Do you lift a roof over your head
or is the lifting
roof enough?

Do any of them keep the rain out?

The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, 1995

ABSURD, THE. A term used by existentialists to describe that which one might have thought to be amenable to reason but which turns out to be beyond the limits of rationality. For example, in Sartre’s philosophy the ‘original choice’ of one’s fundamental project is said to be ‘absurd’, since, although choices are normally made for reasons, this choice lies beyond reason because all reasons for choice are supposed to be grounded in one’s fundamental
project. Arguably, this case in fact shows that Sartre is mistaken in supposing that reasons for choice are themselves grounded in a choice; and one can argue that other cases which are supposed to involve experience of the ‘absurd’ are in fact a *reductio ad absurdum of the assumptions which produce this conclusion. The ‘absurd’ does not in fact play an essential role within existentialist philosophy; but it is an important aspect of the broader cultural context of existentialism, for example in the ‘theatre of the absurd’, as exemplified by the plays of Samuel Beckett.

AI

In philosophy, the absurd refers to a conflict between two things:

1. the human demand for meaning, order, or justification, and
2. a world that offers none, or at least none that can be objectively guaranteed.

The term is most closely associated with Albert Camus, though it has roots in earlier thought.

For Camus, the absurd is not that the world is chaotic or meaningless by itself, and not that humans are irrational. The absurd arises from their confrontation: we ask the world for meaning, and the world remains silent. That mismatch is the absurd.

Importantly, the absurd is not a theory about reality but a description of a lived condition. It is something experienced, not deduced.

Camus rejects three common responses:

• Religious faith (inventing transcendent meaning),
• Philosophical absolutism (claiming final rational explanations),
• Suicide (escaping the problem rather than facing it).

His alternative is lucid revolt: living fully, consciously, and honestly without appeal to ultimate meaning. Sisyphus, condemned to push his rock forever, becomes the model figure—not because his task has meaning, but because he recognizes its meaninglessness and continues anyway.

Related but distinct uses:

• Kierkegaard treats the absurd as the point where reason fails and faith begins.
• Existentialism more broadly links the absurd to alienation, contingency, and freedom.
• Logical positivism uses “absurd” differently, to mean meaningless or nonsensical statements.

So, in philosophy, the absurd is not mere nonsense. It is the tension between our need for meaning and the world’s indifference.

Wikipedia

Absurdism is the philosophical thesis that life, or the world in general, is absurd. There is wide agreement that the term “absurd” implies a lack of meaning or purpose but there is also significant dispute concerning its exact definition and various versions have been suggested. The choice of one’s definition has important implications for whether the thesis of absurdism is correct and for the arguments cited for and against it: it may be true on one definition and false on another.

In a general sense, the absurd is that which lacks a sense, often because it involves some form of contradiction. The absurd is paradoxical in the sense that it cannot be grasped by reason. But in the context of absurdism, the term is usually used in a more specific sense. According to most definitions, it involves a conflict, discrepancy, or collision between two things. Opinions differ on what these two things are. For example, it is traditionally identified as the confrontation of rational man with an irrational world or as the attempt to grasp something based on reasons even though it is beyond the limits of rationality. Similar definitions see the discrepancy between intention and outcome, between aspiration and reality, or between subjective assessment and objective worth as the source of absurdity. Other definitions locate both conflicting sides within man: the ability to apprehend the arbitrariness of final ends and the inability to let go of commitments to them. In regard to the conflict, absurdism differs from nihilism since it is not just the thesis that nothing matters. Instead, it includes the component that things seem to matter to us nonetheless and that this impression cannot be shaken off. This difference is expressed in the relational aspect of the absurd in that it constitutes a conflict between two sides.

Various components of the absurd have been suggested and different researchers often focus their definition and inquiry on one of these components. Some accounts emphasize the practical components concerned with the individual seeking meaning while others stress the theoretical components about being unable to know the world or to rationally grasp it. A different disagreement concerns whether the conflict exists only internal to the individual or is between the individual’s expectations and the external world. Some theorists also include the metacognitive component that the absurd entails that the individual is aware of this conflict.

An important aspect of absurdism is that the absurd is not limited to particular situations but encompasses life as a whole. There is a general agreement that people are often confronted with absurd situations in everyday life. They often arise when there is a serious mismatch between one’s intentions and reality. For example, a person struggling to break down a heavy front door is absurd if the house they are trying to break into lacks a back wall and could easily be entered on this route. But the philosophical thesis of absurdism is much more wide-reaching since it is not restricted to individual situations, persons, or phases in life. Instead, it asserts that life, or the world as a whole, is absurd. The claim that the absurd has such a global extension is controversial, in contrast to the weaker claim that some situations are absurd.

The perspective of absurdism usually comes into view when the agent takes a step back from their individual everyday engagements with the world to assess their importance from a bigger context. Such an assessment can result in the insight that the day-to-day engagements matter a lot to us despite the fact that they lack real meaning when evaluated from a wider perspective. This assessment reveals the conflict between the significance seen from the internal perspective and the arbitrariness revealed through the external perspective. The absurd becomes a problem since there is a strong desire for meaning and purpose even though they seem to be absent. In this sense, the conflict responsible for the absurd often either constitutes or is accompanied by an existential crisis.

Read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absurdism