Real generosity towards the future lies in giving all to the present. This profound statement holds great significance. When we truly understand that the present is the foundation upon which the future is built, we realize the importance of wholeheartedly devoting ourselves to the here and now.

In the hustle and bustle of modern life, it's easy to get caught up in thinking about the future and neglecting the present. However, by doing so, we may miss out on countless opportunities and experiences that could shape our future in a positive way.

Giving all to the present means being fully present in every moment, whether it's spending quality time with loved ones, working on a project with passion, or simply enjoying the beauty of nature. It means being mindful of our actions and decisions, and making choices that are in line with our values and goals.

When we practice this kind of generosity towards the present, we not only enhance our own lives but also contribute to the well-being of those around us. By living in the present and giving our best, we create a positive ripple effect that can have a lasting impact on the future.

\\n  Real generosity towards the future lies in giving all to the present.\\n

In this attempt of a book, the author has tried to strip the subject from the politics and political stances of the past era and has also attempted to give the postmodernist individualist attitude.

The past era's politics and political positions often had a profound impact on individuals and society as a whole. By stripping the subject from these aspects, the author aims to present a more objective and in-depth analysis.

The postmodernist individualist attitude, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of the individual and their unique experiences and perspectives. This approach challenges the traditional view of a unified and objective truth and instead recognizes the multiplicity of meanings and interpretations.

Through this book, the author hopes to offer readers a new way of looking at the subject and to encourage them to question and reflect on their own beliefs and values.

YouTube book channel, you can get information about Albert Camus' life, all his books and the chronological reading order: https://youtu.be/-_X3xWwwAoA

There is a saying that "however you enter the new year, that year will pass like that". Well, I wanted to enter 2021 with Camus' "The Rebel" book and spend the whole year with the thoughts of rebellion. Isn't reading a book the greatest form of rebellion anyway?

Camus, who turns Descartes' philosophy of "I think, therefore I am" into "I rebel, therefore we are", is actually calling us to be informed about the history and forms of rebellion. And what don't we rebel against in our daily lives?

Taking myself as an example, I rebel against conformism, against groupings, against insincerity, against those who present believing or not believing in God as a form of show, against those who don't read books, and against those who can still remain ignorant even after reading. At the beginning of this year, I also informed others about what I would rebel against. For example, I said that I would rebel against employers who offer a salary even lower than the minimum wage and look for modern slaves, and also against the 8-5 working hours schedule that is dictated to me and that many people are tired of. Yes... Now I rebel, therefore I am! So what would you like to rebel against?

Camus' account of the individual human's formation process with only his own self is more about denying the existence of God and finding his own individuality. In this regard, let me add my own thought here. Believing or not believing in the existence of a God does not make you a primitive person. But if you interfere with a person who believes or does not believe in the existence of a God, then you can also easily become a primitive person. Therefore, the main purpose of this book and generally the books that teach us to rebel should be this: Do not be primitive.

Also, are you one of those who want to take a leap at the beauty of the title of this book? Then, having a background in Greek mythology, the human-God encounters between Prometheus and Zeus, the Marquis de Sade and his books, Dostoyevsky's books and especially the Karamazov Brothers book, the philosophical, religious and historical reasons for Nietzsche's saying "God is dead!", the reasons for Nietzsche's rejection of all moral values, the addition of the individual who is in rebellion on top of the human who is inconsistent and absurd, which Camus based in his "The Myth of Sisyphus" book, the poems of Lautréamont and Rimbaud, Jean Jacques Rousseau and the "The Social Contract" book, Hegel's philosophy, Hitler's fascism, the Russian revolutions, Bazarov, Bakunin, Nechayevism, Marx and his thoughts on capitalism, Proust and the "In Search of Lost Time" series, and then reading this book, I think it will be much better.

Of course, I was not informed about all of these topics. After all, we are born without this information and we can develop ourselves over time and also choose over time what we should rebel against. Therefore, I think Camus' book can also give you research clues about the topics I wrote above and can draw a path for you about which author can contribute to you with which form of rebellion. That is, Camus is saying: I have written a 360-page book, and now it's up to you to choose what you will rebel against based on what's in this book...

