My left ear found this really interesting.

One must imagine the right ear happy.

One day the "why" arrived for me in the form of cancer. I was 23, taking existentialism at university, and reading The Myth of Sisyphus. I had been ill for a long time at that point. There were good days and bad days. Enough good days for me to remain ignorant of the pattern of death growing inside me. On my last day in school before I received the diagnosis (stage 4 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma) we finished the essay TMOS. My last memory of the class was my professor finishing with the line "we must imagine Sisyphus as happy". I completed six months of chemotherapy and eventually returned to university. I finished one semester. In my second semester, I again took existentialism, this time hoping to finish. I also worked as a supplementary instructor teaching PHI 101 students. On my last day on campus, the day before I found out my cancer had returned, I read Camus with my 101 students. Camus was there with me when I discovered the absurd. He helped me to see what is actually meaningful, in the subjective and immediate sense. Anyway, great video. Awesome content in general.

Camus was like my best friend growing up. I read the Myth of Sisyphus when I was 17 and felt like I was glowing the entire time. I'm looking forward to reading it again now entering into adulthood. My favorite thing about Camus is that it doesn't feel like he places himself above you like a lot of philosophical writers, he just feels like a friend walking beside you, trying to appease your loneliness by sharing his.

Fantastic summary. I read this essay the day after I graduated from high school, and there began my education. Listening to this 43 years later I am struck by how seminal reading The Myth of Sisyphus has been for my life, the revolt, the freedom, the passion... I'm reminded, and this is a tangent, of something I read by a Buddhist about the liberation of hopelessness. In a society that clings to hope, in this Christmas season where I've heard over and over that "everything happens for a reason," I'm struck by how the absurd has contributed, not to angst or malaise or existential vacuum, but to my sense of motivated acceptance, active compassion, amazed engagement. Thanks.

The fourth consequence of the absurd is quiet quitting.

Camus and the absurd is the only philosophical outlook that I have ever needed. People put it down because it's simple and they dont like the consequences they think will result. Neither of those things dissuades me in the least: -Simplicity is to be cherished (complicated is easy and a great way to avoid actually dealing with things) -The acceptance of the absurdity of a meaning-making organism living in a meaningless environment is intensely liberating ... not bleak or hopeless at all. REVOLT!

I would literally kill to have Dr Anderson as my professor. I would have enjoyed my degree so much more if someone delivered these ideas so fluently and engagingly. This channel is one of my best finds for 2022! Thanks Ellie

Well done. As a therapist, your presentation reminded me of something I think about a lot, the idea that we live in a bubble of limited perception, and that we need to learn to be more comfortable with uncertainty. If there is a "purpose" to all of this, there is little chance that I can figure it out from here. My brain is intelligent enough to know that I will die, but not intelligent enough to know the why, or if there is a why, especially because my ablity to sense my environment is limited. I take comfort in the idea that whatever it is, it's not my fault. My lack of perception limits my responsibility. Philosophers still go after that closure, because that is what people want. Maybe we should just encourage people to see that closure is not necessary.

9:53 was that your stomach? 11:48 too, then your next example is about the next meal. Yeah, you're certainly hungry.

Such a cogent presentation. Thanks once again. Shortly before Camus died, he asked a Methodist minister for Baptism...and meaning. The minister said Camus should wait and think it over. Then Camus died in a car crash.

The invention of jargon & attributing meaning to them is stunningly easy & illuminating at the same time.

Thank you! Once again, your intellectual dance with words always carries one to the end! Departing with a better understanding!

Thanks for all of your content!

A very concise, expert presentation. Well done. Thank you. Been there: many times. When that awareness happens, don’t shy away from it.

thank you dr. ellie. this is a wonderful early college level book to wrap your thoughts sround, as is all camus. its interesting to rethink about at later stages of life too periodically. i recently retired and walked away from my sisyphusan rock and so thoughts of camus and his absurd and what it means now are again on my mind lately.

Thank you for not littering this with ads. Am enjoying your channel

One of the best works I have seen. just progressed to the 2nd year of bachelor's degree in philosophy and politics, I feel so lucky that I have found this channel.

