Why do normie retards cite this as an argument against suicide

>>8612937
Thinking about killing myself, should I read this?

>>8612937
Yet you chose to shitpost instead of kysing you are self, so you probably imagine suicide is not so logical for whatever reason.

>>8612940

Read Nausea instead. The end is still BS but the the rest is better than anything Chadus could've sharted out.

>>8612937
Agreed.

My shrink suggested I read this as well and I did.

20 years of debilitating severe depression to the point where I get disability checks and need to have my parents take care of me. I tried hanging myself multiple times. Been through nearly 40 meds, CBT, DBT and even ECT and Ketamine.

Fuck this nightmarish existence. I'm supposed to pretend that I'm actually happy? I accept the absurd. Life has no inherent meaning and everything we do is insignificant and does not matter at all.

But this is not a compelling argument against suicide at all. Killing yourself is absolutely a logical choice when your existence is complete suffering and is unamenable to any treatment.

Fuck Camus.

>>8612944
already got my heroin stash. waiting on my mom to die. fuck spending the rest of my life in a psych ward and lying to myself that im actually happy when I'm not.

>>8612937
Are you from /tv/

>>8612950
I'm like 20% sure that Camus opens with a line that suggests you should kill yourself if your love means nothing and your existence is pain

ITT people who have not killed themselves

>>8612973
life* sorry I have love on the brain.

File: 10nihilism.jpg (22KB, 550x778px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 550x778px

>>8612946
I got the sense from reading summaries of their respective bodies of work that Sartre was the intellectual superior of Camus. I personally find it to be a simpler explanation for life's meaning that none is really in existence yet whomever so wishes to might create for themselves their own meaning, rather than striving against this dubious metaphysical force known as "The Absurd" for a meaning to be found in the act itself, being forever barred from knowing both the real meaning of life and even whether that meaning exists at all.

I don't remember as much about it at all after giving up on philosophy, having realized that all I know now is all I knew back 3 years ago when I read "Existentialism is a Humanism" for the first time, but I don't think there's much value to be extracted from Camus's nonfiction.

>waaaaaah my life is so hard: the thread
literally all of you are crybaby attentionwhore faggots without the balls to kill yourselves

>>8612950
Camus does not rule out suicide by causes of "incurable disease". He treats suicide without any pathos and from a very general and detached point of view, it obviously doesn't meant people with legitimate depression (which are the exception) are to be "cured" by reading the book.

This is in the first pages, come on.

>>8613046
>Camus rules out suicide by "incurable disease".
Sorry, I'm sleepy as fuck

>>8613046
that's not to say that guy didn't misrepresent the idea in his post.

he did.

File: Gee.jpg (40KB, 460x345px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 460x345px

>>8612937
You obviously did not get it. This is not about Sisyphus living an inherently painful existence. It is merely about him having his daily, absurd chore to do - just as we all do (with Sisyphus just being an extreme metaphor).

It is about accepting your universal fate, the fact that you are here now and will cease to be in due time, no matter what you do in life. So rebel against that fact by at least living life to the fullest of your capabilities. By that Camus doesn't just mean a qualitative life, but also the quantiative accumulation of experiences (that whole Don Juan-section in the book). Physical suicide would be like giving up, while turning to religion for consolation also equals suicide (intellectual suicide to be exact).


So this really isn't that hard and it's a perfectly fine point to make.

PS: None of this implies some sort of egotistical nihilism by the way.

>>8614259
All these posts on /lit/ and there's often only one guy per thread who gets the point.

>>8612937
Normie retards have not read or heard of this book, and cannot cite it.

>>8613027
Sartre also fucked little girls, was ugly as shit, worshipped communism like a religion and didn't even pretend he cared about constructing his fiction while Camus was a good-looking writer with a strong philophical background that still cared about delivering a beautifully delivered story first and foremost.

>>8614542
>>8614693
Maybe two.

>>8614542
Posting on /lit/ isn't about getting the point or learning, it is about showing off your ignorance, trolling, trying to make the world fit your view etc.

File: right.jpg (20KB, 739x469px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 739x469px

>>8614720
Oh silly me ! Thanks for the reminder.

>>8612937
>he hasn't questioned the will to truth yet
you are like little babby

File: Demons_(Fyodor_Dostoyevsky)[1].jpg (17KB, 259x399px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 259x399px

>>8612940
Read Demons instead

>I'm a nihilist.

>>8612937
The Myth of Sisyphus isn't an opinion, if you're severely depressed and suicidal but still haven't killed yourself you do imagine Sisyphus is content even if you're too egotistical to admit it.

