The Myth of Sisyphus读后感精选

　　《The Myth of Sisyphus》是一本由Albert Camus著作，Vintage出版的Paperback图书，本书定价：USD 15.00，页数：212，特精心从网络上整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。

　　《The Myth of Sisyphus》精选点评：

　　●“In order to understand the world, one has to turn away from it on occasion; in order to serve men better, one has to hold them at a distance for a time"// "The first [precept] was never to accept anything as true unless I knew it to be obviously so." [The Minotaur]

　　●西绪福斯神话

　　●什么是超经典

　　●Just like experiencing a chronic paranoia, although I choked, clutched and almost wept on this, I have always known I still want to live and I still believe in life. For Camus, maybe it is cheaper for him to commit philosophical homicide w/ his cumbersome absurdity compared w/ a silent philosophical suicide as L'Étranger. [Spring Recess 2010 Beijing 5th Snow@ Lotus]

　　●相隔三年重读还是心里澎湃。发现加缪28岁写的这篇，好生气地把书一丢。

　　● 加缪唱着荒谬之歌，意识到人类即便再有理性，这个宇宙也无法以人类的理性来回应人类。所以人类的存在是无意义的、是荒谬的、是让上帝发笑的。但加缪忘记了一点，人的存在不是在和宇宙对话，而是在和人对话。

　　●没有了自由意志为前提，似乎可信度以及合理性立马增加很多。但如果我说某些地方相比之下我更买萨特的单。不过我也逐渐开始领会在我初期迷恋存在主义的时候，有人对我说的“存在主义在哲学层面上其实是站不住脚的。” 无论加缪的荒诞还是萨特的自由选择，都存在不能自圆其说的地方。

　　●this book defined my understanding of existence.

　　●“What counts is not better living but more living”:living intensely and rebelliously, being fully aware and conscious. 我爱加缪

　　●所附采访里他说 “Not through virtue, as you see, but through a sort of almost organic intolerance, which you feel or do not feel. “ 爱一个人的作品，之后往往会发现可能是因为作者本质上和自己是一类人，是好事还是坏事呢。Nevertheless the book resonated with me so much that I almost cried at the end.

　　《The Myth of Sisyphus》读后感(一)：无题

　　“There exists an obvious fact that seems utterly moral: namely, that a man is always a prey to his truths. Once he has admitted them, he cannot free himself from them. One has to pay something. A man who has become conscious of the absurd is forever bound to it. A man devoid of hope and conscious of being so has ceased to belong to the future.”

　　“The important thing is not to be cured, but to live with one's ailments.”

　　我们觉得是自己掌握了真理，但却可能是真理掌握了我们，我们的一切行为都是在自己所信奉的思想下产生的，这就是荒谬所在。但当我们认识到这一荒谬的关系时，我们又陷入另一种荒谬。因为了承认荒谬的存在，而同时又无法摆脱它，似乎只能成为它的囚徒。这样看来存在没有什么意义，因为人永远在被动中。但是正如加缪所言，"无意义的人生" 不必然的引向 "不值得活" 这一命题。如果荒谬不能被解决，那不如就带这它活着。

　　存在主义揭露存在的无意义，看似消极的哲学，却最终导向了积极。也许这也是一种荒谬。

　　《The Myth of Sisyphus》读后感(二)：西西弗斯的跳跃和希望

　　当我开始读《西西弗斯神话》时，COVID-19 还没有成为一个全球性的灾难，不然我一定会先读《鼠疫》。而我也没有想到，此次疫情会漫长到当我把英文版《西西弗斯神话》读过两遍，再拿起《鼠疫》时依然应景……

　　由于语系的差距，在将西方语言的著作翻译成中文时，大概很容易迷失在错综的句法当中或者让读者迷失在本不该错综的句法当中，而如果翻译的不是小说是哲学类书籍，这种迷失就尤为要命。《西西弗斯神话》并无公认的经典译本，几种主流的翻译似乎也都各有瑕疵，相比之下，可能 Justin O'Brien 的英译本更为可靠。（有一个使我更加深信这一点的例子：阅读初期，我还没有适应作者的行文风格，有一句话足足花了二十分钟才看懂，便一怒之下去翻了法语原文，想看看这萦纡回转的语言迷宫是该归功于加缪本人还是英文译者。结果是，即使仅凭我低幼的法语水平，仍然能看出这句话在法语和英语中的语序基本一致。）

　　《西西弗斯神话》可能拥有加缪作品里仅次于《局外人》的第二著名的开头：

　　真正严肃的哲学问题只有一个，那就是自杀。加缪从自杀开始追问生命的意义，从自杀的原因谈到人在面对忽然显现的非理性宇宙时所产生的割裂感——对失乐园的记忆已然消散，对应许之地的希望亦属渺茫，人被放逐在那一瞬间。加缪称之为对于荒诞的体验。如果诚如加缪所言，“荒诞”是这冷漠无情且无法解释的宇宙之真面，那么之前的许多哲学家都曾在推理即将走到尽头时触及过它的面纱。但加缪认为，他们都没有严守逻辑之路，在他看来，海德格尔、雅斯贝尔斯、舍斯托夫、克尔凯郭尔等人在山穷水尽之时，都舍弃了逻辑推理的稳定步伐，跳向了非逻辑的柳暗花明（原文 “take the leap”），他们希望抚慰面对荒诞的痛楚，这本质上是一种逃避。在此基础上，加缪揭开了荒诞的面纱，在与荒诞的对视中得出了三个结论：反抗、自由和激情。人应当弃绝希望，在自知永无胜算的情况下反抗无涯的非理性之海，并从中汲取力量，直到荒诞与他自己同归死亡。