You were made for this. Thank you!

Ha! You dropped this video just as I'm making my way through the myth of sisyphus. Wonderful!

Excellent content as always! Greetings from a Camus fan!

Great summary. Well done. Thanks.

I am loving your channel. Just my level, right length, mind-blowing topics. And very good explanations! Im learning so freaking much.

Beautifully stated: from and about. Thank you.

brilliant summary. you got to all the nuances of sisyphus so concisely and exactly to camus' point(s). i really don't think i've ever heard it explained so well. i've been a fan of this book since i first read it at 19 (46 now) and over and over again at various points throughout my life and i always pick up some new shade of his meaning that i hadn't fully caught onto before. camus packed so much into such a short essay. it's interesting being light years from the 19yr old who was gifted a beat up copy of this book, slid to me across the table by a fellow student in conversation french class, to being in the throes of middle age and camus is still guiding my revolt against the absurd. rock on... ✌🏽😜

Thank you so much , this lectures are wonderful!

You need to enable mono audio from phone settings to enjoy the absurd on both ears 😊

To be honest, I love the continental philosophy series more than the podcast. Thank you for what you are doing!

Thanks for the Absurd to consider. Sound recording was totally one sided (mono), not in center.

Amazing explanation, thank you so much, concise yet profound.

Everyone else has in-depth responses covered, so I'll make a short aesthetic one: the pictures of the excerpts are a wonderful addition. They're very simple yet very helpful.

Read Camus in college and it is such a relief to read someone talking about suicide in a philosophical way, amidst our culture where suicide is hardly discussed at all, and never discussed philosophically, only psychologically. "Once the absurd is recognized, it becomes a passion, the most harrowing of all." -- one of my favorite quotes of all time. When I got to the end, however, I got frustrated. I cannot imagine Sisyphus happy. Camus seems to be defending a kind of optimistic nihilism -- nihilistic because there are no truly good reasons to live, and optimistic that we can live regardless. But I can only imagine Sisyphus happy were he a simpleton. Kids play with simple toys. Should we play with kid toys well into adulthood? No. We grow up and become more rational and needier. We need something more sophisticated, more meaningful. The rational response for Sisyphus is not to feel happy at all, but to feel boredom and despair. Optimism can archetypically be associated with naivete, a kind of willful ignorance for the sake of emotional comfort. Pessimism, instead, can be associated with a sober acceptance of reality, no matter how painful reality is. I think Camus is engaging in naïve optimism, and not taking absurdity to its logical, pessimistic, conclusion. It reminds me of those who say "Sure, there is no meaning to life. But that's okay; we can create our own meaning." To me that sounds like: "Sure, there is no God. But that's okay; we can create our own God." This is an explicit denial of reality, which is irrational. If, objectively, there are no good reasons to live, and yet you live anyway as if there _are_ good reasons to live, then you live a lie. (To me, the core idea of absurdity is contradiction, and thus life is absurd if life is contradictory. And certainly life _is_ contradictory, contradicted by death. But I also find myself using "Life is absurd" to mean "Life is meaningless", which in turn means "Life is without good reason to live".) If so-called "noble" lies are acceptable, then why can't we all accept the noble lie that God exists? How do modern critiques of religion survive? Instead, I say there are objectively good reasons to live. It's perfectly rational to live to maximize the moments of flourishing and minimize the moments of suffering that you and those around you experience. So I accept a kind of Aristotelianism or Eudaimonism. Life is not absurd or pointless or stupid or a joke. Life is full of tragedy and suffering, but it's also full of happiness. Life is not _fundamentally_ bad, but _conditionally_ bad. In Sisyphus' case, his life is quite bad, and perhaps it would be reasonable for him to choose to die rather than choose to live, in a similar way that a terminal patient might reasonably choose to die. But humans in general are not Sisyphus. We don't all live conditionally bad lives. Many of us are young, healthy, working jobs, have friends, family, meaningful hobbies, and are working to improve ourselves and improve our lives. Even those of us who are unsatisfied with our lives are working towards improving them. Sisyphus is stuck in a way that most of us just aren't. Sure, the doctor heals a patient who will just die later anyway. So it might look like the doctor is rolling a boulder up a hill. But that fails to recognized the real moments that real people really experience, in this case the moments the patient gets to have, the years they get to live, thanks to the doctor saving them. In other words, the doctor is maximizing moments of flourishing and minimizing moments of suffering, which is perfectly reasonable. No lie needed, "noble" or otherwise. P.S. - Christians talk about being the "hands and feet of Jesus", of being the "salt of the earth" and the "light of the world", and that "faith without deeds is dead." And what is the Christian idea of heaven if not for the perfect maximizing of flourishing? ("There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.") So it sounds like Christianity, and I'd say other religions as well, operate according to Eudaimonistic assumptions. So Eudaimonism isn't necessarily an exclusive way of being, but a basic way of being that's compatible with, and in common with, all sorts of religions and philosophies of life. P.P.S. - Coincidentally, this interview with Christopher Watkin was just released, and he comments on Sisyphus from a Christian point of view: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/j-BypregrNispGg.html.