>>8614259
This guy gets it.

>>8612950
Rebel against your suffering. Live in spite of it. You've conditioned yourself to defeat yourself, Camus would tell you grab a thing and do it out of spite for the absurd nature of life that causes you so much suffering. It's not the best argument, but he's no idiot.

Sartre has more ideas that may add something to your life, especially his radical freedom. You can choose anything, any time. Check out his short essay Existentialism is a humanism and Nausea.

But honestly for you guys, Epictetus and Dostoevsky are your only hopes. You probably have no drive or thing to live for, which will ruin Nietzsche (if you have a thing, but the world/society won't let you do it, he's your guy) Stirner and Aristotle for you, and I imagine all religion is out, which removes Plato and Kierkegaard.

Read C&P and watch how the character's rationality is occasionally wielded by his base thoughts, and his over-rationalizing is simply his subconscious justifying itself to himself.

Good luck guys.

File: great.jpg (51KB, 600x652px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x652px

>what's hermeneutics?

>>8615084
If I'm not mistaken, C&P has a significant theme/statement about faith and theism too. Although, I think this makes the book even better

I can absolutely tell you didn't understand what Camus meant.

Camus is saying -- as an extension upon his Absurdist philosophy -- that Sisyphus found meaning in his endless labor of rolling the boulder; thus, we must think of him happy in creating his personal meaning.

Also
>>8614259
He gets it. Rebelling against the absurdity of your existence is what runs counter to suicide; suicide isn't addressing this absurdity, it is running from it.

>>8614259
>>8615130
Quality posts like this are why I still browse here

>>8614693
>Camus
>Strong background in philosophy
>Only has a BA
>Literally surrounded by more highly qualified people

>>8614259
>>8615084
>DUDE JUST REBEL AND PRETEND HE IS HAPPY

What if I don't want to accept the suffering?

There you have no fucking arguments.

This is a very piss-poor argument against suicide.

>>8615130
>living a life based on a lie
>pretending sisyphus is happy when he is not

What Camus is telling you is to live your life in bad faith. Sisyphus' existence is hell and he is not happy. But we must pretend he is.

Fuck that shit.

>>8615451
Ah but wanting to accept, not accept, engage with the question, or not engage with it is your choice.

In a way, by taking a stand and refusing to accept the suffering you've made the leap Camus talks about. In this absurd, awful world where nothing is certain or reliable you found a thing that "feels" like it has meaning. That's pretty baller. Shame you'd waste such a powerful moment on dying.

There's a character in The Plague who devotes his entire life to stopping death because he watched his lawyer father coldly condemn a man to death. Equally absurd, equally rebelling.

>>8615451
>but i don't want to!

no one is forcing you. suicide is your loss. the world might lose you but you'll lose the world.

>>8615120
I'm more thinking that these guys would find something to relate to in Svidrigalov.

If they skip the later appended epilogue then Raskolnikov's final act also seems relevant.

>>8615451
Camus talks about meaninglessness, not suffering.

>>8615458
You just said that everyone who is alive that doesn't want to kill themselves is lying. I think you are just a failed human being that is projecting.

>>8612937

Agreed, I am surprised Camus became recognized as a famous author / philospher. The idea of someone in a bad situation choosing not to feel bad is not at all intersting or novel. And he doesn't come up with any clever play on the mythology he uses to make his point, which is weird. Usually when you bring in a myth reference you want to do something with it to let the myth level suggest something about the real world, but all he does with his is saying "imagine he enjoyed it."

>>8615523
You fail to understand the position that the book starts from and you fail to understand the conclusion that he comes to. Not only did you completely misunderstand the book you also fail to grasp the significance of the analogy.

Please come back when you are 18. Thank you.

>>8614259
>>8615130

These guys get it. Read their posts.

>>8612937
Saying something is for normie retards and then simplifying it's message to a DUDE LMAO meme doesn't really make you any less retarded for having the point completely go over your head.

>>8612937
It's a terrible argument with false premises and bad logic. Life isn't absurd, and if it were, suicide would be necessary.

>>8615477
>>8615486
>>8615497
Sisyphus is not happy. Camus wants you to pretend he is.

>you will lose the world and won't be able to rebel against the absurd xD

So what? Life is complete and absolute suffering. We only continue to life in spite of that because we are biologically programmed to do so, just like how we are biologically programmed to fuck and make kids. If we were not ingrained with the innate instinct to survive and fear death, I guarantee you we would have all killed ourselves as we would be able to come to the logical conclusion that our existence is much more suffering than pleasure and not worth it. You're only alive because you are biologically programmed to do so.

