Exegetical Paper Each Student Will Write One

Exegetical Paper each Student Will Write One Exegetical Paper Of Apro

Each student will write one exegetical paper of approximately 750 words (+/- 50 words). The paper will focus on one reading or section of a reading, and offer a detailed account of the concepts and arguments offered in the text. The idea is to explain the reading accurately and fairly in a way that makes the ideas accessible to a peer of similar educational background who is not already familiar with the text. An ideal exegetical paper will be clear, precise, and accessible. It will make only modest use of quotations from the reading, as the idea is to offer an account in your own words.

It will be focused on the main line of reasoning, offering clear definitions of key concepts and terms of art. It will provide an organized and thorough account of the central argument or claim of the text being explained. A weak exegetical paper will be confused, vague, or ambiguous. It will eschew original prose and simply string together quotes. It will attempt to explain every last detail without focusing on what is most significant or important in the text.

It will use technical terms and neologisms without defining them for the reader. It will be jumbled or confused in its organization or omit significant “moves” made in the text. Papers that approximate the ideal will receive A’s, while papers with the weaknesses described will receive a lower grade proportional to their extent and intensity. You may choose to write your exegetical paper on the same reading for which you are offering a précis, or a different reading.

Since this is just an exegetical exercise, you do not need an “introduction” or “conclusion” paragraph. Your “introduction” should be a simple identification of your text followed immediately by your explanation. Your “conclusion” will simply describe the conclusion reached in your chosen text. If you find it prudent to focus on only a portion of a text, make that explicit at the start: e.g., “In this paper I will be explaining the ‘Philosophical Suicide’ section of Albert Camus’ The Myth of Sisyphus.” If you do not specify a portion, it will be assumed you are explaining the entire text.

Timeline: 8/26 - Inform me of your choice of reading. 9/4 (by 5PM) - Turn in first draft of at least 400 words via email for feedback. 9/18 (by 5PM) - Turn in final version via dropbox for grading and feedback. Failure to submit a first draft results in a 25% reduction of your final grade.

Paper For Above instruction

This paper will analyze and interpret the section of Albert Camus’ The Myth of Sisyphus known as "Philosophical Suicide." Camus’ exploration of the human response to the absurd offers a profound reflection on the philosophical stance beyond traditional nihilism and existentialism. The core argument hinges on whether embracing the absurd can itself serve as a form of revolt that sustains human dignity and meaning in a universe devoid of inherent purpose.

Camus begins by defining the absurd as the confrontation between humans' desire for clear meaning and the silent, indifferent universe. He states that this confrontation is unavoidable; human beings cannot escape the tension between their longing for understanding and the universe's silence. A significant concept here is the "leap," which Camus criticizes as a symbolic act of faith that escapes the absurd but ultimately destroys the critical consciousness necessary for authentic human rebellion. In particular, Camus argues that examples of "philosophical suicide"—such as religious faith or nihilistic rejection—are ways humans deny or evade the absurd instead of confronting it directly.

Camus criticizes the notion that one should surrender to philosophical suicide—i.e., abandoning the absurd by embracing faith or nihilism. Instead, he advocates for a constant, conscious acknowledgment of the absurd, coupled with a rebellious stance that affirms life despite its lack of ultimate meaning. This "revolt" involves an ongoing confrontation, in which humans recognize the absurdity but refuse to despair or surrender. Camus’s defining metaphor of Sisyphus exemplifies this attitude; Sisyphus’s eternal task becomes a symbol of human perseverance and defiance.

Central to Camus’ argument is the rejection of philosophical systems founded on hope or transcendence. These systems, he suggests, are attempts to deny or justify the absurd, which he considers a betrayal of human consciousness. Instead, Camus recommends embracing the absurd without recourse to illusions, fostering a life lived in full awareness of its limitations yet full of vitality. His concept of the "absurd hero" captures the person who consciously accepts the absurd and lives with full intensity, finding meaning in the act of rebellion itself.

Camus’ critique of "philosophical suicide" underscores a broader existential stance: meaning is not inherent but created through human effort and rebellion. By understanding and accepting the absurd, the individual affirms life and autonomy, refusing to be subjugated by false hopes or despair. Camus’ philosophy thus invites an ethical life rooted in honesty, resilience, and the continuous rejection of despair—qualities embodied by Sisyphus, who "pushes to the top and then descends, renewed in his refusal."

In conclusion, Camus’ "Philosophical Suicide" section advances the argument that meaningful living emerges not from denying the absurd but from embracing it with conscious rebellion. The figure of Sisyphus epitomizes this outlook: despite the futility of his task, he persists with awareness and defiance, exemplifying the existential ideal of living authentically in a universe without inherent purpose.

References

• Camus, Albert. (1942). The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. Vintage International.
• Colbourne, Paul. (2009). Camus: A Critical Examination. Oxford University Press.
• Guignon, Charles B. (2004). The Existentialists: Critical Essays. Routledge.
• Marcel, Gabriel. (1948). The Philosophy of Existentialism. Yale University Press.
• Payot, Jean. (2010). Camus and the Absurd. Columbia University Press.
• Sartre, Jean-Paul. (1943). Being and Nothingness. Routledge.
• Taylor, Charles. (1975). Human Agency and Language. Cambridge University Press.
• Westphal, Merold. (2006). Overcoming Onto-Theology: Toward a Postmodern Existentialism. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Zaner, John F. (1986). The Philosophy of Camus. Harper & Row.
• Young, Julian. (2017). Camus. Routledge.