Love this. Thanks!

Thank you so much 🥳 it was easy yet detailed explanation on his ideas.

I love Camus’s work. The Myth of Sisyphus is a very dense read, but a must read

I love the little stomach noises throughout the video. Also, technical note, I could only hear in one of my headphone speakers, whereas I can hear in both for other youtube videos. Something you may want to look into! (I can help). These comments aside, I really enjoyed your video. Camus' take on the absurd is possibly the most foundational issue I'm trying to get my head around properly. Your video has brought additional light on it to me. So thank you! You're a very smart and eloquent person!

amazing lecture, greetings from Brazil

Excellent!

You are the thinking man's Heather Graham. Thank you for existing....

A favorite of mine from Albert Camus and the notion of the absurd could not be more clear than with comments of the audio quality.

I wanted to watch this video, but I can't handle to listen to it with my left ear only

I just moved to Paris a couple months ago and bought myself "l'étranger" for myself as a xmas present two days ago so this is perfect timing lol!

Thanks a million.

Thank You Dr. Ellie Anderson... What a pleasure it is to listen to such an intelligent clear thinking presenter/woman. I am a bone head/peanut brain so I will have to watch a couple times. Put a philosophy book in my hand OMG, UGH!!! Put a blueprint in front of me along with a machine shop and I become a very focused rock star . I have liked and subscribed 😀... TM

Thank you so much 😇 But the sound is coming out of one side of the speakers ☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻

A line from Camus that has stayed with me for some 60 years since I first read it: "Although life is incomprehensible, it is not without meaning." This destroyed Sartre for me.

I enjoyed this. I do love Albert.

It's okay that Dr. Anderson uploaded a video with only a mono signal audio which only plays on the left channel. Perhaps her camera, or audio device, only recorded in mono, or how the video was rendered… sh*t happens. Which, of course, makes it wonderfully absurd as it follows the three consequences of the absurd. As it should. Great content, as usual.

No sound on one side, headphones/speakers :/

If you commit suicide because you think there is no reason for anything, you are actually giving meaning to death, suicide, and life, ironically.

Great work. Remember those characters that seek subtle perfection and great friendships in Camus’s novels. They are his hope against this rational nihilism that is fundamentally anti life

always happy to learn from my left ear.

You're awesome that was a great video.

I LOVE THIS CANNEL!!!!!!

what a perfect review!

the absurb is what exists beyond the silence and stillness of the non dual universe. if you step into the silence and stillness, the answer arises. the answer (for me) lies in the resolution of paradox(any paradox will do). this is the resolution of non duality in buddhist thought. this is a lecture on buddhist dzogchen, framed in western philosophical terms. i enjoyed it. the nice thing is that the universe has an endless amount of time to perfect its humour and to set up the parameters of the joke.

