Absurdism

[Emporion]

A random musing on absurdism that floated across my mind today:

An Absurdist is someone who looks at the evidence of everything around them and comes to the conclusion that "life more than likely, or does not, have any inherent meaning or value" but at the same time comes to the conclusion that "my life DOES have meaning and value, as well as others." This is the confliction that the absurdist must embrace. If he does not embrace this, then he leaves himself open to either becoming a nihilist and will honestly consider the option of suicide, wether physical or intellectual, to be on the table of personal options. If he does not become a nihilist and takes his lifes meaning away from the absurd and into idealistic realms, he will commit intellectual suicide by ignoring the conclusion he came to by saying "Even though I see no inherent meaning in this universe, I will escape it by believing otherwise." Nihilism and Idealism are NOT options that sit on the table of the absurd even thought the absurdist recognizes these options to be available. With that said, the absurdist is in constant conflict and acceptance with the absurd. How can someone be in conflict with, and also embrace, something? If I may be so bold, I will give you an example:

The nuclear combustion that creates a star. I have always considered combustion to be a good example of embracing something that is in conflict. The star wants to blow outwards, yet its own mass pulls it back into itself. One would imagine if the star had an intellect, that it would have an inner conflict of wanting to blow up but stay together at the same time. One would think the star, if questioned about its conflicting and embracing nature, would retort: "That is my nature. If I were to blow up, I would have commited suicide and destroyed myself. If I ceased trying to combust then I would no longer be a star and that is suicide as well. By embracing the conflict I exist."

There is no conflict, just two different views.

"life more than likely, or does not, have any inherent meaning or value" ---------more general and relating to the fact that the universe will continue to exist even after life ceases to exist.
"my life DOES have meaning and value, as well as others."---------this is an opinion based on feelings as you are an emotional object ("object" because it is more general in this context).

irrational= emotion

One view governed by raw rationality(only rationality and not 5 units of rationality and 1 unit of emotions in this example) and the other governed by raw emotion(same kind of comparison as raw rationality in this example).

Labeling me as an Nihilist and/or Idealist in response to what I said above will not work because they are labels and labels carry with them preconceived assumptions even if they are relate to other labels. you would have to express each label you use in this mathematical model as linear combinations of each other to justify a general label from the linear combinations to properly label just one person. Also, any labels is too stringent because you can add x number of label vectors to the vector end of the equation along with y number of z different units assuming x=y and z can be any number(even complex numbers if required) and come up with a new batch of labels which are dependent on the new parameters.

I still embrace Atheism as a label and that doesn't contradict the mathematical model I just constructed above.

Conclusion:
I find your random muse to be irrational and absurd in the realm of rationality. I urge you to rethink your random muse.

---

Absolute freedom? We are all free to do anything that is possible for us to do. How can it get more absolute that that?

Here is an example of the mindset of being described using math.
absolute=a constant (a), freedom=x
so Absolute freedom= ax

or more generally:
Language being used as math without using math terms.
adjectives and nouns as (a) and (x) respectively from the example above.