　　不过，这样的结论本身似乎也并不具有严密的逻辑。桑塔格说读者会感谢加缪从虚无主义出发，最终（并无逻辑地）将他们领向了人文主义。也许桑塔格在写下这句话时想到的并非《西西弗斯神话》，但她把加缪摆脱虚无主义深渊的举动称为“illogical leaping”，似乎就有些犀利的针对性，像是在代表海德格尔等人对着加缪隔空喊话：“You also took the leap.” 我似乎可以理解为，同样是跳跃，哲学前辈们起跳的时刻是接触面纱的一瞬，而加缪则是在揭开面纱之后。（从而也就更为惊险？）不过，作为读者，我确实感谢加缪在否定了为”意义“而活——也就是否定了生命的意义——之后，提出了另一种激情而又清醒的生存状态；帮助现代的西西弗斯们在每日重复工作的间隙，找到快乐的依托。

　　在这本书的后半部分，加缪列举了一些“荒诞人”的例子，比如唐·璜、征服者、戏剧演员和创作者。唐·璜清醒且没有希望地恣意生活着，征服者知道自己的统治不会长久，戏剧演员在大幕一次次的升起和落下之间方生方死。看到最后，我忽然觉得，科研工作者亦当仁不让地属于荒诞人的行列。他们正是站在挑战非理性的前线，试图做一个征服者，用有序击败无序，用已知驱逐未知。同时，他们也从未奢望自己的胜利可以永存，没有一篇文献可以永远正确。和戏剧演员类似，他们的探索、质询，他们作品的全部意义，就只存活在一篇篇 paper 短暂的生命里。他们具有荒诞人的几乎所有美德。也许他们唯一的“罪过”在于希望，他们终究还是希望自己心怀热情写下的结论就是宇宙的真相。戈达尔的电影《精疲力尽》里，帕特丽夏向一位著名作家提问：”你最大的追求是什么？”作家收起了谈笑风生的态度，用现实中梅尔维尔的话作答：“成为不朽，然后死去。”让自己作品成为不朽，有哪一位作者能拒绝这样的希望？加缪在附录里讨论卡夫卡著作中的荒诞和希望，说卡夫卡在猛烈地反对整个宇宙之后，却不可思议地赦免了这个连鼹鼠都敢妄谈希望的丑恶世界。我同时赞成抱有希望和拒绝希望，后者对于宇宙和生命的终极问题，前者对于眼下的生活。虽然西西弗斯知道他永远摆脱不了重复推动巨石的命运，但在他每一次上山的过程中，总还是可以对自己登顶的那一刻怀有希望。而对所有留恋于希望的人们来说，即使加缪投以冷眼，至少卡夫卡还是会宣判他们无罪。

　　《The Myth of Sisyphus》读后感(三)：“One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

好吧我同意加缪是有点啰嗦，不过以诺贝尔文学奖得主的文笔，同样的意思换上不下六种写法，散落在文章各节，我其实是不大介意的，但也理解可能有人会受不了。

比如关于荒诞吧，他想说荒诞是冲撞：生活本质非理性、无序，人们却期待它是理性且有序的。（这里他不是在说生活本身荒诞，而是缘木求鱼的荒诞。）

以下六句话都在说这个意思。

1 Tenacity and acumen are privileged spectators of this inhuman show in which absurdity, hope, and death carry on their dialogue. 荒谬、希望与死亡持续着它们的对话，顽强与决断观看着这场演出。

2 I said that the world is absurd, but I was too hasty. This world in itself is not reasonable, that is all that can be said. But what is absurd is the confrontation of this irrational and the wild longing for clarity whose call echoes in the human heart. The absurd depends as much on man as on the world.

3 The world is peopled with such irrationals. The world itself, whose single meaning I do not understand, is but a vast irrational. If one could only say just once: “This is clear,” all would be saved. But these men vie with one another in proclaiming that nothing is clear, all is chaos, that all man has is his lucidity and his definite knowledge of the walls surrounding him.

4 ... The irrational, the human nostalgia, and the absurd that is born of their encounter—

5 ... The absurd is essentially a divorce. It lies in neither of the elements compared; it is born of their confrontation.

6 It is a matter of living in that state of the absurd I know on what it is founded, this mind and this world straining against each other without being able to embrace each other.

