Imagine Sisyphus happy

Is Sisyphus really happy or is he satisfied?

The question is difficult because it is very difficult to know what Camus had in mind while writing. Many interpretations are possible. However, there is a way to investigate this.

Camus starts from the premise that life is absurd and meaningless. This is important to note. Camus also regards as a failure the philosophers who mitigate or eliminate absurdity by turning to other concepts - the task of pinpointing the actual point of view of an absurdist. The moment you try to respond to the absurdity of life (which, according to Camus, is a conflict between reason and unreason) by giving up or exalting reason, you have just compromised the position / feelings of the absurd.

Sisyphus is thus an ideal absurdist - one who did not fail like others. This is because he knows that he will never achieve his goal and that he will accept that. So he is content - in the sense that he knows that there is no better life than what he should strive for because it is impossible (just as it is not possible for people to have a better life despite them may have more options than Sisyphus).

However, according to Camus, after accepting the absurdity (this absurdity exists), it is important to live it without giving up it and falling into any kind of hope. Sisyphus does that. And that makes him happy. Sisyphus is happy because he has conquered his fate - not by changing it, but by accepting it and still rebelling against it. There is no fate that cannot be overcome by scorn. He is not sad about futility and therefore happy because he realizes it.

To answer the last part of your question, consider the chain of events.

A man who realizes that there is absurdity in life, that there is a conflict between what he (should) consider to be rational and what the world is like, is saddened by this knowledge. What Camus offers is a solution that comes from peace with fate (with contempt). A man has to accept that the world is unreasonable and that he is looking for reason and therefore there will always be a conflict between the two. If he accepts that, he is no longer sad. Because the only reason (in this context) for the unhappiness has been eliminated, a man is now happy. Here I have to give you an example -

They work in a 9 to 5 job and are happy. Suddenly you are suffering from the crisis Camus speaks of. You realize that all of this is meaningless. Get up, go to the office, succeed a few times and fail other times, return home, spend time with wife and children, go back to sleep, wake up the next day, and so on. This realization makes you sad. If somehow that sadness is removed, you will be happy again.

If Sisyphus doesn't like pushing stones, he will never be happy with it. But if he is sad just because he knows he will never make it to the top, then he will be happy again when that sole cause of his unhappiness is fixed.

They are not hoping for a greater purpose or purpose. How does that make someone happy?

You can be happy rolling in the sand, putting your hands in a sack of grain, dancing spontaneously, or putting ice cubes on your tongue. If you read Camus, you will see his characters delight in all the things that somehow arouse our emotions and make us happy - like lust for power, etc. You get sad when you realize how meaningless they are or how immoral they are . However, if you accept this and accept that nothing better is possible, and accept your fate (with contempt), you will grow out of your quest to find meaning that doesn't exist. If you ignore that there is something "better", that there are values, you will be out of the moral-immoral conflict in your head. And so you will be happy.

An absurdist is like a person who ignores that one day he will die ((ignores that life is meaningless), except that the absurd knows, accepts, and does not ignore that he will one day die.

Look at don Juan. He moves from one woman to the next. He doesn't want true love. He just wants to have the most joy in the present moment. He knows the limits. He knows he won't get real love and he doesn't want it. The only happiness he has is the happiness he experiences because of his actions. He doesn't hate what he does and what he does tickles his "happiness inducing" senses. So there is no guilt, just a little luck and it's all he wants.

Whether this position can actually be defended and absurd views consistently held is beyond the subject, as Camus does not talk about it (whether Don will one day realize how much better true love is and regret his actions), which is certain, however that people find happiness in actions that don't make much sense - you may have seen these duck-faced selfies;)

Moving company

I understand that removing all hope for something "better" is that bad luck will eliminate, but I still don't understand why Camus goes so far as to say that this is you will make you happy .

Is that true

Camus doesn't say that. What will make you happy would be other things like making women want you, like in the case of Don. The only thing is that the futility of these actions doesn't stop you from enjoying them now. Camus says: "You have to imagine that Sisyphus is happy" and not that he is happy. It is perhaps only worth emphasizing that our standard position on Sisyphus should not overemphasize his misfortune. We don't know if Sisyphus is sad or happy, but we think he must be sad because we see this futility. Camus just says we shouldn't look at him like that.

Moving company

Why should we us Sisyphus so happy to introduce ? Where does Sisyphus' happiness come from? What could he possibly be happy about?

Is that true

Everything and if it isn't, he can do it for himself. Since he believes that there is no way his life could be more meaningful (like absurdists), he is not afraid. He can waste Pushig Rocks all day long, each time reaching a certain position a second earlier and enjoying the improvement. Here happiness is not born of hope, but of forbearance.

CriglCragl

The character in "The Outsider" is no hedonist, could hardly be less than Don Juan. He is someone who does not turn to others for motivation or approval. He lives in and reacts to the moment, living everyone fully and accepting the consequences of this good and "bad".