Extremely happy to have found your lectures. Thank you for taking the time to make these videos. On a side note, I like that you're adding the secular inclusion to philosophical suicide.
Secular philosophical suicide made me realize I had not really understood Camus. This professor explains everything extremely well. I love that he has a degree in exact sciences and some other degrees in social sciences, which makes it a lot more encouraging to me, an engineering student, to keep learning about philosophy.
"... what counts is not the best living but the most living." Camus loads a conditional clause prior to this, then he ends it with this. It makes total sense to me because (and I could certainly be wrong), IF we are to allow ourselves to become enchanted with the "Flame of life" and with every present moment, then it would seem necessary to experience as many "moments' as possible. i.e. most living. "Best living" sounds, to me, to invest in great experiences and occasionally missing the moment, whereas if we're to fall in love with the mundane, everyday moments, then we will have missed no opportunity to experience all that life has to offer.
Excellent point. I think "best living" involves some kind of valuing of certain lived experiences as being "better" than others, a sort of hierarchy of experiences, where some are "better" than others. Focusing on the "most" living involves expanding the sphere of moments that we find as important in life to include as many experiences as possible, eventually the whole of life and every possible moment. Since we have a limited amount of time, what counts is not getting to experience the "best" moments, but getting to the state of experiencing each moment as what really "counts" in life.
Mr. Dodson, thank you for making your videos public. This is the second one I’m listening to. Suffered from depression for decades, and as a logical person never could find an answer. Your lectures are very helpful to me. Thank you very much,
Wow... I didn't think that these lectures would be that entertaining. But I'm glad that they are, at least for you. Eric D. P.S. Oops... I wrote this comment from my other channel. Sorry.
Sir I guess you ve no idea how many how far round the clock( due difference in time zones) among diverse cultures/ nations … are engaged watching educating enlightened learning from your these on line lectures …!! Thanks appreciated and gratitude for these and you Sir..!!
I had a laugh out loud moment when you were describing how the absurd man might treat prison. The imagery it conjured up was superb, so thanks for that. Brilliant
It's always interesting to confirm that "fancy words" for the English speakers are usually the ones with Latin roots, and when it comes to Romance languages, it seems to be the other way around. He says "aleatory" and that instantly clicks in my mind as "aleatório" (random, in Portuguese). The fancy term in my native language would be "randômico".
Thank you so much for posting these. I don’t go to your school but I found myself reading philosophy lately and your videos give context and depth to the topics. Appreciate it very much.
I found these lectures quite by accident. I had read a blurb or 2 years earlier by Albert Camus and wanted to know a little bit more without having to read a book length treatuse. So when I found these lectures I hit the jackpot. Many golden nuggets of philosophy in here including "Real life is not What we want it to be"
Brilliant lectures. Thank you. I'm now much more knowledgeable about the concept of absurdity. Good wishes from the coronavirus champions of Europe. Stay safe.
I am a screenplay writer and I found your videos really helpful in terms of making a good screenplay ... I recommend the movie crime and misdemeanors it totally fits Albert Camus philosophy
Thank you for these comprehensive lectures! I love Camus philosophy. He has always spoke to me in a way that I can relate to in everyday life. Nature will not answer to the human condition and does not provide a consistent paradigm to follow. We will continue to experience hopelessness and randomness in our life, much to our misguided leaders that have persuaded us otherwise.
Good afternoon Eric, I hope all is well. I am very pleased to find your channel, I like your explanations and trust your style of teaching and your experience and knowledge is refreshing in an online world of hyper reality. A little about myself, I have read works by Camus many years ago with The Outsider being a favourite for some time, I’ve also read the plague. It’s interesting to pin point from your 3 part discussions Camus thoughts and more precise points. The idea of the absurdity of life has helped me with my anxiety. I have recently stopped drinking as I was an alcoholic and entered into therapy which amounted to a whole lot of talking and little new insights. I myself have been guilty of philosophical suicide binge watching Netflix and drinking to excess to numb anxiety. Luckily I’ve really decided to get myself in check with a multi faceted approach to living as my old ways simply are not working for me. One of my calls to action is to study philosophy. After watching this final 1 of 3 I wonder now who to know delve into, perhaps you can advise on this? Many thanks
I really appreciate your help with the section on Camus. It provided me with a better understanding and served as a helpful introduction to reading "The Rebel." You're just a rock star!
I don't understand how you could enjoy the place you are in without accepting it. The prisoner had to accept his situation and see the positives to be able to enjoy his place.
Well, it's mostly about finding a way experiencing enjoyment that passes beyond the common ways we have of thinking about its essential nature. For instance, haven't you ever experienced joy in rebelling against something, even you still refused to accept it? In other words... who says that we can't *enjoy* the sensation of defiantly refusing to accept something? Who says that every act of defiance has to be governed by emotions like anger, depression, disgust, misery, etc.? And if you *have* experienced joy in rebellion... well, what's stopping you from applying that same basic logic to life itself?
@@EricDodsonLectures Good point, but I honestly can't think of a moment in which I could enjoy rebellion without some negative feeling also being present. But it's possible I guess. Personally I just find most enjoyment in a peaceful mind at the moment and rebellion doesn't fit so well into a peaceful state.
