent meaning for itself. What an idea, to reject the lack of meaning.
This is where the divide of Camus and Sartre comes in. But let me talk a little about my absolute favorite absurdist fiction, Galactic Pot Healer by Phillip K. Dick. You might recognize PKD from well, he also is the author of Blade Runner or in the original name, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
Now Galactic Pot Healer was an interesting read. Our protagonist is a guy named Joe Fernwright, whose job is basically to restore pottery back to its original form, not some craftsmanship valued in totalitarian “Communal North American Citizen’s Republic.” Joe, is depressed, and is in this constant battle with himself and the world around him in his search for a meaning. The story is basically when this god-like entity from Sirius 5 reaches to him and hires him for this mission. The subte lines in the novel hints at Joe embarking on this journey in the existential hope of attributing meaning to it.. but something is always missing. And only when he truly gives up on it and embraces and confronts the chaos and meaningless, we see Joe truly content with his life.
To be honest, to book in my opinion is not the best of PKD’s cocaine filled adventures, though I read a few essays and blog posts of people very fond of the chaotic nature. And I believe this is also the exact point the book is trying to make, as in it’s meant to be this way. It’s a man’s debate and his attempts at trying to carve his path between the deterministic nature of totalitarianism and absurdist nature of the adventures he was summoned to. Only when Joe instead ends his life-long search and confronts the absurd, he finds the joy in his existence.
Absurdism, to sum it up highlights one’s thirst for a purpose, and sees it as a conflict. Existentialism however, picks the torch back up and turns its back to Nihilism and Absurdism instead, highlighting a different path could exist.
Alright time to switch to my favorite now.
Jean-Paul Sartre sums Existentialism up with this infamous quote “Existence precedes essence” and for one reason or the otehr, it’s impossible to understand this notion without understanding this quote. So what Sartre does here is, he reverses the natural order of the immutable idea of essence. What he means is, the question of finding out who we are, in the big grand picture sense which would guide us and give us values to live by, isn’t answered for us from the outset by any fact of science, philosophy, or religion, but rather is a question posed to us and which we must answer in the acts and experiences of our actual lives.
In general, existentialists believe that humans do not inherit meaning or values but rather create it for themselves. This was SO controversial back in the day because it’s the idea that is directly opposes both the traditional philosophy and also religious beliefs (kudos to him for pissing them both) Basically, a personality is not built over a previously designed model or a precise purpose, as it is the human being who chooses to engage in such enterprise. Sartre believed there is a radical free will in humans, and that free will is the way to carve out our own meaning as our lives are one of a constant choice.
What defines our existence comes after our existence.
(btw I paraphrased most of this part from that cursed research paper. Is it plagiarism if I plagiarize it from my own paper?)
Anyway, our whole existence is a collective tragedy, one we hopelessly find ourselves drowning in. This idea is agreed upon by all of the philosophical beliefs I talked about. However, existentialism differs from the rest in it’s nature of individualism when it comes to define or rationalize this tragedy. Nihilism’s way to deal with this is simply lowering your weapon in defeat and accepting the meaninglessness. Absurdism, is picking the weapon back up and existentialism as a coping mechanism is… turning your back to the darkness.
The light is to be found wherever you want to see it. Be it in your loved ones, your purpose, your values etc., whatever you want it to be. Camus sums this up as “Whatever keeps you from suicide”. I find existentialism as a coping mechanism quite useful, and even heroic at times. But I will keep away from the individualistic nature of existentialism for now and instead focus on a different aspect of it first:
Life is suffering. Guess we can all agree on that, and I’m not talking about the whole ‘but there is happiness and value in your relations’ or whatever yet. Life is painful in a lot of aspects for a lot of people. And this is where existentialism comes in. How do you find a reason to fight for amidst all of this? Coming back to Myth of Sisyphus, Camus suggested that the happiness and purpose can be found in the mundane. This is the core of existentialism.
Is it all meaningless? What truly is the means of your existence? Or will you step up and carve it in spite of everything? The struggle within the cycle is all we have. The struggle for meaning in a meaningless existence is the closest connection and the only thing conscious beings have as an answer. One must have the strength to believe and choose for themselves. This is the idea that kept Kierkeegard, father of Existentialism and Sartre and even Camus from that philosophical suicide.
Like many others, I find solace in existentialism. It’s an all-encompassing alternative to the darkness nihilism finds itself in. It’s individualistic, broad and optimistic. There is something profound in the belief that anything that gives your life the slightest crumb of meaning is valid. We don’t exist to fulfill a purpose, but rather we exist first and then label our existence with a purpose.
Let’s conclude this with a thought experiment. Philosopher Nick Bostrom proposes three possible scenarios for simulation theory.
Number one: we will never reach the technological levels required to build a virtual reality system indistinguishable from real life.
Number two: we can build it, but we aren’t interested in it.
Number three: we already have the ability and have reached these levels, and we have already built it, living inside the very simulation right now.
The idea of existentialism offers a unique way to deal with such a theory. Let’s scrap the idea of God and the creation but replace it with a programmer, who programmed each and every one of us. He created us and put us in this world. This then is a simulation. This does not take away anything from its reality. Accepting this world and/or the simulation as it is brings hope, joy, and freedom to the table once the individual is able to push their mind out of the existential dread stage.
If our world is a simulation after all, then it is not a lack of reality, but rather an acceptance of reality. Existentialism suggests these conclusions are of one and the same. We do not exist in purpose. Instead, we choose our purpose. We define our reality ourselves by taking our purpose for ourselves.
Whatever hand you were dealt with in life, you have the freedom to find the meaning for yourself. Be it for yourself, your connections with others and the universe itself. Your soul hums the same melody. The lack of meaning allows us to give it one. This can be as simple or as complex as you want. Maybe some of us are only living to spend another day under the sunlight, some for simply survival, maybe for a loved one, a promise or for the possibility of a better future.
The lack of meaning allows us to give it one.
OOOF that took me back to some places. But this was fun. I didn’t even get the chance to explain how I at times feel myself lost in between Nihilism-Absurdism-Existentialism triangle, but I rather see it as unecessary now as this has been much longer than I anticipated.
I consider myself an Existentialist but well… sometimes the attributed feelings and meanings ultimately fails me and I find myself desperate in the dark void of nothingness of nihilism. Usually, existentialist and sometimes absurdist ideas takes me out of that depressive pit and allows me to breathe. Maybe one day, I can manage to give up all of this search and fully embrace the absurd. I really hope to be able to do so one day.
SO, what’s your philosophical suffering of choice?
universe in exile. 
Yorum bırakın