It has nothing to do with useless platitudes or some "DUDE DEEP PHILOSOPHY LMAO" shit.

Camus is a fucking cowardly idiot. He would never have the gall to go up to a person suffering from an unamenable agonizing condition that affects them physically or mentally and renders every waking moment of their lives hell and go "DUDE JUST ACCEPT YOUR IMMENSE SUFFERING PRETEND SISYPHUS IS HAPPY LOL".

The ultimate rebellion IS suicide. Because you basically tell your biological programming to go fuck itself.

>We must imagine Sisyphus happy
>*We* must *imagine* Sisyphus happy

how people manage to misunderstand this boggles my mind

>>8616111
While also a conclusion, suicide is not the one you're supposed to draw from absurdism

>>8616535
You're not seriously reducing it all to biology, right? Finding meaning in a life of strife is not just your survival instinct talking.

>>8616586
t. Biocuck

>>8615084
>Camus would tell you grab a thing and do it out of spite for the absurd nature of life that causes you so much suffering.

I've remember doing this when I was 16 and I got on the bus despite my crush getting on there with her boyfriend. I stood right next to them too, even tried to engage in conversation but they just rejected me awkwardly. Guess I'm just that much of an intellectual.

I never saw it as Sisyphus being happy, it's more that he refuses to let himself become an object at the mercy of the whims of the world. Suicide is reducing yourself to an object, unable to take action in or against the world and simply perishing.
When Sisyphus walks down the hill to get the boulder, that's him making a choice. And that's really what it's all about, choosing to be.

To be honest i never thought the myth of Sisyphus was a good way to transmit his idea. Sisyphus never had a choice (after provoking the gods at least) so he carries the rock again and again whether he accepts the absurdity of it or not. Also his world has actual gods and an afterlife, so no meaninglessness there.

>>8616111
Its absurd if we're built to need meaning and control in a world were there is none.

>>8616777
In Sisyphus' case it's meaningless. He's already in the afterlife and charged to push the rock for eternity with no end, and no reason.

>>8616586
It is all because of biology.

continental philosophybis so dumb

>>8612950
Have you tried shrooms? Try a decent amount of shrooms, at least 5 grams. Seriously.

Or better yet, go to South America and sign up for an Ayahuasca retreat. Shit will change your life

>>8616806
Just like us to be honest.

File: eggman-pepe2.png (202KB, 344x477px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 344x477px

>>8614693
Simone's students were teenagers not little girls in the sense we'd use the term; him being ugly has nothing to do with his thought being good or not you pseudo-intellectual normie faggot; we need to distinguish between pre-Marxism and post-Marxism, and I am talking about the former Sartre.

>>8614895
Or read about the Nigilistki from an actual history book instead

>>8615084
Dostoyevsky was a christfag who pussied out of radicalism.

>>8616535
>Camus is a fucking cowardly idiot
No, Camus is dead

>>8616806
You're right. The thing is, one can't just assume he accepted the absurdity of his new life like Camus did. He might've just suffered for all eternity (as the gods wanted him to), or just become completely mindless after a while it, which isn't exactly accepting it either.

>>8616823
>You have to poison your body to learn to enjoy life
Top kek

>>8616535
How do you know? Sisyphus is basically just a normie doing his work day in and day out. Some people can find meaning in such repetitive work. Sisyphus is still free in his mind to interpret what he's doing any way he likes. His situation isn't objectively worse than anyone else's.

File: 1475902052932.jpg (263KB, 700x1065px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 700x1065px

havent even read camus' works but i just assume its pic related

>>8617056
accurate summary of the summaries

>>8615451
Well, I guess Sisyphus fate, according to Camus, is equivalent to a meaningless, more or less, ordinary life. I don't think killing yourself to end suffering like endless (literal) torture, or if you believe it'll help in a cause you're engaged in (as indicated in a footnote in the introduction, I think), would be unreasonable for him.

>>8616535
Whether or not you agree with Camus this is a complete misreading of what he meant to do in the Myth of Sisyphus. No one here is saying Camus was right. We are only defending him from bad readings of his philosophy.

>So what? Life is complete and absolute suffering.
First of all Camus isn't writing about suffering but rather meaninglessness. If you want to posit some definition of suffering where that is an accurate statement you have invented a personal definition which no other person shares. No one, not even if it's Schopenhauer or Buddha say that all life is suffering and these are two thinkers very commonly misunderstood to have thought that. It is as controversial a statement as saying that existence is absolute pleasure. If you believe that then fine, but you can't assume it and then say Camus was wrong because he doesn't agree with your assumption.