Thank you for your explanation of Albert Camus. I collected about 10 books about his filosophy which are all quite good but not so easy always to understand. One book is quite a very good book, written by Dr Hans Achterhuis in 1969 ‘de moed om mens te zijn’ = the courage to be a human. I can recoomend that book but do not know if it is published in english. Thank you Eric👍
Understanding this will help me have more fruitful conversations with one another regarding the dire implications of climate change and how one might act to face the leviathan that awaits us
Wish I had a teacher like this when I took Philosophy 101 years ago. The guy that was supposed to be a teacher was so disgusted with those in the class (100%) because they (myself included) did not have a starting point. He was all hung up on Hegel. Anyway, a complete waste of time on the part of those there to learn. He didn't even show up for class half the time. Complete disdain and contempt for students. From listening to several vids now of Professor Dodson, I cannot imagine an attitude like this for his students.
How is The Absurd not just another grand narrative? I don’t deny the absurdity and I’m grateful for these lectures, because I needed these experiences. I was missing The Absurd from my framework. And I see the absurdity of “life” just not caring about us, even if we make meaning of our own circumstances. And maybe it’s a problem with our language. Maybe our language, or language itself, doesn’t let us say it in a way that isn’t a narrative? I guess what I’m asking is, even though he generated a whole new school of thought that was a defining narrative about the universe and it’s absurdity, he still didn’t get away from needing a belief system that was larger than himself to lean on when he was troubled. He leaned on The Absurd. How is that not still philosophical suicide?
The absurd isn’t a belief system, it’s a conflict between our want for meaning, and the lack of any such meaning. It’s a narrative as much as describing an emotion like sadness is a narrative. His response to the absurd, revolt, is maybe what you’re talking about. What I would say is: revolt is a narrative, and maybe a grand one, but that’s not the point. Camus didn’t argue against grand narratives, he argued against narratives that removed either side of the absurd equation, and he believed his narrative was best because it keeps absurdity central to experience.
Great lectures on Camus. The fallacy in Camus' philosophy is while he recognizes the absurdity of existence, he contradicts himself by suggesting there is a correct response to life, namely existential defiance. If life is indeed absurd, there is neither right or wrong way to respond to it, and any response to life would have to be similarly absurd (suicide, philosophical suicide, existential defiance, or nothing whatever).
Well Camus defines absurdity as the conflict between human desire and the irrational. In that sense, there would be a correct way to respond to the irrational, IF one wants to keep the absurd in view.
@@paulblart8568 That's precisely the contradiction in his definition of absurdity. If the existence itself is absurd, then there's no room for human rationality. A human being is as much a part of existence as everything else, and is governed by the same absurdity.
The whole premise behind Camus' philosophy is that the absurd only manifests itself as the conflict BETWEEN human rationality and the irrational of the universe. Without either of those parts the absurd disappears. That's why leaps of faith cause the absurd to disappear; They remove either of the necessary parts required. Here, we're talking specifically about natural human desire and want for meaning. It's something that Camus recognizes and talks about extensively. If we remove human rationality from the equation, that constitutes a leap of faith itself. In essence, revolt is the only correct response IF you want to keep the absurd in view because revolt recognizes the revoltee (human desire for meaning) and the revolted (the irrationality of the universe). This revolt itself can take an infinite amount of forms though, as long as the revolted is kept in view.@@AT-py5dy
@@paulblart8568 I understand Camus' premise, and that's precisely what I'm questioning. The so called conflict between human reasoning and the meaninglessness of the universe is a flawed concept. In fact, the human brain naturally arises out of the universe, and is not a separate entity. It doesn't exist outside the universe, hence cannot study the latter objectively. Really, the idea that humans have the choice and freedom to interact freely with the rest of the universe is an illusion. Believing otherwise gives rise to absurdity.
I believe I see your point, but I still think you're missing a vital aspect of what Camus is saying and of exactly what he's describing. To preface, I think we're using the term "universe" in different ways here. I was using it in the sense of: everything outside human consciousness, essentially as a stand-in for irrationality. I believe you were using it as (correct me if I'm wrong): The physical universe, i.e. the stars, Earth, chairs, the human brain. I'll use your definition for this comment. Firstly, I don't think Camus would argue that the brain is a construct outside the universe, or that consciousness is either. Exactly what he is saying is that consciousness has aspects to it that tries to transcend irrationality, but that it can't, precisely *because* it is a part of the universe. I also don't think he's claiming that consciousness is studying the universe objectively either. All he is saying is that routinely in life, we have experiences that just do not make sense to us. Things that happen at random, or horrible things just.... happen, and we as humans have the tendency to attribute these random things to an outside power that reasons just like us (as one example). Finally, to your point that humans do not have choice and freedom, I think I would have to agree that there at least is a great deal of things outside our control that dictate what we do, but I would also have to say, even if free will is an illusion, that doesn't change how we interact with it. We still have to believe that we have the autonomy to choose and change, otherwise nothing new gets done, written, or made. @@AT-py5dy
The only problem though, Professor Eric, is that hope is so ingrained in us that we have some level of "hope" even in the most trivial tasks we carry out. Let alone the big desires of life. Letting go of it seems almost antithetical to living in an inherently meaningless world.
Thank you professor for sharing your wonderful lecture. It has been life changing for me, especially the concept of secular philosophical suicide. I’d like to understand better the concept of best life versus most life as you explained from this book.
The new hat will make its appearance soon with a series of videos about Friedrich Nietzsche, with whom you are evidently familiar. First I have to finish a video for my other channel, though. Anyhow, thanks for watching & commenting. Eric D.
Oops... thanks for noticing that. I probably didn't remember to click the playlist button when I uploaded. Anyhow, the playlist should be complete. Gratitude! Eric D.
I am not so quick to write off hope as nonessential. One can grant that there is a great deal of randomness built into the structure of reality and still legitimately hope to end up on the upside a given spectrum of outcomes. That is to say, one can derive value from hope without treating hope as an ontological category.
