Absurd levels of coping
Although most philosophies are a form of elaborate, convoluted cope and delusion, one stands out as the worst of them all, while at the same time insulting most other philosophical schools of thought, due to being mistakenly included as one. That being absurdism.
Absurdism lacks a moral framework and any normative power. Justifying moral nihilism and hedonism is it’s only purpose as a defense mechanism against the realization of lifes futility and pain.
Or in frenchoid schizobabble: The absurdist tries to deterritorialize their qualia into a more manageable form by rationalization. This turns absurdism into a cyclical process more than a philosophical theory: they aren’t relieved of their qualia, they merely reterritorialize as noxious qualia. The dissastisfaction subjugates the self and reenforces their absurdist belief. (pulsion de mort ou quelle que soit la façon dont le hamburger est retourné)
The absurdist posits that there is only one important question (only to then answer it incorrectly). Now we can ask an unimportant question, e.g. what would the absurdist do if someone broke into their house and kill their children with a blowtorch? Presumably, we have to dismiss this as another mode of the absurd, without giving individual suffering any weight.
The absurdists proclaimed apathy and ignorance thus rids him of any moral obligations, he can happily absorb himself in his hedonic behaviour, without any consideration for his environment. To him, moral values are part of the absurd as much as everything else, so his pleasures can be enjoyed guilt free. He is the center of the absurd, he somehow still values his own pleasure and tries to minimize his own pain while ignoring the suffering he causes others.
Absurdism is mainly a philosophy of the professional-managerial class. These people have no immediate material shortcomings, they live a reasonably comfortable life and are plagued by lifes meaninglessness much more than those who have material and more immediate problems. Most people at the brink of starvation or homelessness woudln’t brush their situation off as meaningless and starve, but having at least subjective value and will rather try to get something to eat. Only those materially better off can afford the arrogance and ignorance of absurdism.
Absurdism only deserves to be called such due to how absurd it’s own premise is. But that is true for many beliefs, so I suggest calling the absurdist for what he is – an Hedonist.
See also Der Optimist