In the world of philosophy there is some difficulty in understanding Absurdism vs Existentialism.
They seem to actually go together like peanut butter and chocolate, let’s look at how these two compliment each other and how they differ!
As I like to mention in ALL posts, any links to products like books or audio formats are affilliate links and they are scattered throughout all posts.
If you purchase anything on the blog, it greatly supports me and allows me to continue to write articles to share information.
Absurdism vs Existentialism: Core Principles and Philosophical Foundations
Absurdism and existentialism are two profound philosophical frameworks that explore the nature of human existence, albeit from different perspectives. Absurdism, deeply rooted in the works of Albert Camus, asserts that life is inherently meaningless.
This philosophy underscores the conflict between humans’ quest for significance and the universe’s silent indifference.
Camus introduced the concept of “the absurd” to describe this paradoxical situation where our desire for clarity and meaning confronts the inexplicable and chaotic nature of the world.
In contrast, Existentialism, as articulated by thinkers such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, acknowledges the absence of inherent meaning in life but diverges by suggesting that individuals have the freedom to create their own purpose.
Existentialism emphasizes personal responsibility and the power of choice, positing that through our actions and decisions, we define our essence and construct our own framework of meaning. Sartre famously argued that “existence precedes essence,” indicating that we first exist and then, through our conscious choices, shape our identities.
Key tenets of absurdism include the acceptance of life’s inherent meaninglessness and the courage to confront this reality without resorting to false hope or nihilism. Camus illustrated this through the myth of Sisyphus, where Sisyphus’s eternal struggle to push a boulder up a hill, only for it to roll back down, symbolizes the human condition. The absurd hero embraces this struggle, finding value in the journey despite its futility.
Conversely, existentialism is grounded in the concepts of existential freedom and authenticity. It stresses that individuals are condemned to be free, meaning they must navigate the ambiguity of life without predetermined guidelines. This freedom is both a burden and a source of empowerment, urging individuals to live authentically, make deliberate choices, and take responsibility for their actions.
Both philosophies grapple with the search for meaning in a seemingly indifferent universe, yet they offer distinct pathways: absurdism through acceptance and defiance of the absurd, and existentialism through the proactive creation of personal meaning and purpose.
“The Myth of Sisyphus”, originating from ancient Greek mythology, serves as a poignant allegory for both absurdism and existentialism. According to the myth, Sisyphus, the cunning king of Ephyra, is condemned by the gods to an eternal punishment: he must roll a massive boulder up a steep hill, only for it to roll back down each time he nears the summit. This endless cycle of futile labor has been interpreted through various philosophical lenses, most notably by Albert Camus in his seminal essay, ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’, which serves as a cornerstone for absurdist thought.
Albert Camus employs the myth of Sisyphus to illustrate the essence of absurdism. In Camus’s view, Sisyphus epitomizes the human condition—a relentless quest for meaning in an indifferent and chaotic universe. Despite the apparent futility of his task, Sisyphus embodies the absurd hero who confronts the absurdity of his situation without succumbing to despair. Camus famously concludes that, “One must imagine Sisyphus happy,” suggesting that contentment arises from embracing the absurdity and finding personal significance within it.
For Camus, the recognition of life’s inherent absurdity paradoxically empowers individuals to live more fully, accepting the lack of inherent meaning while still engaging passionately with existence.
Conversely, existentialist interpretations of the myth of Sisyphus diverge in their emphasis on human freedom and the creation of meaning.
Existentialists might argue that Sisyphus’s predicament underscores the fundamental aspects of human existence: freedom, choice, and responsibility. While the task itself appears meaningless, existentialists posit that Sisyphus retains the freedom to define his experience and impute his own meaning to it.
For example, an Existentialist could argue that instead Sisyphus would be allowed to even undergo mental self-flagellate to reconcile and accept his never-ending struggle (Ex, Deeming that he “deserves” this never-ending chore for his actions.)
This perspective underscores the existentialist belief in the power of individuals to transcend their circumstances through authentic choices and self-determination, even in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles.
Applying these interpretations to life’s challenges provides insights into how each philosophy can shape one’s approach to personal struggles and the quest for meaning.
Absurdism encourages embracing the absurdity and finding contentment in the act of living itself, while existentialism emphasizes the importance of personal freedom and the ongoing responsibility to create meaning within one’s circumstances. Both perspectives offer valuable frameworks for navigating the complexities and uncertainties of human existence.
In essence, Absurdism acknowledge that life has no inherent meaning, the same as existentialism.
Their core difference is that Absurdism seeks to find a way to be okay with that principle, whereas existentialism allows for people to undergo personal thought and development to construct their own meaning for life.