Moreover, if I were to give a "reading guide for The Rebel", I would first recommend reading Camus' "The Stranger", "The Plague", "The Myth of Sisyphus" and "The Fall" books, and then understanding Camus' thoughts on the inconsistent human and moving on to this book. Definitely, but definitely, this should not be the first book you read from Camus. I think you should first understand the "sun", which is the metaphor of hope and individual rebellion determined by Camus himself, from books like "The Stranger" and "The Myth of Sisyphus", and then also understand the human-world independence together with the Sisyphus myth in the "The Myth of Sisyphus" book.

I will prepare a detailed reading guide for all of Albert Camus' books in the near future.

Léelo, o no lo leas. En realidad no importa demasiado. Esta frase puede sonar un poco indiferente, pero en cierto sentido, tiene una cierta verdad. A veces, la decisión de leer o no leer algo no puede tener un impacto enorme en nuestra vida. Podemos elegir no leer un libro que no nos interese, o no prestar atención a un artículo que no tenga relevancia para nosotros.

Sin embargo, también es importante recordar que la lectura es una actividad muy valiosa. Puede expandir nuestro conocimiento, mejorar nuestra capacidad de expresión y desarrollar nuestra imaginación. Además, la lectura puede ser una fuente de entretenimiento y placer. Así que, aunque en ocasiones no importe demasiado leer o no leer algo, no deberíamos olvidar el valor que tiene la lectura en general.

En conclusión, podemos decir que la decisión de leer o no leer es una decisión personal que depende de muchas factores. Pero, sea cual sea nuestra decisión, debemos recordar que la lectura es una actividad muy importante que puede enriquecer nuestra vida en muchos aspectos.

How have you become so accustomed to shedding blood that if one day passes and you haven't shed human blood, that day will be your downfall? Astonishing, astonishing, at all of us inhuman beings.

On the 26th of Khordad, in the year 1402, naivety.

This text seems to express a sense of horror and condemnation towards the act of shedding blood and the inhumanity of people. It questions how one could become so desensitized to such a heinous act that it becomes a regular occurrence. The use of the words "astonishing" and "inhuman" emphasizes the magnitude of the situation.

The mention of the specific date, 26th of Khordad, 1402, might add a sense of historical context or perhaps a specific event that led to this realization. Overall, the text serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of human kindness and the consequences of our actions.

One of the most brilliant books I’ve ever read.

It is truly a masterpiece that showcases the author's remarkable intellect and creativity.

The ideas presented within its pages are not only thought-provoking but also have the power to change the way one views the world.

Every sentence seems to be carefully crafted, leading the reader on a journey of discovery and enlightenment.

The author's ability to weave together complex concepts and present them in a clear and engaging manner is truly astonishing.

It is a book that I will surely return to again and again, as there is always something new to uncover and learn.

Such a great mind behind this work, and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to experience it.

It has left an indelible mark on my literary journey and will undoubtedly inspire me for years to come.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who is looking for a truly exceptional reading experience.

This is probably Camus' masterpiece. It represents the finest, most mature, and controlled exploration of his highly accessible and, above all, humane philosophy.

You could even choose to read it in isolation or prior to any of his other works. It is both reflective and a development of the ideas presented in "The Outsider" and "The Plague" that didn't always seamlessly transfer to "The Myth of Sisyphus", despite the essay's individual stunning nature.

I often find myself comparing Camus to Dostoevsky in terms of the ideas he engages with. Camus' philosophically complex novels together form an almost secularized version of Dostoevsky's greatest works.

"The Rebel" reaches its culmination as a deeply political (and extremely controversial in its time, to say the least) response to the mournful final passages of "The Myth of Sisyphus". It offers a highly perceptive examination of revolution, violence, power, and what nihilism truly is, what it does, what it can signify, and what the possible solution might be.

It happened to me to read that life divides people into those who live it and those who describe it, and that one cannot do both things at the same time. This seems very true to me, and indeed it is often the task of the latter to find patterns and keys to reading in order to give meaning to the chaotic and bloody becoming of history that the former live. It happened to Saint Augustine after the barbarian invasions, to Spinoza after the religious wars, to Hegel after the Terror and also to Camus, faced with the terrible test of finding a meaning to Stalinism, which was beginning to show the world its terrible face precisely in those early fifties.

Metabolizing the shock of seeing the revolution that had been (and still was) the hope of so many millions of oppressed people turn into a bloody nightmare risked depriving the very concept of revolt of legitimacy: it almost seems inevitable that every form of power overthrow is destined to evolve into a form of oppression even worse than the one from which it starts. And this the cultural world of the left, also faced with the blatant social inequalities of the West of that world, could not accept: this is the true necessity of the reflection contained in "The Rebel".

