Live in 2016: a rebirth of Albert Camus
During the last week, some questions are frequently encountered
: Should we change our perception of life ? Is changing our way of life by Attacks
on Paris? Is building a new philosophy ? Should we change or not? If you saw the
reactions of Medias, they give the right and the opportunity for people to
talk, explain their feelings and issues. No matter if some reactions were
unreasonable, it seems that these issues are legitimate. And the latest issue of
a philosophical mag is obviously about this topic. It’s not a post to criticize
this article, but rather to discuss about a possible connection between the
life on the end of 2015 and vision of Albert Camus.
At the end of the year, work of Albert
Camus continues to be timely. First of all, the way of life that concerns
everybody is changing due to the magnitude of these events. On a certain way,
people become aware of new conflict. They discover that new ideologies have
violent ends. It doesn’t mean that we didn’t know the radicalization process,
or that it’s a new phenomenon. On the contrary, it seems that people imagine it
in other countries but not in a bar, or show, just below their flats. For this
reason, if we don’t try to understand this form of terrorism, we live with something
far bigger than ourselves. And here we’re. Because it’s not simple to get into
heads of killers and young men’s, and because we can’t give meaning to this without
a lot of things – sociological facts, history… - we have no answer. Therefore, if we talk about
the action of ISIS to kill, but especially the strictest sens of it, there is
resentment. When Albert Camus explains it, he says that the man of resentment have
one will : destroy the world by the violence, with it causing suffering, in the
spirit of vengeance. This spirit gives birth to resentment. Maybe a part of new
terrorists want to give meaning in their life, to give answer to the absurdity
of life In “L’Homme Révolté”, Camus explains that men (in absurd world) does
not accept divines prospects, but humans answers.
“Better to die standing than to live on
your knees”. After this aspect about resentment, we must pay attention to the
answer of Camus. If we can keep in mind one idea : I would say that there are
two choices. Contrary to the suicide, we might revolt. During his life, Camus
was engaged against inequity and injustice. If he was with us nowadays, he would
probably write that our duty is to stay revolt.
However, revolt is not
revolution. And revolt is not resentment. Actually, the goal of revolt is not
to take the power, but to express freely that men and women who try to disturb
our values of liberty, and try to give answer to the part of absurdity in life
will not be able to success. That’s why revolt is not revolution. On the other
hand a man who says “no” is not going to say “I don’t want to live with
absurdity of the life”. So, revolt is not resentment. Thus, it’s our duty to
pay attention on political issues, on attempts to divise us, and become revolt
against any form of ideological violence under the pretext that a religion is
better than another or any other reason of course.
Finally, Camus’ philosophy helps us to
take a step back, and to understand what we live nowadays. Even if we try to
get back to a quiet life, I believe that there will be changes. But the
question is now to choose the way of this changing. Should we live in fear of
everybody, or should we make the necessary to make actions and revolt (without
taking candles on places of memory…) to defend our life, our values ? What do
you think will attacks change citizens, or should we make on contrary the necessary
to change views and resentment?
Hi there Maxime, i found your post very intriguing and thought that making a relation with the last events that happend here in Paris was very accurate. My question is if we can revolt in a quiet life? How would you revolt nowadays in Paris?
ReplyDeleteHi Lucia, Thank you for your comments. To be honest, it's difficult to make precisions about it, but I'm convinced that we can revolt nowadays in Paris if someone have racists convictions, or if you know people who are in an dangerous borderline, we have to discuss, and to explain why it is foolish. On the other hand, we have to be revolt against politics if they don't respect human rights, obviously
DeleteIn my opinion, these terrible attacks have changed our comportments. The question is not to know if we should change or not, because for me, we have changed at the moment we heard about these terrorist atrocities. Today we can feel that people are more worried in the street, the slightest noise makes them jump, they seem suspicious when they see someone acting weird, etc. But more than ever, I think it is crucial to protect our freedom against insane people who want us to change our way of live. We must not yield to the fear. We have to live like we were used to, and we have to keep in mind that by doing this, we are revolting (we protect our freedom). Moreover, we have to be vigilant to not let hate, mistrust, or paranoia changing us and deteriorating relationships inside our society. Because If we did that, we would give up a part of our freedom and Daech would have won.
ReplyDeleteHello Maxime,
ReplyDeleteI think it can be very interesting to try to analyse the recent attacks through Camus. Actually I believe that it is always philosophy is always useful to analyse the events of our lives.
However, I was a bit confused about your point on resentment. In your opinion, the terrorist's acts are the product of resentment. So it would be a way for them to cope with the absurdity of life ?
And Camus would suggest to turn rather toward revolt instead of resentment, right ?
The frontier might seem tiny. Indeed, don't you believe that the terrorists would answer that they are in revolt ?
I don't know if I understood you well, but there, Camus' analysis doesn't seem enough, as I see it. At least to understand/explain the terrorist's behaviours.
Hi Anna !
DeleteI understand your comments and will try to be more clearly. To be meticulous, according to Camus the revolt doesn't implies notion of scorn or aversion. Instead of the revolt, the resentment is a result of scorn and aversion, and people who don't want to live with any kind of absurdity. Actually, the goal is not to explain the terrorist's behaviours because it was very long and we must take into account some geopolitical issues. Yet, I'm convinced that some young people become open to radicalism because they developping feeling of scorn and aversion. Finally, Marx said that a revolutionnary man wants to transform the world, althouh the revolt have to change the life... (2nd point by Rimbaud)
Hi Maxim !
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful idea : Revolt or kill yourself. And I'm not even ironic.
While I comment the threat is no longer Daesh but FN.
Let's be moving. I think that revolt is about act. Suicide is about past, or at least be passive. Suicide is getting stuck in the past, in a frozen image. Suicide is letting yourself die. Because all philosophers we studied, talked about it, absurdity of life, despair and suicide in the end.
You must be a poet, revolt is not revolution. Revolt against suicide.
Thanks, I love these ideas.
(Revolt includes love, that's what we should do)
Clem
Hi Clem,
DeleteWhat can I say ? You get it ! I support you ! Good point Clem, 'I'm lovin it' !