Bij een onderzoek naar de aard van muziek hoort natuurlijk een stevige brok rock,of blues or whever klassic music there is around.Owow wow stop for a few minutes,gotta turn back sombody wan't to pull my ears,I canott say who but I tink that is clear.I want some coffee and then We go onn in the book and find some arguments wich we need ,now I have to smoke a little...Waarvan akte...This is clear, Donna...Let's go...
@Eric Doson Lectures, I didn't understand when you first said "Not accepting it, or the Existential Defiance". For me "Acceptance" has been answer to everything irrespective of the context. Assuming that we are put in here by a "Good God" who wants us to live happily, we should accept it find happiness and be happy about everything. This will make him/her happy and we will also be happy because we got to make him happy. But let's say we are put in here by a "Bad God" or "Devil" who wants us to suffer here, We should still accept it and find happiness and be happy about everything. This will make him/her unhappy , and that's what we want.
22:24 just guessed happy because of L'etranger, guess Im right? Ok. So it's bezt if we have a goo- You know? Philosophy actually lets you go round and round, then at the finish line tells you 'ignore all that and just viBeee'. Philosophy just lets you escape and understand cultural and religious institutions and struxtures/ideas better. It kind of just sets you back in a way, and you have wisdom that can help you not get stuck or control in what ideology you land atleast.
I am confused, acceptance and defiance is something about belief, and this is exactly what was countered when we started to look the absurdity straight in the eye away from ready-made answers ? As Krishnamurti had said, "There is no place for belief, where truth is concerned", then how can one be defiant of it? How can one not accept this absurdity ? I am just a temporary stage in this history of universe going back to a billion years, to be defiant is just another form of escapism from real reality isnt it ? And that doesnt mean i dont enjoy myself, i enjoy try to enjoy my life as much as i can, but thats cuz i realized the "rarity" of it, its like a little miracle, and just because it doesnt matter at all isnt a reason for me to not do anything if it makes me "feel" good and happy ? What do you think sir ?
There is a matter of victims that are valuable for the State. People die out of starvation. Every year. Coronavirus attacks diabetic and high blood pressure victims like lightning strike. Other diseases do the same. Stray strong.
Finding happiness in the midst of revolt probably becomes comprehensible only insofar as you're aware of having experienced it. In other words, it's not so much a matter of explaining how it can happen, but of recognizing and remembering what it feels like when it has occurred in your life. Practicing meditative consciousness can help with that process. However, at first it's probably easier to reflect upon a relatively small and transient experience... some moment or situation in your life when you found yourself revolting against something, but also experienced a peculiar kind of happiness at the same time. However, that happiness probably isn't the same as happiness in the usual sense of the word...
Goed Liefde &Muziek zal het dus worden en laat ons starten met Begeerte&muziek wat is daar de samenhang van?In de interacie tussen beide zouden we eerst kunnen vragen wat er het eerst is begeerte of muziek?I gotta go now and have some smoke first...Voor ze mij bij de kraag vatten zoals Lieve zei...Ik ga dat niet afwachten maar doen wat ik moet doen...Tot later...Dionne ...
I am learning a lot from your lectures, ERIC. I would only say that this video has not aged so well because of your comments regarding the coronavirus. Five months later we have nearly 200,000 Americans dead, a great many more than the common flu and that despite months of quarantine and mask wearing. The fears about coronavirus, in other words, we’re not just the usual ones resulting from randomness, But rather those resulting from listening directly to the science. The science told us this thing was super dangerous and some of us listened. It is interesting, however, to notice that those who were most not wanting to hear the science, not wanting to adhere to social distancing and mask wearing, have been those in the religious community who are, as Camus would say, committing philosophical suicide intensively on a daily basis.
Critiquing after the fact looks a bit like you’re searching for soapboxes to stand on. Nothing he said was against the science or circumstances at the time of filming, and he was just trying to provide a real world example. The video is superb, just like the rest of this series.
@@jake2480 Yes, the video is superb, just like the rest of the series, but I do think Eric was being a little premature regarding the number of deaths from Covid.
Well coming from 2 years later, you can kinda see that he was right in a way that it turned out to be a thing nearly not as devastating as it might have been seen around the time you wrote this comment :) So honestly I think his assessment of the virus and the reference to its randomness seem much closer to the truth now to me compared to for example the level of importance you gave to it in your comment. And don't get me wrong, I thought exactly like you did back then too. It's impossible not to make something a bigger deal than it is when everyone and everything around you basically are obsessing with it.
Lots of unexplained deaths and blood clots lately. Our grandkids will find out a closer truth to what really happened. No transparency whatsoever to see the actual facts. The whole thing stunk from the beginning and I cannot believe how malleable peoples’ psyches are to blindly follow authority all the way to their death.
Well, up until recently, it was the University of West Georgia. But thanks to the Corona Apocalypse & ensuing financial chaos... I'm now retired. Anyhow, I'm glad that you're enjoying these videos. You might also enjoy my main channel. Here's a link if you want to give it a try: czcams.com/channels/r8ziBzqZlGAvv4krfAAORQ.html
This may be somewhat peripheral to the lecture but I was wondering if you can tell me what Camus’s thoughts on morality are considering that his views are based on an atheistic or agnostic slant. The contention being that morality seems to be grounded in religion therefore would he be more apt to agree with moral relativism Or possibly that there is no morality and that everyone must make up their own decision on how they should act?
I had an honest question about Albert Camus's view on morality. I stated nothing about my belief. Since my view is being inferred from my question I will respond. I believe that morality need not be grounded in religion or any organized collective mindset. I believe that the individual has the ability to decide what is "moral" but I don't believe that morality is objective or universal in every situation. As for my question it was nothing more than that..a question
Question please. Is Camus saying , when you believe in something , part of you dies just because you believe in that particular thing ? A philosophical suicide of sorts ...
