The absurdist argument holds that humans have a tendency to apply meaning where it does not exist. While humans are naive creatures who are afraid of their mortality, we occupy a universe that is cold, uncaring, and absurdly random. Basically, we could die at literally any time without warning, and there is nothing we can do to stop that. If we were to fully recognize this fact in all of its magnitude and futility, many of us would probably go crazy. Thus, in order to maintain our sanity, we deny, deny, deny.
Mr. Heidkamp, when teaching this concept to us, was very thorough in his shooting down of everyone's arguments against it. For that, I'm rather impressed. However, there's one major problem with this theory that has not yet been brought up.
It goes like this: Are we as humans not part of the universe ourselves?
The absurdist argument relies very strongly on the assumption that we as humans are soft and smushy and caring, while the universe is cold and oppressive. But aren't humans a part of the universe themselves? Are we not made of stardust like everything else? Giving such a rigid distinction between humans (us) and the universe (everything else) is giving us too much credit, and the universe too little. The universe cannot be completely cold and terrible and random, because we are a part of it, and we are curious and kind!
What does everyone else think? Anybody want to refute this position? Comments, questions, concerns?
I think this is a very interesting argument. I actually have done some outside research on existentialism, though, and I found some sources saying that human existence is absurd, as opposed to existence itself. I don't know if this changes your argument or not, but I thought it was interesting that there was that distinction between humanity and everything else.
ReplyDelete