Albert Camuss Philosophical Questions In The Guest Essay Example

Even though Daru does not know the man's name, he still views him as an object or an animal. He only sees the Arab's dark yet shining eyes and animal-like mouth as he consumes Daru's flour cake. Despite performing actions that would be considered humane towards a man such as putting away the gun, removing ropes, sharing a meal, and giving a bed, Daru still perceives the Arab as if he were an animal or object. This is evident in his failure to inquire about the prisoner's name or past.The Arab is depicted by Camus as lacking a personality, making it challenging to determine the impact of Daru's actions when giving him choices. The Arab's individuality does not affect Daru's decision to provide options. This lack of personality can also be seen in Balducci leaving the Arab with Daru without verifying if Daru fulfilled his societal obligations.

Camus, a philosopher, may have chosen to write the story with vacuum-packed characters as a way to draw definite conclusions about the nature of man. This aligns with his ultimate aim as a philosopher. During the night, Daru does not actively prevent the prisoner from leaving. The gun is in the drawer and the doors are unlocked. When the Arab wakes up to relieve himself, Daru believes he is running away and thinks "Good riddance!" However, the Arab does not take the opportunity, possibly out of fear of falling into a trap or because he does not understand the opportunity presented to him. It is also possible that he has accepted his punishment and is buying time until his imprisonment or execution. If Camus intended for the Arab to

represent "the dog," it would explain why he did not leave.

A loyal dog will not escape when it has the chance, just as a person faithful to society's laws should not disobey them unless there is injustice. Therefore, Daru's act of giving the Arab a choice loses its significance. If the Arab were truly loyal like a dog, Daru wouldn't have needed to leave the door unlocked because no dog would have even considered unlocking it themselves. However, if Daru is isolated from society, then it doesn't matter whom he offers the opportunity or what actions he takes; philosophical conclusions are drawn from his presentation of the opportunity regardless of who receives it. The power to make decisions is shared among all members of society.

The text discusses the concept of predetermined outcomes and the inability to predict them through simple rules. It questions why some men contemplate decisions while others react without thought. It also raises the issue of whether all men understand their free will. Daru's offering of a choice to the Arab is examined, questioning whether it was fair or driven by ego. The sadness that Daru feels towards the Arab's final decision is explored, as well as Balducci and Daru's reluctance to take responsibility for another man. Ultimately, the text suggests that the Arab becomes society's servant, with no control over his decisions according to both the reader and Daru. However, uncertainty remains about whether Daru himself is different from this societal dynamic. Through its characters in isolation, Camus presents philosophical inquiries that prompt further questioning. This approach reflects the philosopher's tendency to ask questions that inherently contain answers rather than seeking

them directly.