THE COST OF GOING NOWHERE: THOMAS NAGEL, SØREN KIERKEGAARD AND THE ABSURD By THEODORE BENSON RANDLES A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007 1 © 2007 Theodore Benson Randles The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. 2 “But suppose the whole matter were really a hocus-pocus. Suppose that whatever meaning you may choose in your fancy to give to it, the real meaning of the whole was mockery. Suppose it was all folly. Suppose…” “I have been in it,” answered the voice from the tall and strange figure, “and I know it was not.” —G.K. Chesterton, The Napoleon of Notting Hill With much admiration and affection to all those who have ennobled my life by their care and concern; especially to General Richard Lawson, whose example and character have made this study possible 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To all those who aided me in this endeavor I give my most sincere thanks. I individually mention and thank Drs. Robert D’Amico, Gordon Marino and Stewart Duncan; who guided and challenged my work. To those friends and family who have put up with my ramblings on absurdity these past few months, you also have my thanks. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................6 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................8 2 AN ABSURD CONFLICT.....................................................................................................12 Irreconcilables.........................................................................................................................12 Nowhere Man.........................................................................................................................21 Proximity................................................................................................................................27 3 AN ABSURD RESOLUTION...............................................................................................35 The Knight of Faith................................................................................................................35 A Grave Pursuit......................................................................................................................45 Speculations............................................................................................................................54 4 AN ABSURD RECONCILIATION.......................................................................................65 LIST OF REFERENCES...............................................................................................................73 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................75 5 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts THE COST OF GOING NOWHERE: THOMAS NAGEL, SOREN KIERKEGAARD AND THE ABSURD By Theodore Benson Randles December 2007 Chair: Robert D’Amico Major: Philosophy Thomas Nagel develops his philosophical sense of absurdity, between his Mortal Questions and The View from Nowhere, as the conflict between the objective and subjective perspectives regarding our lives. We can objectively doubt all of the subjective commitments of our lives, viewing them as matters of indifference. These viewpoints cannot be eliminated or reconciled, and their clash is the absurd. Søren Kierkegaard argues that the search for objective certainty with regards to subjective matters is a futile effort; it is beyond the abilities of a person. Objective doubts can always be raised about our subjective enterprises. Despite this objective doubt, we commit ourselves to our lives with the passion of inwardness. This, one of the pseudonyms tells us, is a paraphrasing of faith. Both Nagel and Kierkegaard believe that the absurd is inherent to human life and that it cannot be solved. Life is a matter of living with our absurdity. Both recommend reengaging our lives despite lacking rational justification for doing so. For Kierkegaard, absurdity is an occasion for faith, as reason cannot compel our reengagement. Nagel advocates a return to life with irony. For both, consciousness of our absurdity also leads to humility—a recognition that our subjective pursuits are without objective grounds. 6 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea. And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, “It is a spirit;” and they cried out for fear. But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, “Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.” And Peter answered him and said, “Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.” And he said, “Come.” And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, “Lord, save me.” And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” Matthew 14: 28-31 (KJV) 7 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The present work does not attempt to give an exhaustive analysis of the various senses and meanings of the term ‘absurd.’ The term has lent itself to myriad uses and, partly as a consequence of this, myriad topics. For example, in Albert Camus’ “The Myth of Sisyphus”1 absurdity is linked with theology, free will, metaphysical realism, and the moral issue of suicide. The interweaving of these themes has much to do with the difficulty of grasping Camus’ view. The aim of this work is to carve out what I consider a central meaning of the term absurdity and to avoid, as much as possible, these other issues, as interesting as they may be. In pursuit of this narrower focus I compare the philosophical analysis of absurdity found in Thomas Nagel with some of Søren Kierkegaard’s writings on faith and absurdity. I contend that there is an interesting and important convergence of ideas between them concerning the absurd as well as how to practically live with the problem. Before concentrating on their work, it may be helpful to begin with a broad characterization of the idea of absurdity. Why should we concern ourselves with the absurd? Absurdity seems to arise when contemplating the place of humanity in the expanse of the universe. The length of human life is a mere moment when compared to cosmic time; a human being is of miniscule size compared to astronomical objects. If we firmly immerse ourselves in our immediate lives, these thoughts may never arise. Frank Ramsey offers just such a nepenthe in commenting, “Where I seem to differ from some of my friends is in attaching little importance to physical size. I don't feel the least humble before the vastness of the heavens. The stars may be large, but they cannot think or love, and these are qualities which impress me far more than size does. I take no credit for weighing 1 Albert Camus, trans. Justin O’Brien, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays (New York: Vintage International, 1991). 8 nearly seventeen stone. My picture of the world is drawn in perspective, and not like a model to scale. The foreground is occupied by human beings, and the stars are all as small as threepenny bits.”2 But we are not bound to Ramsey’s perspectival schema. We can make the jump into the stars that shrinks our concerns and pursuits. We can distance ourselves, viewing our lives as the background with the stars in the foreground. The absurd arises because both accounts remain, and yet we cannot fully marry the view from without with the view from within. This gap or incongruity is common to most senses of the absurd, whether the problem is treated as circumstantial or universal. Camus thought this matter was connected with the question, “Ought I to live?” Absurdity is a condition we naturally seek to escape. Yet, if it is a fact of our lives, we may be forced to give the problem central significance. Camus introduces his essay by announcing, “Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy.”3 Jeffrey Gordon, whose comparison of Nagel and Camus will be considered later in this work, argues, “If human life is indeed absurd, it would be difficult to imagine a more important fact about it. Whatever view we might project upon the stars, it would be a fact that we humans, for whom alone it would be relevant, could not but find deeply dispiriting.”4 In pursuing our lives, we all occupy Ramsey’s perspective. But we can take the viewpoint of the stars, and it is that abrupt shift that is at the center of the concept of the absurd. 2 Frank Ramsey quoted in Simon Blackburn, Being Good: A Short Introduction to Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 79. 3 Camus, Sisyphus, p. 3. 4 Jeffrey Gordon, “Nagel or Camus on the Absurd?” Philosophical and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Sept., 1984), pp. 15-16. 9 Like many other philosophical problems, the problem of absurdity lacks clear consequences for day-to-day life. This does not mean it is a puzzling riddle devoid of practical import. Rather, it is an issue in the way we understand ourselves; it addresses our deepest concerns. In this way, the absurd is similar to such classic philosophical questions as the clash between free will and determinism or the notion of personal identity. The conflicting intuitions that form the basis of philosophical problems often do not arise in everyday life. The present grasp of the absurd in Nagel and Kierkegaard is critical. Consciousness of the absurd has a peculiar consequence: though it changes nothing, it changes everything. We continue to do just the things that we did before our consciousness of the absurd, and yet a metamorphosis occurs in our understanding of ourselves and the lives we lead. The sense of absurdity being carved out as central to this work is often treated comically. In Woody Allen’s Annie Hall, the main character as a child is seen being taken to the doctor by his mother for refusing to do his grammar school homework. When asked to explain his actions, he notes that the universe is expanding and thus eventually all matter will come apart. “What’s the point?” the child asks. The conflict between the effort required to complete his homework and the child’s grasp of cosmic impermanence fuels the scene’s absurd humor: here we glimpse the simultaneous proximity and incongruity of the absurd. Allen’s comic question is a form of that larger philosophical question, “Ought I to live?” Thomas Nagel concludes that human existence is inherently absurd. Though we may attempt to practically confront the conditions of absurdity, Nagel contends that we cannot eliminate them. If Nagel is correct, we should be able to locate a conflict inherent to existence and understand what about the conflict is irreconcilable. Nagel’s reasoning on this issue comprises the first chapter of the present work. 10