Both ideas are the similar. Only one fits a kind of personality disposition, and the other, another.

I've been interested in both philosophers and even now I see how much their thoughts have influenced me.

The thing in itself is knowable, and through this 'knowability' humans can align themselves to a 'purely subjective will without knowledge'- Schopenhauer's 'ultimate good', without being pessimistic.

The idea of 'existence as suffering' - the experience of the absurd is no longer tenable. Because humans can now freely choose to be the will, 'the thing in itself'.

It's a grey area.

Too much 'truth' to handle?

There's absurdity here only to the extent of the 'programs' running in our minds. But otherwise many other ideas and realities exist. And they go by other descriptions.

I can imagine a black Harry Porter, or a James Bond who's a Muslim, turn it to a script and later a movie. It's possible to have a Luo president, it's only a matter of conditions changing- if it's improbable now.

My interest here rests on what fuels a group of people, the investors, to fork up millions of dollars required to turn such an absurdity into a reality.

Think of the absurdity.

A mass of Somali natives have the gumption to slay the mighty US Marines and drag their bodies along the dusty streets or Mogadishu or wherever.

It rankles, it hurts pride deeply, and it means loss of face.

Until Black Hawk Down turns this absurdity of unimagined loss into a crowning victory.