The book is difficult to read and clearly has no divulgative intentions, but in my opinion it has the merit of starting from great intuitions and of restituting a clear, realistic and useful interpretation of the contemporary world for deepening even today. To understand what a revolt is, one must start from metaphysics, that is, from Being. So what is a rebellious man? A man who says no. And each of us is defined in his Being by the no's that he finds the strength to say, exactly as by positive decisions.

This is the approach from which the whole book takes its cue, which first distinguishes revolt (the entirely internal and personal act of finding the strength to disobey) and revolution (the historical event that embodies a widespread revolt and overthrows the power against which it rebels); and then shows how from the French Revolution onwards, through Rousseau, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche and the political systems of Nazism and Communism that have taken their cue from them, the three forms of revolt (metaphysical, political, artistic) have gone hand in hand through an almost obligatory path until the nihilism of the twentieth century.

Such nihilism is politically embodied in Hitlerism and Stalinism on the one hand, and in the artistic void of the neo-avant-gardes and neorealism on the other. All this through a solid, linear and rigorous reasoning, which allows the reader to close the book with a rich and useful key to reading the Contemporary Age from the point of view of the revolutionaries of those generations. Personally, I have never read a book that explains with so much clarity in so few pages the paradox between the socialist ideal and its manifestation in Soviet tyranny.

And the way out? In the effort to give, after all, another possibility to the revolt that does not resign itself to the complacent inequality of liberal society, Camus seems to be in difficulty; in my opinion, the last part of the book is really very confused, but not without meaning. The Algerian writer correctly defines slavery, lies and murder as the vices of the degenerate revolutions from which the revolt in its three forms must beware, but he fails to bring his reasoning to its extreme consequences: this is because he himself belongs to the cultural world of the West and of nihilism, and he cannot give up either the necessity of the violence of the revolutionary gesture or the radical disobedience towards every form of revealed truth ("the death of God" in Nietzschean memory, which takes its start precisely from the French Revolution). He will end up with a very fragile idea of the revolutionary ideal, always in tension between fidelity to the ideal from which it is born and the historical necessity of giving order to the chaos it creates. And the only way out of this contradiction seems to be the sacrifice of the revolutionary himself, who dies for his idea. It is a beautiful image and very suitable for those times (Che Guevara would have liked it very much), but illusory and dangerous for those who live in the world of 2011, where every day we witness revolutions that are certainly not justified by the sacrifice of the fedayn of the day, but rather made even more bloody.

It is a pity, because if he had not been so Western in his atheism and in his will to power, the Nobel Prize winner from Algiers could have noticed that three years earlier a revolt had been embodied in a revolution not condemned to degenerate. He would have noticed that a very small old man had put himself at the head of a billion men precisely to fight slavery in the name of freedom, lies in the name of truth, murder in the name of non-violence. He did not notice it because as a son of the French Revolution he could not understand that that old revolutionary named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi united faith in God with truth and non-violence, as an unrenounceable principle. And killing that unrenounceable principle is the mistake that condemns Western revolutions to blood and nothingness.

Albert Camus' mind was indeed truly one of a kind.

In my personal opinion, this is without a doubt one of the finest essays ever penned. As a Nihilist myself, observing Camus' distinct brand of Nihilistic perspective, which leans towards the optimistic side with his concept of Absurdism, has been incredibly instrumental in helping me formulate my own philosophy in life. I have an admiration for this man that words simply cannot fully express.

It is truly a tragedy that he was taken from us far too soon. Just imagine the plethora of other remarkable works we could have been blessed with if he had not met his untimely demise in that fateful car crash. (Although there are some reliable sources that firmly believe he was actually assassinated by the Soviets, but that is a topic that merits further exploration at another time.)

His ideas and writings continue to have a profound impact on countless individuals, and his legacy will undoubtedly endure for generations to come.

I should have given him the necessary space and time for a more in-depth analysis. If I had done that, he would have obtained a better result. However, his academic work is still very impressive.

Sometimes, in the pursuit of academic excellence, we may overlook the importance of allowing others the freedom and time to explore and analyze. In this case, had I provided the appropriate conditions, the outcome might have been even more outstanding.

Nevertheless, despite the potential for improvement, the work that has been done is already remarkable. It shows his dedication and hard work in the academic field. We should always strive to learn from both our successes and our missed opportunities to continue growing and achieving better results in the future.

