Are we like Sisyphus? : What Camus philosophy of the absurd tells us about our human existence

This essay is an attempt to understand what Albert Camus philosophy of the absurd entails, using the figure of Sisyphus in The myth of Sisyphus as a reference. We all face the absurd: the discordance that results from the confrontation of the human longing for the absolute with the worlds non-absolute character. Camus illustrates this condition with Sisyphus among other “absurd heroes”. But what does he want to tell us about our existence with this metaphor? Is life a punishment? Or is it completely indifferent as Sisyphus improbable happiness might indicate? And how can Sisyphus represent us although he is not mortal in the original myth? In order to answer these questions, I investigate the following aspects of the absurd in this essay: what it tells us about the human condition or even the human nature; if it entails a life in indifference; how it is related to finitude; and finally in which sense Sisyphus is an adequate analogy for our existence. My analysis is a combination of an in-depth study of Camus book and a critical discussion of the commentaries of Robert C. Solomon, Arnaud Corbic, and Avi Sagi on The myth of Sisyphus. I conclude that the image of Sisyphus contains some inconsistencies, but that its main goal is to illustrate the constant act of balance, the conscious effort that never reaches its goal which life is for Camus. Such a life does however not need to be dark or indifferent, but rather on the contrary is an authentic life in knowledge of one’s boundaries and possibilities, a life where finitude highlights the value of what it restrains, a life worth living despite its difficulties. While arguing for this reading of Camus, I also attempt to show how this philosophy of the absurd already contains key elements of an ethical position which according to a common view on Camus only appears in his later works.