Camus concludes The Myth of Sisyphus stating: “The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must consider Sisyphus happy” (777). Do you think that Weirob would have agreed with Camus if he had been a partner in the discussion before her death? If so, why? If not, why not?
Weirob is concerned with the consistency of identity, with the relation of the “soul” to “physical existence.” Weirob’s major statement was “we have knowledge of our own identity through time”. Camus, on the other hand, is concerned with our freedom to choose in the absence of a Designer. The myth, for him, is a visual metaphor for the meaninglessness of human effort on the physical plane, unless each individual human “soul” or entity designs him/her self by making a plan, by struggling with some task that identifies his self-design. Camus, after completing his metaphor, make the philosophical observation that effort itself (the struggle) is “enough” to fill a man’s heart, that is, to give his life direction. Weirob might have agreed that as long as Sisyphus continued to seek the heights, he was being consistent from day to day. Of course, this comparison might be seen as an example of “argument by analogy,” a logical fallacy.