Rebellion and its manifestations have been a subject of great interest and exploration. As soon as a man, lacking in character, takes refuge in doctrine and crime begins to reason about itself, it multiplies like reason and takes on all the aspects of the syllogism. The purpose of this essay is to once again face the reality of the present, which is logical crime, and carefully examine the arguments that justify it.

. . .As soon as a man, through lack of character, takes refuge in doctrine, as soon as crime reasons about itself, it multiplies like reason itself and assumes all the aspects of the syllogism. . . . The purpose of this essay is once again to face the reality of the present, which is logical crime, and examine meticulously the arguments by which it is justified.(p. 3)

This topic can be extremely fascinating, especially if, like me, one abhors historical Sovietism and all that it has brought about. I discovered that Sarah Bakewell's excellent new book At the Existentialist Café: Freedom, Being, and Apricot Cocktails provided the perfect background to start delving into this. Published in French in 1951, what I particularly like so far is Camus's refusal to embrace the concept of the worker's collective. He writes solely about the individual and his or her need for rebellion. It is a very brave book. For instance:

Man's solidarity is founded upon rebellion, and rebellion, in its turn, can only find its justification in this solidarity. We have, then, the right to say that any rebellion which claims the right to deny or destroy this solidarity loses simultaneously its right to be called a rebellion and becomes in reality an acquiescence in murder. (p. 22)

One can only imagine how they must have hated him. The section on the lunatic Marquis de Sade is truly breathtaking. My disgust always prevented me from reading him for subtext. But Camus shows us how...

Two centuries ahead of his time and on a reduced scale, Sade extolled totalitarian societies in the name of unbridled freedom. . . . The history and the tragedy of our times really begin with him. . . . Our times have limited themselves to blending, in a curious manner, his dream of a universal republic and his technique of degradation. Finally, what he hated most, legal murder, has availed itself of the discoveries that he wanted to put to the service of instinctive murder. Crime, which he wanted to be the exotic and delicious fruit of unbridled vice, is no more today than the dismal habit of a police-controlled morality. Such are the surprises of literature. (p. 46)

Lucretius is touched upon, as well as Valentinus and some of the other Gnostics, Milton's Paradise Lost, Dandyism, the Romantics, Ivan Karamazov's moral position on crime—particularly patricide—in Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, and Nietzsche, of whom Camus said, \\"he recognized nihilism for what it was and examined it like a clinical fact.\\" (p. 66)

\\"When the ends are great,\\" Nietzsche wrote to his own detriment, \\"humanity employs other standards and no longer judges crimes as such even if it resorts to the most frightful means.\\" He died in 1900, at the beginning of the century in which that pretension was to become fatal.(p. 77)

Rimbaud is \\"...the poet of rebellion—the greatest of all.\\" His decision to stop writing being perhaps the ultimate act of rebellion. \\"He illustrates the struggle between the will to be and the desire for annihilation, between the yes and the no, which we have discovered again and again at every stage of rebellion.\\" (p.91) This exploration of rebellion through the works and ideas of various thinkers and writers offers a rich and complex understanding of this fundamental human impulse.

"The Rebel: An Essay on Man in Revolt" by Albert Camus is often seen as a thought-provoking exploration of rebellion and its consequences. However, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that this work has several flaws. Firstly, Camus fails to provide a clear and consistent definition of rebellion. The concept is muddled and convoluted, making it difficult for readers to understand its true essence. Secondly, he presents an overly dualistic view of rebellion, dividing humanity into rebels and tyrants. This simplistic approach overlooks the complex web of motivations and behaviors that make up human nature. Thirdly, the book lacks psychological analysis, which is crucial for understanding the underlying factors that drive rebellion. Camus generally ignores the role of emotions, desires, and beliefs in the acts of rebellion and their consequences. Fourthly, the moral framework presented in the book is inconsistent and ambiguous. Camus criticizes violence and terrorism, but at the same time, he attempts to justify some acts of rebellion. This ethical dilemma only adds to the confusion and makes it difficult for readers to evaluate the morality of rebellion. Finally, Camus' intellectual arrogance and condescending tone alienate readers who may have different opinions. His unyielding stance on his own ideological perspective stifles intellectual growth and dialogue. Overall, "The Rebel" falls short of offering a comprehensive and meaningful exploration of rebellion and its consequences.