>Sisyphus is not happy. Camus wants you to pretend he is.
As I said before you saying this literally means no one can ever be happy. Literally no one who has ever lived or ever will live can be happy. You are saying that happiness is ontologicaly impossible. The only thing you can say about people who say they are happy is they are lying or mistaking, which is to say that everybody who disagrees with your theory is wrong regardless of what they say. That is some bullshit right there.

>has the motivation to read and comprehend entire novels
>thinks he will actually kill himself

lol, you've got a way to go yet kid

>>8612940
no, read The bible and then don't kill yourself

>>8612937
>calling someone a normie retard
>'bad faith
go back to your grave sartre

>>8614259
>this guy actually fuckin' read the book
>madlads.jpg

Stop reading any of these French hacks.
>>8614693
>>8616835
They were still little girls. I say this as somebody that has had a relationship with a teenager.

The moment Simone felt justified in abusing a child was the moment feminism as a valid ideology died. The ideology in its modern states takes after her, and by using the vulnerable as a means to pleasure (complete objectification) she made herself unworthy of any recognition. I forget if she wrote when she was a teacher, but she certainly did when the 'couple' adopted a 16-year-old to be their slavegirl.

This would be like if Socrates threw the hemlock into the guy's face and ran off to Asia, bought a harem, and smoked opium for the rest of his life.

>>8616111
>suicide is the solution to absurdism
do you even think? absurdism is one of the most life-affirming philosophies out there so long as you take logic as foundation for argument

>when he clearly is not
He only isn't happy to your low test mind

>>8616858
....but it actually does help, anon...

>>8612944
>kysing
>kill yourselfing
what did he mean by this?

>>8613046
>it obviously doesn't meant people with legitimate depression
how many people kill themselves without being legitimately depressed, you fucking goof

>>8619833

Two words : Darwin Awards.

>>8619231
>The moment Simone felt justified in abusing a child was the moment feminism as a valid ideology died.
You have the critical thinking skills of a ten year old. There is no logical compulsion to anything you said nor are the things in question even nominally let alone de facto related. You just said some things and then concluded things from it that do not follow at all. Congratulations you are a cancerous growth on the human race.

>>8612937
What's the best edition of this?

>>8617056
This is what people who read the first page and then put it down because "nah, 13 year olds read The Stranger so I shouldn't do this" think his philosophy is

Sartre was intellectually superior to Camus, which isn't saying much. His whole thought is still incredibly childish.

>>8620182
trolled hard

Is it true that he wrote a work arguing against Stirner?

>>8616535

>Muh scientific reductionism
>Doesn't know humans are biologically different from animals and we are no longer programmed to fuck
>wew lad

>>8620598
>humans are no longer programmed to fuck

Yup, I too look back on the days when people had any interest in sex. With all the nightclubs and whorehouses shut down, and young people devoting their entire early lives to serious study, I can hardly remember the time that the idea of sex was thought appealing by anyone.

>>8620556
It's a chapter in The Rebel

>>8620680

I don't see how this refute my point. Aren't you just blinded by your bitterness? Humans no longer being programmed to fuck is a biological reality, not some random opinion.

>Young people

That's always been the case. And yet, look at the pop of this board. Most of them are young (me included) and I suppose they don't visit the nightclubs much.

Also, liking sex ≠ being programmed to fuck. Sex born out of love seems like one of the best thing this world has to offer.

>>8620707

Where exactly are you getting the idea that we aren't programmed to fuck from though? We still have the same animal urges and hormones every other animal has which drives sexual behaviour.

>>8620709

>Human brain has rewired over time to value pleasure over reproduction and other natural urges
>Human constructs are more important than natural ones in today's world
>Literally thousands of sexual behaviors are completely unique to humans
>Thinking love exist for the sole purpose of reproduction is false

There's a section on Durkheim's essay on suicide where he explains this very clearly. There's a perfect graph out there to illustrate what I'm saying but I can't find it.

>>8620689
Whats the gist of the argument, is it any good?

>>8616535
Other anons have already corrected you on Sisyphus, but your argument already has holes.

>You're only alive because you are biologically programmed to do so.
>The ultimate rebellion IS suicide.

But if you can kill yourself then aren't you alive exactly because you choose to be rather than being 'programmed' as you say? If there is a choice, any choice at all, then there can be no such programming. You already contradict yourself by saying suicide is an option, because then, continuing to exist would no longer be part of programming, but a choice as well.

Your argument for programming is already wrong because you acknowledge that you have the freedom to kill yourself. Your logic is self-disproving. Proceeding from there, you were not 'programmed' to survive. You chose to each time. And it is because these choices were meaningless that you find the choice of suicide appealing. Because this is the only choice where you found meaning in 'rebellion' but it is by no means, from your own logic, the only choice. To drive that point, what is a choice if you only have one to choose from?

