What does this mean?

"I knew that I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of a beach where I'd been happy. Then I fired four more times..."

Why? That's the question I had while reading this part, a question that was never really answered even after the conclusion of this story. Why did Meursault kill the Arab? He doesn't even know the answer himself. He knew it would accomplish nothing, he knew he could have walked away- so why? Why did Meursault kill the Arab?

It's a tough question- nobody really knows why. And so then the question must be, what was the point? What was this meant to show? What does this mean? And there, we can find an answer.

The author of The Stranger, Albert Camus, had a widely-known belief in the existential philosophy, one that says that nothing can rationalize human existence and there is no answer to the question of "why am I?" This philosophy, at its core, says existence precedes essence. Meursault is the character who exists, but feels no meaning to his existence, no essence. He knows death will come to him and all others one day, and he therefore doesn't care when that time is. He simply lives; he doesn't feel meaning to his life.

And maybe that's the whole point- that the meaning of his killing was to show that it had no meaning at all. He knows life will end one day, for him and the Arab. He sees no reason to allow them to live longer if they will one day die either way- in his view, there is no meaning in the life they'd otherwise live.

It's a rather depressing outlook, in my opinion, to think that life has no meaning. I do believe that if one has that outlook, as Meursault did, their life will indeed have no meaning. But maybe if we think ourselves to be meaningful, maybe if we believe that existence is not absurd and irrational but instead real and true, and if we act differently from Meursault in a situation like this- maybe then, we'll have meaning.

That's the answer to the question of "why?” Meursault had no reason, he saw no meaning. He knew death would come either way, and didn't care that he was allowing it to come sooner. Albert Camus is showing us the absurdity of the human existence, that there is no answer for the question of "why do I exist," since, by the time our individual lives come to an end, we will die.

But I disagree. I may be naive and foolish, but I can’t live with the thought that life has no meaning. I’m not like Meursault. When I’m standing, gun in hand, the barrel pointed at the head of another man, I see something. I see all the things that can happen in life, and I see the meaning life really has. Unlike Meursault, I lower the weapon. I walk down the hot, red shore in the other direction.

One Down, Three to Go

It's hard to believe that the first quarter of this year is already over.

When I programmed for classes back in February last year, this wasn't on my list of requested courses. It wasn't even a back-up. I originally programmed for speech & debate, but due to scheduling conflicts I was placed into this class. Luckily for me, it was a class that I was interested in and willing to take. And even luckier, today, it has easily become one of the best classes I ever took at this school.

The parts of the class I find most enriching are, naturally, not the parts designed for raw intellectual enrichment- not the lectures or the questions, not the quizzes or essays. Instead, it's the interactions with others, the debates and the discussions with my peers in the class. The reason is because, I think, philosophy is not just an individual contemplation of the world. It's a collaborative effort, and it gets better with more thinkers. More ideas, more challenges to your opinions, more unheard of and out-of-the-box thoughts. This is what makes the class enriching.

When I came into the class on the first day, I saw a big group of students who pretty much meant nothing to me. I knew some people in the class, but other than them everyone else was just filling up space in this building. I didn't consider those who weren't familiar to me as having much relevance, socially or intellectually. This is the only class I've really took that breaks that thought. After discussions and debates, I've gotten to see past random strangers and started to see fellow philosophers.

In no other class do I get to see complete strangers open up about their personal philosophy and their ideas and opinions. And thus, in no other class do strangers become everything but strangers to me. That's why philosophy is one of my favorite classes ever.

Voltaire, Camus on Election Day

It is hard to tell who the renowned philosophers Albert Camus and Voltaire would vote for in the 2012 presidential election. However, from what we know about each philosopher's ideas and the ideas of the candidates, we can make some guesses.

Camus's philosophy is hard to grasp at first. On the surface, it seems that he is a nihilist, someone who believes life is meaningless, and has no reason for being. However he only conveys this idea through his character Meursalt in The Stranger. His own personal idea is likely different from the relevant human condition he sought to brought to light. This is evident in his essay, "The Myth of Sisyphus," where he indicates that a person who lives in the most miserable conditions can somehow find a bit of happiness. He would probably vote for Obama, as he has served and has been viewed as a shining light, a beacon of hope in the world of darkness. He has given meaning and happiness to many Americans, reflecting Camus' philosophy of finding happiness in darrkness.

Voltaire, on the other hand, has a slightly different philosophy. While it's unclear of Voltaire's position on the specific issue of meaning, he has clear positions on philosophies and issues of the day. He satirizes religious officials and public ministers, he portrays the world in a very dark way, and brings to light important issues that were overlooked at the time he lived- things like greed and slavery. These views mark him as open-minded and nonconformist, and definitely progressive for the day. He would probably write-in Stephen Colbert, a man with very similar views and attitudes today as Voltaire's long ago.