Why? - Musings on the Human Condition17/3/2019 One word, one question, that has been the catalyst for the progress of mankind throughout time. For most of human history, we’ve believed that we’re here for a reason. Until a few hundred years ago, we thought we were the center of the universe. Astronomers, such as Galileo and Copernicus were ridiculed for their radical theories that disproved this notion. Why? The answer lies rooted deep within the human condition. As a collective, humans seek purpose in life. Some attain this purpose through belief in a higher power, through gods. The Greeks, for example, believes that man was created by Zeus and Hephaestus from clay, allegorical to the creation of the gods from Gaea. In Genesis, man was said to be “created in His image.” Others take solace in the fact that there is no other known, intelligent life in the universe, thereby making humanity destined to achieve great things. According to Ancient Greek legend, a mortal, Sisyphus, once chained up Death to prevent humans from dying. He then concocted his escape from the underworld, but was eventually caught and sentenced to eternal damnation. In his essay entitled The Myth of Sisyphus, French philosopher Albert Camus argues for an absurdist stance of the human condition. According to Camus, Sisyphus is destined to do the same, menial task over and over again, in eternal recurrence. This means that the nature of human existence is inherently absurd, as all our actions are repetitive with no grander purpose, and, Camus argues, we must find happiness within the absurd. This is often misinterpreted as nihilism, a similar yet subtly different philosophy popularized by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. His famous discourses on nihilistic tendencies of life contend that human lives inherently do not have a greater purpose - after we’re gone, all memory of us will be forgotten. Nihilism is often thought to be the rejection of the inherent human condition itself, with Nietzsche’s “God is dead!” being famously misquoted as the basis of this thesis. There is, however, a minute distinction between what people think Nietzsche meant and what he said. “God is dead!” signifies his conjecture and rejection of the notion of a supposed higher power, thereby rejecting the idea that we exist for a purpose. Nietzsche didn’t advocate for nihilism, he presented the dangers of it. At the risk of sounding “edgy,” I would suggest that modern science creates a nihilistic purview of the meaning of human life. In the grand scheme of things, we probably don’t matter much. We’ve only been around for a tiny part of Earth’s history. Earth itself is quite insignificant: one, invisible ball of dirt orbiting an average star, amongst countless others within the Milky Way. In The Unbearable Lightness of Being, author Milan Kundera discusses the same concept of eternal return as presented by Nietszche. This doctrine ascertains that everything in existence will recur over and over again, in a preset loop through time. Existence, as a result, is “weighty,” as one must carry the burden of one’s actions forever. This also posits that everything takes on an eternally fixed meaning, hence preventing one from believing things to be fleeting and worthless. Kundera then presents his own philosophy of the “unbearable lightness,” which states if eternal return were impossible, there would be an absence of meaning and the complete lack of “heaviness” in one’s life, thereby making this lightness of existence unbearable, knowing that nothing we do will ever matter. So, why does anything matter? What then, is the purpose of our existence? While everyone is entitled to their own philosophy, at a fundamental level, it is difficult to deny the nihilistic tendencies presented by modern science. Now, how it is interpreted can be vastly different. People may choose to approach the subject positively, stoically, realistically, or existentially, amongst other schools of philosophical thought. And the truth is, there is no absolute answer - we cannot fundamentally determine which is the “best” way to approach life. What is best is up to each individual. It is, however, a good opportunity to discuss a fresh way of looking at things. Recently, I saw a YouTube video on what philosophers call “optimistic nihilism.” Contrary to the angsty teenager/existentialist college student tropes associated with said philosophy, the theory of optimistic nihilism posits that one must accept the inherent irrelevance of human life in the grand scheme of the universe. Instead of being weighed down by it, however, we must take this opportunity to free ourselves from the shackles of responsibility and accountability, to a certain extent. Of course, it is essential to bear in mind the consequences of one’s actions, however, that should not limit us from pursuing something that makes us happy. Every time you are faced with a difficult decision, instead of asking yourself the question “why?”, ask “why not?” What does this mean for the human condition? Absolutely nothing, and yet, absolutely everything at once. In some ways, Camus was right in his hypothesis. There is an inherent absurdity in the human condition - what we consider to be major events are, in fact, comically insignificant on a grander scale. It is our responsibility to make the most of what we have. This, ironically, is a paradox, as it causes humanity to actively make decisions in the pursuit of happiness, yet never fully obtaining it. As a species, it is in the nature of humans to always desire for more, rather than being satisfied with what they have. "You will never be happy if you continue to search for what happiness consists of. You will never live if you are looking for the meaning of life.” ~Albert Camus This is where the Catch-22 lies. Most people have a singular goal from life: attaining happiness. Hence, they tend to chase after this elusive quality, and in the meantime, forget how to live. The pursuit of happiness leads to the constant feeling of despair of seemingly not achieving this goal. What is difficult to realise, and execute, is the notion that happiness isn’t something you can actively reach for. Happiness is something you simply get by living your life the way you want to.
Where I disagree with Camus is when it comes to the sentiment of having to find happiness in the absurdity of life. I believe that this inherent absurdity paves the way for us to become happy, by freeing us from having to constantly be obsessing over each and every small decision. It allows us to be bold, take risks. It allows us to ask ourselves the question of “why not?” that has propelled humanity to great heights, and will continue to do so. For eternity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.Aayush GuptaAspiring writer and photographer, looking to showcase his work. Archives
June 2018
Categories |