Your lectures are great, thank you for sharing your knowledge. Do you recommend any further reading, resources, or writers for someone who's learning philosophy on their own as a new hobby?
I don’t get it. Acceptance of the absurd is a form of philosophical suicide, and it’s not what we should do. Instead, we should be defiant about it, and the most defiant thing we can do is to be happy about it. But isn’t that a form of acceptance?
Probably the easiest way of thinking about it is... that Camus is calling for a shift in the meaning of constructs like happiness & acceptance so that they're much more in alignment with existential defiance... and hence much more in alignment with the reality of existence itself. In other words... if we just stick with "happiness" and "acceptance" the way we usually think about them, then Camus's point will probably just seem like nonsensical gibberish.
@@EricDodsonLectures Thank you so much for the reply! However, unfortunately it still doesn’t make sense to me. I guess, I would need to study Camus more to better understand it. The problem with shifting the meaning of happiness is that then is it really happiness what Camus means? If yes, his logic is problematic. If not, then that raises a lot of questions too. E.g., are there different kinds of happiness? What are they? Or if it’s not really happiness, then what is it exactly? But again, I would probably need to study his philosophy more. Then, I would either understand it, or have the knowledge to criticize it more articulately.
South of no north,The most beautyfull woman in town,Hot water music,Septuagarian stew,Betting the muse,en notes of a dirty old man zijn de korteverhalenbundels van Charles Bukowski die ik moet vinden.Hier in Boechout hebben ze die niet en de Antwerpse bib moet ik ze bestellen wat redelijk wat tijd in beslag neemt.Dat betekent dat ik voorlopig niet verder kan om een onderzoek naar de structuur en onderwerpen van de kortverhalen te doen.Dus zal het Schopenhauer en de aspecten van de muziek worden....Waarvan akte...En verder heb ik nog hoplessness,meaninglessness en randomness om over te leren.Waarvan akte groetjes,Dionne.Die vent lijkt in zekere zin op mij,heeft een baard wit als de mijne,een bril als de mijne,En daar blijkft het waarschijnijk niet bij..Met vriendelijke groeten,Daniël
I´d like to mention some aspekt of interest : philosophy of Camus, Heidegger, Hegel, Nietsche & the other ones, is according to their Time as well as their History. Thus were is .... our own Philosophy , or Modern Philosophy!!? To get aquented with great THINKERS of Time, is a our Gauidence toward Time Trawellers - Family😊
Why is it like though I really like the lecture, I feel rather bored with the unending unbroken stream of talk ? I don't feel like continuing till the end of it...I feel somewhere that it lacks a bit of soul for its utter glibness , which may or may not be a fault of the professor. Ranting off such deep philosophical concepts perhaps requires more in depth and a brooding delivery, I feel.
Perhaps it is because there is no neat resolution to the question being asked and that deep down we want resolution and get bored when we realise we are not going to get it.
Extremely happy to have found your lectures. Thank you for taking the time to make these videos. On a side note, I like that you're adding the secular inclusion to philosophical suicide.
Secular philosophical suicide made me realize I had not really understood Camus. This professor explains everything extremely well. I love that he has a degree in exact sciences and some other degrees in social sciences, which makes it a lot more encouraging to me, an engineering student, to keep learning about philosophy.
"... what counts is not the best living but the most living." Camus loads a conditional clause prior to this, then he ends it with this. It makes total sense to me because (and I could certainly be wrong), IF we are to allow ourselves to become enchanted with the "Flame of life" and with every present moment, then it would seem necessary to experience as many "moments' as possible. i.e. most living. "Best living" sounds, to me, to invest in great experiences and occasionally missing the moment, whereas if we're to fall in love with the mundane, everyday moments, then we will have missed no opportunity to experience all that life has to offer.
Excellent point. I think "best living" involves some kind of valuing of certain lived experiences as being "better" than others, a sort of hierarchy of experiences, where some are "better" than others. Focusing on the "most" living involves expanding the sphere of moments that we find as important in life to include as many experiences as possible, eventually the whole of life and every possible moment. Since we have a limited amount of time, what counts is not getting to experience the "best" moments, but getting to the state of experiencing each moment as what really "counts" in life.
Mr. Dodson, thank you for making your videos public. This is the second one I’m listening to. Suffered from depression for decades, and as a logical person never could find an answer.
Your lectures are very helpful to me.
Thank you very much,
Listening to your lectures is how I'm spending my day offs. :) Thank you for posting!!!
Wow... I didn't think that these lectures would be that entertaining. But I'm glad that they are, at least for you. Eric D. P.S. Oops... I wrote this comment from my other channel. Sorry.
Sir I guess you ve no idea how many how far round the clock( due difference in time zones) among diverse cultures/ nations … are engaged watching educating enlightened learning from your these on line lectures …!! Thanks appreciated and gratitude for these and you Sir..!!
I had a laugh out loud moment when you were describing how the absurd man might treat prison. The imagery it conjured up was superb, so thanks for that. Brilliant
It's always interesting to confirm that "fancy words" for the English speakers are usually the ones with Latin roots, and when it comes to Romance languages, it seems to be the other way around. He says "aleatory" and that instantly clicks in my mind as "aleatório" (random, in Portuguese). The fancy term in my native language would be "randômico".
Neat!
Exactly my brazilian comrade
Thank you sir, your videos are really good for people who are not the formal students of philosophy. Keep making these videos 👍
Thank you so much for posting these. I don’t go to your school but I found myself reading philosophy lately and your videos give context and depth to the topics. Appreciate it very much.
