|
|
era other than our own requires concepts from a given theory to meet the needs (answer commonsense questions) of the present historical moment or we invite an interpretation of communication that is static and dangerously anachronistic” (32). Unreflective decisions often emerge out of a longing to satisfy personal desires and are motivated by nothing more than personal preference, lacking any connection to or consideration of a larger life narrative. These decisions could be considered groundless, thus leaving one with only personal preference. If a person does not work from a grounded standpoint, in future moments he or she will be tempted either to implement the previously successful model or to work from personal preference. Either way, one will lack the coherence and fidelity that Walter R. Fisher suggested gives meaning to one’s personal narrative and in turn, to one’s life. This reliance upon those who had preceded him both provides insights into Camus’s own engagement and serves as a model for this text, which seeks to draw upon the wisdom and lessons of Camus’s own work.
A second way Camus functions as a philosopher of communication with deep ethical commitments is in his willingness to engage an ever-changing historical moment on its own terms; for Camus this meant rejecting a Christian faith that would have provided an objective position from which to judge the chaos experienced in life. He accepted the absurdity of his historical circumstances and allowed an organic metaphor of absurdity to emerge from within the turmoil of his moment. Camus did not interpret the evil that he witnessed in spiritual terms but believed that humans are capable of creating the meaning of their own existence, whether for good or evil. Evil actions could be manifest through both attacks on people and attacks on clarity of thinking. He wrote, “[N]ever perhaps at any time has the attack on reason been more violent than in ours” (Myth 22). The metaphor of the absurd emerged and expanded as Camus engaged his particular historical circumstances through activity as an advocate for his homeland, Algeria, and as a participant in the French Resistance movement during World War II. Camus’s moment revealed itself as one of narrative and virtue contention, a moment unpredictable, irrational, and violent—a time much like today.