Is it just me or the video actually lost the sound on of the sides of headphone ? :3 The content's still great as always tho. Edit: while I don't like Camus, I respect him. He had tried his best to solve some of the hardest problems of existentialism in general.

I understand that near the end of his life Camus struck up a friendship with a Methodist minister. I have often wondered what he gleaned from that.

Excellent "explication de texte." This would pair very well with an analysis of Adorno’s “Jargon of Authenticity."

This is all extremely relatable as someone with a crappy job. I don't think it's possible to live a mechanical life if you hate your work.

Merci!

Hi. Love your videos. What, if any, philosophy speaks about the dichotomies of reality? Who studies the ideas of irony on a molecular level; the peculiar oddity of the disjointed relationships between intention, observation, and result that makes irony such a common aspect of experience? I mean, I can see the irony in living against the absurd but what about the concept of irony itself, it's mechanics, and their relationships to experience. thank you

Wonderful! 11:48 Hungry?

The camera records in stereo but the microphone is one source. Hence it goes to the left. A good tip is to convert the audio to a mono file.

To fix audio, search up mono audio in your Windows settings and turn it on while you watch the video.

This book was the book that got me into philosophy.

“ beginning to think is beginning to be undermined “

My mother always said, "No one is going to slip money through your mail slot. Don't be absurd. You must go create your own life. [Insert life goals] If that's what you want to do, go do it. You can do anything you want to do when you set your mind to it. Decide to do it, and do it. Make it happen. There's nothing absurd about it. Live your life now. Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day!!:)" "... didn't fall in a day, either. Stay centered. Sleep works. Drink WATER! Love you. Now, get out of my house, my movie is coming on and I want to work on my knitting. Give me a hug, see you next time!!:)" Ma!!:'D ... much appreciate your excellence.

Prof. Anderson, if we wanna specialise in academic/intellectual areas more than one, do you think reading on only 1 topic/field in a day is the best, or on more? And on the longer run, do ye think we should fovus on an x field for a period of time then move on to another, or shouldwe doing different areas of study consistently over time? Or, can we get a brief of yer studying programme? Respect

I would say that the acceptance of "the absurd" as Camus has projected is a form of stoicism which was made popular in Roman ideology and applied within Catholicism by many followers as part of the theodicy of the doctrine. At least, to the observer.

You are amazing

Oh no, there is no audio. was looking forward to this topic too.

Great video! I have a question about the third consequence and the lack of a moral code that arises from Absurd. What's Camus' argument regarding situations where we can plausibly know the outcome of an action? For example, in the case of Mersault shooting the Arab in "L'Etranger", can one really say that Mersault didn't know that the consequence of shooting would be the death of the Arab? With the lack of a moral code, would Camus not be saying that Mersault is not guilty (only "responsible"), even in this case of murder, and thus condone his actions?

The audio is only playing in the left ear for headphone users. Great vid btw

A relational notion? The why is just an imbalance of the scale of good stuff and bad stuff. Is it that the real difference is the knowledge of finite life?

Could you please do a video on The Rebel? Most of the videos about Camus' philosophy on KZfaq mainly focuses on the Myth of Sisyphus.

You gotta put the audio in both ears, i spent so long trying to fix my headphones hahah

My thoughts on this philosophy. Camus believes that we bring the question of meaning into the universe itself, and without our existence such a question would or could never have existed. He thinks this fact is worth noting when considering the question of suicide, but that it won't bring us much solace, since we are never given an answer to the question. Therefore, Camus says we should be rebellious pessimists and agnostics, individuals that keep bringing the question into existence, despite no answers. I think this is actually a major flaw in Camus' argumentation, and one that Heidegger anticipated, for it contains the hidden premise of Cartesian dualism. For although the meaning of being might require consciousness, for it to even be entertained, the mind and world are not two separate entities that need to be brought into relation, but they are one and the same. The universe is a unitary phenomena, so the meaning of being already exists in the world, not just in us. This is why, I think, Heidegger's argument is stronger, because it acknowledges our throwness into the world, as already present in it, and describes dasein and its search for the meaning of being, without recourse to a dualism. Heidegger ends up with a similar pessimism to Camus, but instead of revolting against our condition, we accept the absurd as it is appears to us via our phenomenological investigations.