Ironic that you still found meaning in the world.

>>8619804
Not him, but doing shrooms actually made me way more depressed than I already was, so I wouldn't say it's the best thing to do for a depressed person

>>8612950
camus literally says you should kill yourself if you cannot find reason to live

>>8612937

We know Sisyphus is not fucking happy, but we must imagine him happy anyway.

What Camus is touching on here, is in many ways a precursor to Zizek's 'ideology' - that is, something which we know to be false, but which we go along with anyway because of how it makes us feel to do so.

>>8612950
not even trying to be a dick, but if you actually feel like that why haven't you killed yourself?

i've had 2 friends kill themselves, neither of which ever complained about their lives. The ones who did complain got over it or wrecked their lives but are all still kicking today

I've never been able to wrap my head around posts like these, if you're still here you must have something you think is worthwhile

>>8622635
Why does /lit/ lack basic reading comprehension?

>>8622635
Sisyphus stands in for us and carrying on our meaningless existence. To say that we know Sisyphus is not happy is to say we are not happy which is clearly not true for everyone. Either you have to redefine happiness to mean something other than what Camus means or you have to say everyone lies about their own happiness.

>>8622635
oo so like religion, which is gay as fuck

>>8612937
I am tired of these edgy teenagers who think suicide is a philosophical problem.
Life has no meaning, why should it? Why is this a bad thing? Suppose you were designed and grown to satisfy the sexual desires of a depraved alien species... would this meaning make your life any more pleasant?
Maybe I am just to intelligent for absurdist philosophy...

>>8614259

>It is about accepting your universal fate, the fact that you are here now and will cease to be in due time, no matter what you do in life. So rebel against that fact by at least living life to the fullest of your capabilities. By that Camus doesn't just mean a qualitative life, but also the quantiative accumulation of experiences (that whole Don Juan-section in the book). Physical suicide would be like giving up, while turning to religion for consolation also equals suicide (intellectual suicide to be exact).

You know, you could have just written #YOLO instead, and it would have summarized it even better.

Camus is definitely the shittiest "philosopher" of all time.

>>8614259
Hello,

I've noticed (through the nature of your comment) that you have actually read the book and understand it beyond the autismic level. If this is true I must, at this point, remind you that this is /lit/ and this kind of reasonable and informed reply is rarely welcome here.

So why haven't you killed yourself? If you had done it a week ago we wouldn't have to endure this shitty thread.

TL;DR: Kill yourself.

>>8614542
>>8614962
>>8615130
>>8615184
>>>861
>>8615577
>>8617872
>>8623408

Redditesque horror.

I know, Camus is so fucking bad, right? Like wow, what a shitty writer. Holy fuck, Nobel Prize? Only stoners and idiots like him. What a loser.

>>8614259
>accept your fate
>"rebel" by trying to enjoy it
Said the slave owner to his property.

>>8623474
If Camus uses language like fate then it is meant at an ontological level. Being a slave would not be someones fate anymore than being a grocery boy, a politician or even a slave owner. Protip; reading the book you are criticizing is usually a good place to start.

My knowledge of psychology overturns Camus.
'Absurdism' only makes sense when you live in a world of constant mystery that you never explore. Once you need to eat, or drink things get dire really quick. If you can sit on your porch smoking a cigarette all day, then you can sit and worry about life. Because you're not hungry.

>>8623589
How did you even come to this conclusion? Did you read the book?

>when you live in a world of constant mystery that you never explore
This has nothing to do with Absurdism.

>Once you need to eat, or drink things get dire really quick
And this refutes Absurdism how?

>then you can sit and worry about life
That's not what Absurdism is.

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with this board? I don't remember people always being this bad at a basic reading of a book.

File: 1437278612972.jpg (190KB, 573x654px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 573x654px

>>8616823
>Spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars to fly to Shit-to-Death, South America to chill with shamans and shit so you can learn how to live

>>8616535
You want to commit suicide because you've failed your biological instincts, not because they've failed you.

I fucking hate how the pseuds that praise scientism always know fuck all about the 'biological incentives' for life too. If you did a MINUTE of research into this, you'd realise that intersubjective recognition (whether tribal [national or familial] or individual) is as much if not more of a drive than continuation of your genes, which is more of a drive than 'fear of death'

Whatever your head's so far up your ass you think suicide's the answer so just do it senpai

>>8620598
>humans are biologically different from animals
>being this deluded