Excellent exposure of Camus' line of thinking and explaining the human condition. You've brought clarity to my reading of The Rebel. Thank you.
This helped understand what the absurd man is about. The jail story was a zinger & is a powerful way to live.
I found these lectures quite by accident. I had read a blurb or 2 years earlier by Albert Camus and wanted to know a little bit more without having to read a book length treatuse. So when I found these lectures I hit the jackpot. Many golden nuggets of philosophy in here including "Real life is not What we want it to be"
Thank you so much for these lectures. I am a trainee in Psychiatry. Your lecture will help me to understand my patients. Respect from Bangladesh.
These lectures are brilliant, learning & realising loads of ‘stuff’....& I’m only 47 😂
I'm 55!!! It's great to learn things we were never exposed to!!! Nice to see you!
54 and learning till I’m gone😎
I'm only 34 I guess I can't combat with you guys 😆👍
I’m 17😐
@@jamesturnbull9266 im 15😩
Brilliant lectures. Thank you. I'm now much more knowledgeable about the concept of absurdity. Good wishes from the coronavirus champions of Europe. Stay safe.
I am a screenplay writer and I found your videos really helpful in terms of making a good screenplay ... I recommend the movie crime and misdemeanors it totally fits Albert Camus philosophy
Random chaos & predatory pestilence are the essence of this dimension in the Universe.
Thank you for these comprehensive lectures! I love Camus philosophy. He has always spoke to me in a way that I can relate to in everyday life. Nature will not answer to the human condition and does not provide a consistent paradigm to follow. We will continue to experience hopelessness and randomness in our life, much to our misguided leaders that have persuaded us otherwise.
Good afternoon Eric, I hope all is well.
I am very pleased to find your channel, I like your explanations and trust your style of teaching and your experience and knowledge is refreshing in an online world of hyper reality.
A little about myself, I have read works by Camus many years ago with The Outsider being a favourite for some time, I’ve also read the plague. It’s interesting to pin point from your 3 part discussions Camus thoughts and more precise points. The idea of the absurdity of life has helped me with my anxiety. I have recently stopped drinking as I was an alcoholic and entered into therapy which amounted to a whole lot of talking and little new insights. I myself have been guilty of philosophical suicide binge watching Netflix and drinking to excess to numb anxiety. Luckily I’ve really decided to get myself in check with a multi faceted approach to living as my old ways simply are not working for me. One of my calls to action is to study philosophy. After watching this final 1 of 3 I wonder now who to know delve into, perhaps you can advise on this? Many thanks
After watching this final 1 of 3 I wonder now whose teachings I should delve into, perhaps you can advise on this? Many thanks
I really appreciate your help with the section on Camus. It provided me with a better understanding and served as a helpful introduction to reading "The Rebel." You're just a rock star!
I don't understand how you could enjoy the place you are in without accepting it. The prisoner had to accept his situation and see the positives to be able to enjoy his place.
Well, it's mostly about finding a way experiencing enjoyment that passes beyond the common ways we have of thinking about its essential nature. For instance, haven't you ever experienced joy in rebelling against something, even you still refused to accept it? In other words... who says that we can't *enjoy* the sensation of defiantly refusing to accept something? Who says that every act of defiance has to be governed by emotions like anger, depression, disgust, misery, etc.? And if you *have* experienced joy in rebellion... well, what's stopping you from applying that same basic logic to life itself?
@@EricDodsonLectures Good point, but I honestly can't think of a moment in which I could enjoy rebellion without some negative feeling also being present. But it's possible I guess. Personally I just find most enjoyment in a peaceful mind at the moment and rebellion doesn't fit so well into a peaceful state.
Attitude is also key.
One of the most enlightening lectures of all times.
Existential defiance!. Yes! Like Steve McQueen as Papillion . Makes a lot of sense!!
Thank you for your explanation of Albert Camus. I collected about 10 books about his filosophy which are all quite good but not so easy always to understand.
One book is quite a very good book, written by Dr Hans Achterhuis in 1969 ‘de moed om mens te zijn’ = the courage to be a human. I can recoomend that book but do not know if it is published in english. Thank you Eric👍
Moral of the story: Living well is the best revenge.
Understanding this will help me have more fruitful conversations with one another regarding the dire implications of climate change and how one might act to face the leviathan that awaits us
Wish I had a teacher like this when I took Philosophy 101 years ago. The guy that was supposed to be a teacher was so disgusted with those in the class (100%) because they (myself included) did not have a starting point. He was all hung up on Hegel. Anyway, a complete waste of time on the part of those there to learn. He didn't even show up for class half the time. Complete disdain and contempt for students. From listening to several vids now of Professor Dodson, I cannot imagine an attitude like this for his students.
“Hoffnung ist ein Seil auf dem viele Narren tanzen” (hope is a high rope many fools dance on. German proverb.
Thank you for your great lectures.
Once again, I recommend “the last messiah” by Peter wessel zapffe. Fantastic essay from 1933
Thanks again for these lectures. They're helping me along the path of learning more about absurdism.
this is helping me a lot in my exploration of the philosophy which I might probably connect a lot with
I don’t take your classes but I am so grateful to have found them on CZcams ..
Thank you so much .
How is The Absurd not just another grand narrative?
I don’t deny the absurdity and I’m grateful for these lectures, because I needed these experiences. I was missing The Absurd from my framework.
And I see the absurdity of “life” just not caring about us, even if we make meaning of our own circumstances. And maybe it’s a problem with our language. Maybe our language, or language itself, doesn’t let us say it in a way that isn’t a narrative?
