Comparing Camus Disagree With The Book Of Job

1.1 The perspective of The Book of Job would state that there is meaning in life, since God gives meaning and purpose to everything He creates. In contrast, however, Camus would see life as meaningless because, as he stated, “…it will be lived all the better if it has no meaning” (512). Though, unlike the two previous perspectives, Sartre would view that, by God, not existing and man’s existence preceding essence, a meaningful life is dependent upon the person’s actions.
1.2 When considering the topic of moral responsibility, the Book of Job would state that humans have a moral responsibility to God, even in difficulty. However, Camus would state that mankind does not have a moral responsibility, due to their failure to understand their own sin and guilt. Sartre would agree with the Book of Job because he also believes that an individual’s actions not only affect them, but others as well.
1.3 The topic of human freedom would be approached by the Book of Job by stating that God gave this freedom to mankind so that their obedience would be done through willing hearts. Camus would be in agreement with the Book of Job, when concerning this topic, because
mankind is able to choose between the practice of faith, suicide, or defiance to cope with life. Though Sartre would be in agreement with the other views on human freedom, he would come to this conclusion through understanding a person’s ability in choosing to ignore their moral responsibilities.
2.
Human freedom is connected to moral decision making because it gives moral decision making purpose. If man were to be without human freedom, moral decision making would then become useless, since situations would only allow one option. Furthermore, if religious and non-religious views influenced decision making, the relationship between these differing views on human freedom could be similar, because neither one is capable of removing human freedom. Those who believe and apply Mill’s perspective of right and wrong, are influenced by him in regards to their moral decisions which, in consequence, allows for one to make their own decision through human freedom. Similarly, Christianity’s perspective of right and wrong would influence a person’s decision making, but it still could not force someone to make a
decision.
3. The meaning of life is obeying God’s commandments; through practicing this, people are brought closer to God as well as mankind. A commonly applied commandment, love your neighbor as yourself, is supported by philosophical theory and real-life experience. For example, love your neighbor as yourself is a commandment specifically quoted in Mill’s “Utilitarianism,” because it promotes the theory of Utilitarianism, by inspiring happiness. Also, in addition to loving your neighbor as yourself, God adds to this commandment by calling all of man to love his enemy as himself. This commandment is supported by moral Universalism, because it encompasses all of man, additionally, it is needed in this world and society. An example of both commandments being applied is the Red Cross’s aiding others after natural disasters. This aid is not dependent on whether the victims are neighbors or enemies; they are assisted due to their need. Furthermore, medical facilities, such as Shriners hospital, assists those who desperately need medical treatment and do not have the financial stability for the treatment’s requirements. By understanding how important these two commandments of God’s are, (loving your neighbor and your enemy as yourself) one can better understand why obeying all God’s commandments make up the meaning of life.