DREIESKIVA​|Roald Kvam

Albert Camus’ The Myth of Sisyphus is one of the most influential philosophical essays of the 20th century, exploring existentialism and the concept of the absurd. Camus examines the human condition, questioning whether life has inherent meaning and how individuals should respond to the apparent absurdity of existence. The essay is a foundational text in existentialist and absurdist philosophy, challenging traditional notions of hope, faith, and rational meaning in life.

Let’s explore…

The absurd: A conflict without resolution

Camus begins his discussion by introducing the notion of the absurd. He defines the absurd as the conflict that arises between human beings’ desire for order, meaning, and clarity and the indifferent, chaotic nature of the universe. Humans seek to understand life, but the universe does not provide satisfactory answers. This fundamental contradiction—between the mind’s search for reason and the world’s lack of inherent meaning—creates the absurd condition.

He rejects both religious and existentialist attempts to reconcile this contradiction. The absurd is not a problem to be solved but a state to be recognized. Any attempt to impose artificial meaning, whether through religion or philosophical systems that claim to justify existence, is an evasion of the absurd reality. Unlike existentialist philosophers like Kierkegaard, who argue for a leap of faith in God, or Nietzsche, who suggests creating personal meaning, Camus insists that humans must confront absurdity without resorting to metaphysical illusions.

The question of suicide

Having established the absurd, Camus turns to what he considers the most serious philosophical question: whether life is worth living. If life has no ultimate meaning, is suicide the only logical response? He acknowledges that suicide is often seen as an escape from the absurd but ultimately argues against it. Rather than being a solution, suicide is an admission that one cannot cope with the absurd. Camus suggests that embracing absurdity rather than seeking to escape it is the only way to live authentically.

Camus examines historical and philosophical perspectives on suicide, critiquing those who see it as an act of courage or a rational decision. Instead, he presents an alternative: a life lived in full awareness of the absurd, without false hope or resignation. This is the path of the «absurd hero.»

The absurd hero: Revolt, freedom, and passion

Camus defines the absurd hero as an individual who fully acknowledges and embraces the absurd without seeking external justification for existence. This hero neither resorts to faith nor succumbs to despair. Instead, he lives with a defiant acceptance of meaninglessness. Camus outlines three key aspects of the absurd hero’s life: revolt, freedom, and passion.

1. Revolt – The absurd hero does not deny the absurd but actively confronts it. This revolt is a conscious decision to live without illusions, rejecting any comforting falsehoods about life’s purpose. By continuing to exist despite absurdity, the hero asserts his defiance.
2. Freedom – With the recognition that life has no predetermined meaning, the absurd hero is completely free. Since no ultimate authority dictates moral or existential values, individuals are liberated to create their own experience without external constraints.
3. Passion – Without a higher purpose, the absurd hero chooses to live fully, embracing experiences with intensity. Instead of seeking ultimate answers, the hero finds satisfaction in the richness of life itself.

Sisyphus as the ultimate absurd hero

To illustrate his ideas, Camus turns to the Greek myth of Sisyphus. In mythology, Sisyphus is condemned by the gods to roll a boulder up a hill for eternity, only for it to roll back down each time he reaches the top. This endless cycle of futile labor perfectly symbolizes the human struggle for meaning in an indifferent universe.

Camus argues that Sisyphus is the ultimate absurd hero because he fully understands his condition but does not seek to escape it. Though his fate is tragic, Sisyphus does not succumb to despair. Instead, he finds a form of freedom in his awareness. He owns his struggle, and by doing so, he transforms his suffering into a conscious act of defiance. The key moment in the myth, according to Camus, is when Sisyphus walks back down the hill after the boulder has fallen. In this moment of consciousness, Sisyphus asserts his existential independence. He is not a victim but a participant in his fate.

Camus famously concludes: “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.” This happiness does not stem from illusion or hope but from an acceptance of life as it is. Sisyphus is content because he fully embraces his existence, even in its absurdity.

Implications of Camus’ philosophy

Camus’ philosophy has broad existential and ethical implications. Rather than seeking meaning through external constructs like religion, ideology, or philosophical systems, he urges individuals to embrace life on their own terms. By acknowledging absurdity, people can live more freely, passionately, and authentically.

In everyday life, this philosophy suggests a shift in perspective. Instead of striving for ultimate answers, individuals can find joy in simple experiences—relationships, art, work, and personal endeavors. The absurd man does not seek salvation but revels in the richness of existence itself.

---

The Myth of Sisyphus presents a philosophy that is neither nihilistic nor conventionally optimistic. Camus does not deny the difficulties of human existence but instead proposes a way to live with them—through a rebellion against despair and a conscious embrace of life’s absurdity. His message is one of defiant joy: even in a world without inherent meaning, one can still find fulfillment through awareness, freedom, and passion. The absurd hero, like Sisyphus, persists—not because life offers answers, but because living itself is an act of defiance against meaninglessness.