I guess what I’m asking is, even though he generated a whole new school of thought that was a defining narrative about the universe and it’s absurdity, he still didn’t get away from needing a belief system that was larger than himself to lean on when he was troubled. He leaned on The Absurd. How is that not still philosophical suicide?
The absurd isn’t a belief system, it’s a conflict between our want for meaning, and the lack of any such meaning. It’s a narrative as much as describing an emotion like sadness is a narrative. His response to the absurd, revolt, is maybe what you’re talking about. What I would say is: revolt is a narrative, and maybe a grand one, but that’s not the point. Camus didn’t argue against grand narratives, he argued against narratives that removed either side of the absurd equation, and he believed his narrative was best because it keeps absurdity central to experience.
I’m big fan of you now! Your language is so vivid !!! Such pleasure to listen👏🏼thank you, professor!
Great lectures on Camus. The fallacy in Camus' philosophy is while he recognizes the absurdity of existence, he contradicts himself by suggesting there is a correct response to life, namely existential defiance. If life is indeed absurd, there is neither right or wrong way to respond to it, and any response to life would have to be similarly absurd (suicide, philosophical suicide, existential defiance, or nothing whatever).
Well Camus defines absurdity as the conflict between human desire and the irrational. In that sense, there would be a correct way to respond to the irrational, IF one wants to keep the absurd in view.
@@paulblart8568 That's precisely the contradiction in his definition of absurdity. If the existence itself is absurd, then there's no room for human rationality. A human being is as much a part of existence as everything else, and is governed by the same absurdity.
The whole premise behind Camus' philosophy is that the absurd only manifests itself as the conflict BETWEEN human rationality and the irrational of the universe. Without either of those parts the absurd disappears. That's why leaps of faith cause the absurd to disappear; They remove either of the necessary parts required. Here, we're talking specifically about natural human desire and want for meaning. It's something that Camus recognizes and talks about extensively. If we remove human rationality from the equation, that constitutes a leap of faith itself. In essence, revolt is the only correct response IF you want to keep the absurd in view because revolt recognizes the revoltee (human desire for meaning) and the revolted (the irrationality of the universe). This revolt itself can take an infinite amount of forms though, as long as the revolted is kept in view.@@AT-py5dy
@@paulblart8568 I understand Camus' premise, and that's precisely what I'm questioning. The so called conflict between human reasoning and the meaninglessness of the universe is a flawed concept. In fact, the human brain naturally arises out of the universe, and is not a separate entity. It doesn't exist outside the universe, hence cannot study the latter objectively. Really, the idea that humans have the choice and freedom to interact freely with the rest of the universe is an illusion. Believing otherwise gives rise to absurdity.
I believe I see your point, but I still think you're missing a vital aspect of what Camus is saying and of exactly what he's describing. To preface, I think we're using the term "universe" in different ways here. I was using it in the sense of: everything outside human consciousness, essentially as a stand-in for irrationality. I believe you were using it as (correct me if I'm wrong): The physical universe, i.e. the stars, Earth, chairs, the human brain. I'll use your definition for this comment. Firstly, I don't think Camus would argue that the brain is a construct outside the universe, or that consciousness is either. Exactly what he is saying is that consciousness has aspects to it that tries to transcend irrationality, but that it can't, precisely *because* it is a part of the universe. I also don't think he's claiming that consciousness is studying the universe objectively either. All he is saying is that routinely in life, we have experiences that just do not make sense to us. Things that happen at random, or horrible things just.... happen, and we as humans have the tendency to attribute these random things to an outside power that reasons just like us (as one example). Finally, to your point that humans do not have choice and freedom, I think I would have to agree that there at least is a great deal of things outside our control that dictate what we do, but I would also have to say, even if free will is an illusion, that doesn't change how we interact with it. We still have to believe that we have the autonomy to choose and change, otherwise nothing new gets done, written, or made. @@AT-py5dy
The only problem though, Professor Eric, is that hope is so ingrained in us that we have some level of "hope" even in the most trivial tasks we carry out. Let alone the big desires of life. Letting go of it seems almost antithetical to living in an inherently meaningless world.
your way of talking and explaining is very pleasant to listen to
Thank you professor for sharing your wonderful lecture. It has been life changing for me, especially the concept of secular philosophical suicide. I’d like to understand better the concept of best life versus most life as you explained from this book.
your channel is so underrated
Awesome series, thanks for this
More talk show impersonations please 😂 I appreciate these lectures and the fact that you bring some levity to the topic.
Great thought provoking stuff
I am going to miss your lectures.
Love the content and hat updates haha keep them coming!
- lots of love from Singapore -
Thank u very much, waiting for new hat
The new hat will make its appearance soon with a series of videos about Friedrich Nietzsche, with whom you are evidently familiar. First I have to finish a video for my other channel, though. Anyhow, thanks for watching & commenting. Eric D.
As a Brazillian dude listening to your lectures, most word you call fancy, I just call normal hehehe
I wish I had lectures like these in my college. Thank you!
Well-spoken and incredibly thoughtful. Thank you for these lecture series, they make engaging his material a lot easier!
Hi Professor, just a suggestion. Please add Lecture 4 video to Camus' playlist so the series is complete.
Oops... thanks for noticing that. I probably didn't remember to click the playlist button when I uploaded. Anyhow, the playlist should be complete. Gratitude! Eric D.
do you post your notes somewhere for us to read?
Thank you for your work. Seriously. You are beloved, dude.
Victor frankl if i am not wrong was a psychiatrist not a psychologist.
I love these lectures. Thank you!
