DarkRange55
🎂
- Oct 15, 2023
- 2,421
It's an interesting thought. For yes, as the digital age increases so does the need to escape it. Which mirrors the settings for the original romantic era.
Any thoughts?
As a side note:
I think existentialism offers a more compelling framework because it acknowledges the absurdity of existence but doesn't stop there. It pushes further—toward responsibility, self-creation, and the pursuit of meaning on one's own terms. Absurdism, at least in its classic form, feels like it revels in detachment, accepting meaninglessness as the final state of things. I get why that was a radical and necessary counterpoint when Camus wrote about it, but now it feels like a closed loop—an end rather than a beginning.
Existentialism, by contrast, embraces the struggle. It says, 'Yes, life has no inherent meaning, but so what? You still have to decide who you are, what you'll fight for, and how you'll face existence.' It allows for creation rather than just acceptance. Maybe that's the romantic in me speaking, but I'd rather live in a world where meaning is something you chase, even if you never fully catch it.
The absurdist philosophy was interesting when it was popular but I think we've moved beyond that ideology now—it's a been played out and boring.
Anyways I'd say I'm a bit of a romantic-existentialist with a Stoic streak.
