Mystical Atheism, Absurdity, and Meaningful Living

Abstract In The Myth of Sisyphus (1942), Albert Camus critiques mysticism for its attempt to escape the absurdity or meaninglessness of reality through a leap of faith (which Camus calls “philosophical suicide”). This critique does not so obviously apply to the atheistic mysticism endorsed by Brook Ziporyn in his Experiments in Mystical Atheism (2024). According to Ziporyn, the mystic atheist (e.g., Daoist) is not ignoring, but instead emulating, the ultimate purposelessness of reality that Camus would characterize as absurd. This raises the question whether acknowledgement of absurdity would be better served by mystic atheism (what Ziporyn calls “Emulative Atheism”) rather than the atheism of philosophers such as Sartre and Camus, who champion human purposiveness, control and freedom (an approach Ziporyn calls “Compensatory Atheism”). In the following exploration of the similarities and differences between Camus and his Emulative Atheist counterpart, I endorse the view that Emulative Atheism better supports meaning in life than Compensatory Atheism, also clarifying how mystic atheism is not a form of philosophical suicide. But I also present a minor critique that Camus would likely make of Ziporyn’s presentation of mystical atheism, given Ziporyn’s pursuit of a highly abstract metaphysical picture of reality, which is at odds with the lucidity that we find in everyday life experience. In his own exploration of Daoism, David Cooper promotes a “sense of mystery,” involving an orientation toward the ineffable that emerges within ordinary experience. This appreciation of Daoism within the context of everyday life serves to enhance the meaningfulness of life that can be derived from Ziporyn’s mystical atheism.