I am not so quick to write off hope as nonessential. One can grant that there is a great deal of randomness built into the structure of reality and still legitimately hope to end up on the upside a given spectrum of outcomes. That is to say, one can derive value from hope without treating hope as an ontological category.
Its beyond any syllabus..
Such a great explanation, thank you sir.
That's absolutely absurd, thank you so much for the lectures 😁
Bij een onderzoek naar de aard van muziek hoort natuurlijk een stevige brok rock,of blues or whever klassic music there is around.Owow wow stop for a few minutes,gotta turn back sombody wan't to pull my ears,I canott say who but I tink that is clear.I want some coffee and then We go onn in the book and find some arguments wich we need ,now I have to smoke a little...Waarvan akte...This is clear, Donna...Let's go...
Good that Ive read Stranger and Plague..
Awesome lecture!! Thank you professor!!
@Eric Doson Lectures, I didn't understand when you first said "Not accepting it, or the Existential Defiance". For me "Acceptance" has been answer to everything irrespective of the context. Assuming that we are put in here by a "Good God" who wants us to live happily, we should accept it find happiness and be happy about everything. This will make him/her happy and we will also be happy because we got to make him happy. But let's say we are put in here by a "Bad God" or "Devil" who wants us to suffer here, We should still accept it and find happiness and be happy about everything. This will make him/her unhappy , and that's what we want.
All the time I was thinking that one must accept the existence of The Absurd
I listen to your lectures at the gym 😂
Ha ha... I never imagined that anyone would do that. Well, I hope that these lectures enhance your pumpitudinousness.
I do too and it works better than music😂
22:24 just guessed happy because of L'etranger, guess Im right? Ok.
So it's bezt if we have a goo-
You know? Philosophy actually lets you go round and round, then at the finish line tells you 'ignore all that and just viBeee'.
Philosophy just lets you escape and understand cultural and religious institutions and struxtures/ideas better.
It kind of just sets you back in a way, and you have wisdom that can help you not get stuck or control in what ideology you land atleast.
I am confused, acceptance and defiance is something about belief, and this is exactly what was countered when we started to look the absurdity straight in the eye away from ready-made answers ? As Krishnamurti had said, "There is no place for belief, where truth is concerned", then how can one be defiant of it? How can one not accept this absurdity ? I am just a temporary stage in this history of universe going back to a billion years, to be defiant is just another form of escapism from real reality isnt it ? And that doesnt mean i dont enjoy myself, i enjoy try to enjoy my life as much as i can, but thats cuz i realized the "rarity" of it, its like a little miracle, and just because it doesnt matter at all isnt a reason for me to not do anything if it makes me "feel" good and happy ? What do you think sir ?
Is there anyway to get a copy of the PDF you are referring to sir? I find the original text difficult to read.
Is Camus sort of saying the most rational response to the absurd is to embrace it?
Yes because if you reject it (the absurd) you aren't accepting reality and the real world and therefore committing philosophical suicide.
You’re awesome and you need to make more videos. I hope you are well
There is a matter of victims that are valuable for the State. People die out of starvation.
Every year.
Coronavirus attacks diabetic and high blood pressure victims like lightning strike. Other diseases do the same.
Stray strong.
How can one revolt the aburdity and also be happy
Finding happiness in the midst of revolt probably becomes comprehensible only insofar as you're aware of having experienced it. In other words, it's not so much a matter of explaining how it can happen, but of recognizing and remembering what it feels like when it has occurred in your life. Practicing meditative consciousness can help with that process. However, at first it's probably easier to reflect upon a relatively small and transient experience... some moment or situation in your life when you found yourself revolting against something, but also experienced a peculiar kind of happiness at the same time. However, that happiness probably isn't the same as happiness in the usual sense of the word...
I deeply regret that I did not study philosophy or something similar.
Excellent lecture of genius
Goed Liefde &Muziek zal het dus worden en laat ons starten met Begeerte&muziek wat is daar de samenhang van?In de interacie tussen beide zouden we eerst kunnen vragen wat er het eerst is begeerte of muziek?I gotta go now and have some smoke first...Voor ze mij bij de kraag vatten zoals Lieve zei...Ik ga dat niet afwachten maar doen wat ik moet doen...Tot later...Dionne ...
I am learning a lot from your lectures, ERIC. I would only say that this video has not aged so well because of your comments regarding the coronavirus. Five months later we have nearly 200,000 Americans dead, a great many more than the common flu and that despite months of quarantine and mask wearing. The fears about coronavirus, in other words, we’re not just the usual ones resulting from randomness, But rather those resulting from listening directly to the science. The science told us this thing was super dangerous and some of us listened. It is interesting, however, to notice that those who were most not wanting to hear the science, not wanting to adhere to social distancing and mask wearing, have been those in the religious community who are, as Camus would say, committing philosophical suicide intensively on a daily basis.
Was coming here to say this. Thank you
Critiquing after the fact looks a bit like you’re searching for soapboxes to stand on. Nothing he said was against the science or circumstances at the time of filming, and he was just trying to provide a real world example. The video is superb, just like the rest of this series.
@@jake2480 Yes, the video is superb, just like the rest of the series, but I do think Eric was being a little premature regarding the number of deaths from Covid.
Well coming from 2 years later, you can kinda see that he was right in a way that it turned out to be a thing nearly not as devastating as it might have been seen around the time you wrote this comment :) So honestly I think his assessment of the virus and the reference to its randomness seem much closer to the truth now to me compared to for example the level of importance you gave to it in your comment. And don't get me wrong, I thought exactly like you did back then too. It's impossible not to make something a bigger deal than it is when everyone and everything around you basically are obsessing with it.
