Life as Absurd and Self-Fulfilling: Examining Joel Feinberg's Philosophy - Essay Sample

Introduction

Joel Feinberg was an American social and political philosopher. He is well known for his thorough examination of the concept of absurd self-fulfillment. Philosophers have had varying responses to life with pessimists regarding all life as absurd while the optimists think that lives can be wholly or partly fulfilled. For Feinberg, life can be both absurd and self-fulfilling. Through the examination of Feinberg's combination of both pessimism and optimism, this paper will demonstrate that life can be both absurd and fulfilling.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Five Different Types of Absurdity

Joel Feinberg raises five different types of absurdity in individual lives. The first characteristic of absurdity is extreme irrationality such as the incongruity or disharmony between two things such as ends and means, conclusions and premises, or reality and pretensions (Feinberg 306). Extreme irrationality can also be characterized by holding steadfastly to false beliefs. The second type of absurdity raised by Joel Feinberg is the clash between the objective and the subjective view of our lives in that some situations that we may view as important from our perspective emerge as completely pointless from another person's perspective. The third type of absurdity according to Joel Feinberg is pointlessness. Simply put, these are the activities that one does that have no meaning or have no point. The fourth type of absurdity is futility. As Joel Feinberg explains, these are the activities with meaning but are incapable of achieving their goal (Feinberg 308). In other words, one may engage in an activity that has meaning but the fact that they cannot meet a certain set goal using this activity makes such an endeavor absurd. Lastly, according to Joel Feinberg, the last type of absurdity in individual lives is triviality. As explained by Feinberg, these are activities in life that produce some small amount of advantage but are not worth the cost of labor that a person puts in. in other words, a person may be gaining some advantage from doing something in life but that may be absurd if they are putting a lot of effort for a marginal advantage or benefit in return.

The Supermarket Regress

Feinberg uses the Supermarket Regress to explore how life, in general, can be explained as meaningless. While observing shoppers at a supermarket, the life patterns of the shoppers seemed to suddenly make no sense. Feinberg started asking himself a series of questions like why are all those people in a line to the cash register? To buy food. Why are they buying food? To stay healthy, and alive. What is their intention by staying healthy and alive? So they can work. Why work? To earn an income. Why earn an income? So they can purchase food (Feinberg 309). This argument revolves around this simple circle over and over every day or week "without significant culmination in the end." Hence, life could be viewed as meaningless using this Supermarket Regress because the people observed in the model put off vindicating meaning and purpose to another stage that does not ever come, and the round of activity then starts to look more like a meaningless ritual-dance instead of something that is self-justifying, and coherent (Feinberg 309).

This absurdity is not restricted to the human species alone because it is also apparent among other species. For example, various insects seem to have no ultimate purpose but to "stay alive long enough to reproduce" whereby justifying purposes are put off forever (Feinberg 309). For these insects, simply keeping the species in existence seems like an end in itself without the need for another purpose. To many observers including Feinberg, this is the very exact model of absurdity and the perfect example of what he refers to as "utterly pointless existence" (Feinberg 309). Feinberg goes on to explain that in the case of some species such as the Salmon, the absurdity reaches the level of punishment because they go to greater lengths and pains simply to produce the next generation to start all over again the absurd cycle.

Feinberg's Criticism of Camus

Feinberg criticizes Camus's stance on absurdity along with the myth of Sisyphus's advocacy of rebellion because to him, some elements of life are absurd but not all. Camus argument is different because he explains that every element about life is absurd. For Camus, human beings want a "cosmic order tailored to their labor, and an intelligible life" (Hall 26). However, in contrast, life has no order, destroys work, and is alien to human beings. In other words, the caring universe that human beings wish for is precisely what the universe does not provide.

The result is a confrontation between the things that one gets and the one that one needs. For example, as Camus observes, "people want immortality but all they get is death" (Camus 16). In response to this absurdity, Camus observes that the response is to rebel and revolt because there will always be a divide in terms of what the human nature wants and the little that we get (Camus 27). In contrast, Feinberg explains that some elements of life are absurd but not all life is absurd in its entirety. To him, within life, some things are absurd while others are not. For example, Feinberg explains that some things in life are self-fulfilling such as bringing closure to an issue, satisfying a desire, achieving a goal and realizing potential.

While Camus focuses solely on the inability of humans to fulfill their nature, thereby concluding that one has wasted his life, Feinberg is of the view that fulfilling life is often a case of using one's natural talents. For example, exercising discretion in doing a mundane job should be viewed as fulfillment even in a life that is still pointless. Hence, while both Feinberg and Camus agree that life is absurd, Feinberg observes that life can be fulfilling and absurd at the same time.

For self-fulfillment to be said to exist in the ordinary sense, four models must be present: achieving goals, satisfying a desire or hope, bringing closure to something, and realizing a potential or doing the natural. Feinberg explain that while the life of Sisyphus may be absurd because he is wired to fulfill his nature by pushing rocks he might have some self-fulfillment elements if he has an appetite for pushing rocks, have a peculiar talent for pushing rocks, a general drive to the work, an instinct to his job and a compulsive impulse to do his tasks (Feinberg 310). If the gods told Sisyphus to push rocks in his way, to exercise his discretion, then he would find fulfillment in his task of pushing rocks even though his life is seemingly pointless.

On the other hand, Sisyphus would have assumed the nature of other simple species like the Salmon if on top of being wired to push rocks forever; the gods do not give him discretion in carrying out the difficult task of pushing the rocks. To Feinberg, self-fulfillment is very important because, without it, humans would not have self-love (Feinberg 311). The challenge to taking Feinberg's perspective in living a meaningful life is to view life from the inside because from this perspective, it is easy to identify purposes and goals which might be very difficult from outside. Hence, the defining difference between the arguments of Camus and Feinberg is the element of self-fulfillment.

Preferred Thinker

While all these different thinkers bring something important to this discussion, I choose to side with Feinberg and Nagel because of their appropriate attitude towards the absurdity of life. After agreeing that life is absurd from the outside, it is appropriate to also see that life is also fulfilling in another way as long as we have purposes and goals. From the inside, one does not see the absurdity of life due to the fulfillment avenues that exist such as the fulfillment that one feels after attaining a certain goal that one may have set a while back. However, on the other hand, examining another person's life from the outside may seem worthless simply because it is hard to know their goals.

I choose to side with Feinberg because he offers something that brings harmony to the absurd but fulfilling life: adopting an ironic attitude. Feinberg defines the ironic attitude as one of the detached awareness of incongruity that is halfway between playfulness, and seriousness (Feinberg 315). By adopting this attitude, one can enjoy the bittersweet pleasure of life without being neither pessimistic nor too much hope. I am attracted to this perspective because this line of argument can appreciate the incongruity of life. Despite its absurdity, this perspective allows one to respond not with amusement, anger or tears but with a tired smile. This is the middle ground that does not elicit pessimism that would paint life as worthless or optimism that would paint all lives as worthwhile.

This paper sought to demonstrate that through the combination of both pessimism and optimism, life can be both absurd and fulfilling as outlined by Feinberg. As revealed, it would be wrong to paint life as worthless and pointless simply because it is absurd. A few elements such as the satisfaction of a desire, achievement of goals and the realization of potential make life absurd but not worthless.

Works Cited

Camus, Albert, and Justin O'Brien. The Myth of Sisyphus. London: Penguin, 2013. Print.

Feinberg, Joel. Freedom and Fulfillment: Philosophical Essays. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1992. Print.

Hall, H. Gaston. "Aspects of the Absurd." Yale French Studies, no. 25, 1960, pp. 26-32. Print.