Camus's ideas about revolution and the justification of violence is quite gangster... I mean, it makes sense within the context of his life, the space and time that he found himself in. But I always wondered, in regard to what he emphasized as the ultimate question (to be or not to be): isn't it really just a question like any other? In other words, does anything really elevate this question beyond any other? I'd hate to flip absurdism into nihilism, but the backdrop of silence from which the question comes from could really generate any question, no? After which, the emphasis/importance of the question would be determined by the unique experience of the observer... Is there then a metaquestion, something like, "is there a question worth asking?". Then again, this assumption becomes quite paradoxical...

Gosh, do I love the little piles. Ok, is Debt/Existential Phenomenology/Search for a Method some kind of blueprint for reprisal against the flailing liberalism snapping away at our every day? I sure hope so!

There are two perplexities that confront us: determinism and meaninglessness. Dismissing determinism with the assertion that "we act as if we are free" merely perpetuates an illusion. Camus' outright rejection of determinism could be likened to a philosophical self-immolation. The crux of the matter lies in our experiential encounters; amidst them, we encounter the stark realization of meaninglessness. However, every action and cogitation we undertake are merely ancillary effects of antecedent phenomena. Our thoughts do not belong to us; they are manifestations of an algorithmic process. Life unfolds akin to a mechanical performance, with us merely playing the role of puppets, albeit imbued with awareness, within an absurd play. The notion of volition itself dissolves into insignificance. Indeed, our capacity for experience might be the only aspect of our existence that could be considered supernatural. The cosmos follows its course, and we are observers, bearing witness to our own endeavors. Consider the motion of the hand: it moves, yet I am not the agent; it reacts to stimuli, and I am merely imbued with the sensation of agency. This illusion persists even when triggering a reflex; the leg moves sans volition, yet the sensation of agency persists. However, this illusion dissipates during muscle cramps, as we observe and sense our muscles contracting, realizing that it is not our doing. We are as incapable of initiating self-extinction as we are of commanding lightning strikes. The timing of our demise was determined at the inception of the universe. We lack the capacity to generate effects that stand causally independent from the cosmic chain of causality. Thus, whether one traverses a life of perpetual bliss or opts for immediate cessation, it was predestined to unfold accordingly.

The audio is messed up- there is no sound in the Right channel, only the left.

A podcast with Andrew Huberman, I imagine would be phenomenal

1."Not to be" is not an option to the cornered man, which is a Classic, Tragic situation. The Self preservation instinct, you know. 2.The Universe is silent only to the hearing-impaired one (ab-surdus). 3."...The starry heavens above me and the moral law within me"...

Why does your videos only play in the left ear?

Camus' "revolt" sounds identical to Heidegger's "authenticity".

Albert is Awesome!!

Can you do an episode with Stephen West? We would love to hear you going back and forth.

The meaning of life is found on the right audio channel

This concept of needing, or not having, meaning, and of the world not responding, is foreign to me, i can't recall struggling much with that.

My left ear was not convinced.

It is interesting that Camus is celebrated for stating the obvious. I really like the nuance in his writing though!

Nice jumper

Could you make a similar summary from Camus' the Rebel?

Circumstances that are beyond the control of all human beings: those have the final say as to what's possible and not possible for human beings.

To be or not to be is not a question.

When we realize that the universe truly is silent, when we have the courage to face it head on, accept it, not escape or distract ourselves away from seeing it... we can first be struck by this nothingness. But from that nothingsness we have a new perspective, out of which we can create our own meaning from. When that perspective isnt found it can lead to nihilism and/or suicide instead..

Can you please discuss deeper into the specific concept METAPHYSICAL REBELLION of Albert Camus?

Just finished it.

Yes we always think back and say to ourselves things would have been better if I would have done this. Everything would have been great if I would have done that, that is an illusion. There's no way to know what may have happened if we would have taken different paths.