Lots of unexplained deaths and blood clots lately.
Our grandkids will find out a closer truth to what really happened.
No transparency whatsoever to see the actual facts. The whole thing stunk from the beginning and I cannot believe how malleable peoples’ psyches are to blindly follow authority all the way to their death.
What university to you lecture for? I'm not a student but loving the content so thank you
Well, up until recently, it was the University of West Georgia. But thanks to the Corona Apocalypse & ensuing financial chaos... I'm now retired. Anyhow, I'm glad that you're enjoying these videos. You might also enjoy my main channel. Here's a link if you want to give it a try:
czcams.com/channels/r8ziBzqZlGAvv4krfAAORQ.html
This may be somewhat peripheral to the lecture but I was wondering if you can tell me what Camus’s thoughts on morality are considering that his views are based on an atheistic or agnostic slant. The contention being that morality seems to be grounded in religion therefore would he be more apt to agree with moral relativism Or possibly that there is no morality and that everyone must make up their own decision on how they should act?
People can create their values on Kant's Categorical Imperative, behave as if your behavior toward others became a law of the universe.
I had an honest question about Albert Camus's view on morality. I stated nothing about my belief. Since my view is being inferred from my question I will respond. I believe that morality need not be grounded in religion or any organized collective mindset. I believe that the individual has the ability to decide what is "moral" but I don't believe that morality is objective or universal in every situation. As for my question it was nothing more than that..a question
10:27 "... listen to what is actually telling us..."
Question please. Is Camus saying , when you believe in something , part of you dies just because you believe in that particular thing ? A philosophical suicide of sorts ...
Superb. Thank you.
Your lectures are great, thank you for sharing your knowledge. Do you recommend any further reading, resources, or writers for someone who's learning philosophy on their own as a new hobby?
I don’t get it. Acceptance of the absurd is a form of philosophical suicide, and it’s not what we should do. Instead, we should be defiant about it, and the most defiant thing we can do is to be happy about it. But isn’t that a form of acceptance?
Probably the easiest way of thinking about it is... that Camus is calling for a shift in the meaning of constructs like happiness & acceptance so that they're much more in alignment with existential defiance... and hence much more in alignment with the reality of existence itself. In other words... if we just stick with "happiness" and "acceptance" the way we usually think about them, then Camus's point will probably just seem like nonsensical gibberish.
@@EricDodsonLectures Thank you so much for the reply! However, unfortunately it still doesn’t make sense to me. I guess, I would need to study Camus more to better understand it. The problem with shifting the meaning of happiness is that then is it really happiness what Camus means? If yes, his logic is problematic. If not, then that raises a lot of questions too. E.g., are there different kinds of happiness? What are they? Or if it’s not really happiness, then what is it exactly? But again, I would probably need to study his philosophy more. Then, I would either understand it, or have the knowledge to criticize it more articulately.
8:05 That was a good one. lol
Thanks a lot Sir! please could you tell me the name of the Microphone you used here on this video? It's very good!
South of no north,The most beautyfull woman in town,Hot water music,Septuagarian stew,Betting the muse,en notes of a dirty old man zijn de korteverhalenbundels van Charles Bukowski die ik moet vinden.Hier in Boechout hebben ze die niet en de Antwerpse bib moet ik ze bestellen wat redelijk wat tijd in beslag neemt.Dat betekent dat ik voorlopig niet verder kan om een onderzoek naar de structuur en onderwerpen van de kortverhalen te doen.Dus zal het Schopenhauer en de aspecten van de muziek worden....Waarvan akte...En verder heb ik nog hoplessness,meaninglessness en randomness om over te leren.Waarvan akte groetjes,Dionne.Die vent lijkt in zekere zin op mij,heeft een baard wit als de mijne,een bril als de mijne,En daar blijkft het waarschijnijk niet bij..Met vriendelijke groeten,Daniël
Where can I download the reading material
This video is proof that philosophers don’t know anything about virology
That’s so interesting, in some sense Camus has a completely opposite philosophy to the Buddha’s
After 20:00 my mind was just constantly blowing up...
Love your videos
The fact that this channel has so few subscribers, shows the majority of human population >99% have committed philosophical suicide!
Thank you.
Would finding and then dedicating your life to a certain political cause/party (whatever it was) be committing philosophical suicide to Camus???
Very interesting take on covid, I wonder it will hold up. 🤣🤣
548000 covid deaths in usa thus far in one year, vs 38000 flu deaths
If you choose to embrace absurdity as a form of defiance then aren'y you still playing into the prison structure?
Where do I get the pdf?
I´d like to mention some aspekt of interest :
philosophy of Camus, Heidegger, Hegel, Nietsche & the other ones, is according to their Time as well as their History. Thus were is .... our own Philosophy , or Modern Philosophy!!?
To get aquented with great THINKERS of Time, is a our Gauidence toward Time Trawellers - Family😊
22:15 yes initially. but i think one cant be a defiant like sisyphus condemned forever. we have some wiggle room, or so i hope
Love the hat!
Why is it like though I really like the lecture, I feel rather bored with the unending unbroken stream of talk ? I don't feel like continuing till the end of it...I feel somewhere that it lacks a bit of soul for its utter glibness , which may or may not be a fault of the professor. Ranting off such deep philosophical concepts perhaps requires more in depth and a brooding delivery, I feel.
Perhaps it is because there is no neat resolution to the question being asked and that deep down we want resolution and get bored when we realise we are not going to get it.
@@brutexrp7207 you missed the point I was trying to make.but then it may be outside the purview of what you perceived my comment meant.
We are condemned at birth to Prison Planet Earth.