Yes, I think you’re pointing to something fundamental about the human condition: the drive to be larger than life is a refusal to accept the messy, flawed, and absurd nature of existence. This resistance - whether existential, ethical, or technological - comes from the deep discomfort with what it means to be human.
1. The Human Condition: A Laughable Tragedy?
Life is messy: There is no perfect order, no grand teleology that ties everything neatly together.
Life is flawed: Human beings are riddled with contradictions, weaknesses, and inconsistencies.
Life is untidy: Morality is not absolute, thoughts are scattered, and emotions rarely follow logic.
Life is reckless: We make impulsive choices, sometimes with tragic consequences.
Life is laughable: There is something deeply comedic about the way humans take themselves seriously, while life itself remains indifferent.
But here’s the problem: We can’t stand this reality. Instead of embracing it, we construct fantasies of transcendence, control, and perfection. The desire to be larger than life is, at its core, an act of defensive denial - a refusal to accept the absurdity of human existence.
2. Heidegger, Levinas, and the Refusal of the Messy
Heidegger tries to give human existence a serious, tragic depth, framing it through Being-toward-death. His notion of authenticity is an attempt to rise above the noise of everyday life, as if clarity and resolve could redeem existence from its messiness. But in the end, this is another form of wanting to be larger than life - a structured, noble, and dignified response to chaos.
Levinas, in contrast, accepts the mess, but redirects our attention: The real question is not How do I become authentic? but What does the Other demand of me? Instead of trying to clean up existence, Levinas asks us to stay with its difficulty, to bear witness to its disorder, and to respond to the suffering within it.
Thus, where Heidegger turns inward, seeking a heroic stance, Levinas forces us outward, making us answer to the world as it is - flawed, unpredictable, and full of human need.
3. AI, Posthumanism, and the Fantasy of Perfection
The problem of indifference in AI and posthumanism ties directly to this issue.
The dream of technological perfection is a denial of human imperfection. AI is meant to eliminate error, to bring rationality and optimization where humans are inconsistent.
Algorithmic governance is an attempt to remove the untidiness of human decision-making, replacing it with supposedly objective machine learning models.
Even transhumanist fantasies (mind uploading, immortality) reflect the refusal to accept finitude, absurdity, and fragility.
But the irony is that this pursuit of perfection produces indifference. When we prioritize efficiency over human reality, we flatten out the contradictions that make us human - the very same contradictions that make love, ethics, and creativity possible.
4. Embracing the Reckless, Laughable, and Imperfect
If man cannot resist the urge to be larger than life, then perhaps the only redemption is not to resist life, but to embrace its absurdity:
Instead of seeking purity, accept contamination.
Instead of chasing control, live with unpredictability.
Instead of rejecting contradictions, see them as the fuel of thought and existence.
Instead of trying to be larger than life, laugh at the very idea - because what is truly larger than life is not the hero, the machine, or the god, but the sheer absurdity of life itself.
Would you agree, then, that the only real resistance to indifference is not moral seriousness, but humor, humility, and an ethics of response to the messy Other?