他想弄清楚的是，这种冲撞下，为什么不选择放弃生命。(He belongs to time, and by the horror that seizes him, he recognizes his worst enemy. Tomorrow, he was longing for tomorrow, whereas everything in him ought to reject it. That revolt of the flesh is the absurd.) 其实很大篇幅讲了不肯妥协的Kierkegaard (“Upon considering again the content of the absurd, one understands better the method that inspired Kierkegaard. Between the irrational of the world and the insurgent nostalgia of the absurd, he does not maintain the equilibrium. He does not respect the relationship that constitutes, properly speaking, the feeling of absurdity. Sure of being unable to escape the irrational, he wants at least to save himself from that desperate nostalgia that seems to him sterile and devoid of implication.”)加缪看着Kierkegaard背影，自己只能望洋兴叹，低头“认怂”。 “暗夜是我的光亮”，他说。虽听来豪情万丈，其实自己心里有数，无论写得多田园诗情，这里也终究无法瞒天过海。总之，他还不想过河。

(I ask for the rule— of life of that state, and what I am offered neglects its basis, negates one of the terms of the painful opposition, demands of me a resignation. I ask what is involved in the condition I recognize as mine; I know it implies obscurity and ignorance; and I am assured that this ignorance explains everything and that this darkness is my light. But there is no reply here to my intent, and this stirring lyricism cannot hide the paradox from me. One must therefore turn away. Kierkegaard may shout in warning: “If man had no eternal consciousness, if, at the bottom of everything, there were merely a wild, seething force producing everything, both large and trifling, in the storm of dark passions, if the bottomless void that nothing can fill underlay all things, what would life be but despair？” This cry is not likely to stop the absurd man. Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable. If in order to elude the anxious question: “What would life be？” one must, like the donkey, feed on the roses of illusion, then the absurd mind, rather than resigning itself to falsehood, prefers, to adopt fearlessly Kierkegaard’s reply: “despair.” )

还好还有胡塞尔可以投奔。胡塞尔说：我们可以不解释这个世界、只去体验。不是只有一个真相，从习习晚风到搭在我肩头的这只手都有自己的真相。

(Originally Husserl’s method negates the classic procedure of the reason. Let me repeat. Thinking is not unifying or making the appearance familiar under the guise of a great principle. Thinking is learning all over again how to see, directing one’s consciousness, making of every image a privileged place. In other words, phenomenology declines to explain the world, it wants to be merely a deｓｃｒｉｐｔion of actual experience. It confirms absurd thought in its initial assertion that there is no truth, but merely truths. From the evening breeze to this hand on my shoulder, everything has its truth. Consciousness illuminates it by paying attention to it. Consciousness does not form the object of its understanding, it merely focuses, it is the act of attention, and, to borrow a Bergsonian image, it resembles the projector that suddenly focuses on an image. The difference is that there is no scenario, but a successive and incoherent illustration. In that magic lantern all the pictures are privileged. Consciousness suspends in experience the objects of its attention. Through its miracle it isolates them. Henceforth they are beyond all judgments. This is the “intention” that characterizes consciousness. But the word does not imply any idea of finality; it is taken in its sense of “direction”: its only value is topographical.)

不过加缪对科学尚无法解释的世界那么忧心我还真没想到，看到胡塞尔的这句话他才得到些许慰藉，也许他当年应该多读读理论物理书，虽然我很理解有晚风中轻搭在肩头的手，夫复何求。

(... When farther on Husserl exclaims: “If all masses subject to attraction were to disappear, the law of attraction would not be destroyed but would simply remain without any possible application,” I know that I am faced with a metaphysic of consolation. And if I want to discover the point where thought leaves the path of evidence, I have only to reread the parallel reasoning that Husserl voices regarding the mind: “If we could contemplate clearly the exact laws of psychic processes, they would be seen to be likewise eternal and invariable, like the basic laws of theoretical natural science. Hence they would be valid even if there were no psychic process.” Even if the mind were not, its laws would be!)

接下来再给自己点鼓励，认怂了以后，就可以背水一战了！就这么多日子，所以就在这些日子里折腾吧。

(The absurd man thus catches sight of a burning and frigid, transparent and limited universe in which nothing is possible but everything is given, and beyond which all is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept such a universe and draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope, and the unyielding evidence of a life without consolation.)

尼采不是也说过：

“What matters,” said Nietzsche, “is not eternal life but eternal vivacity.”

认怂也是一种选择：

Even humiliated, the flesh is my only certainty. I can live only on it. The creature is my native land. This is why I have chosen this absurd and ineffectual effort. This is why I am on the side of the struggle. The epoch lends itself to this, as I have said.

在人生的小小空间里，也有我的自由、我的反抗、我的热情。

opposite the essential contradiction, I maintain my human contradiction. I establish my lucidity in the midst of what negates it. I exalt man before what crushes him, and my freedom, my revolt, and my passion come together then in that tension, that lucidity, and that vast repetition.

Yes, man is his own end. And he is his only end. If he aims to be something, it is in this life.

最后，加缪说，我们要想象西西弗斯是幸福的！

I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain! One always finds one’s burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

加缪啊，你这只天蝎座，希望你肩上的那只手带给了你比写作此文更实实在在的慰藉。因为读着着实很累啊！现在就只羡慕有只手搭在肩头的你啦！One must imagine oneself happy.