Taking out the metaphorical aspect in the allegory, it seems that what Plato wants to convey is that man and his folly could not be reined at times especially when they are presented with the Truth. A man then who is trying to present this Truth would then be deemed as insane or they would shun his/her assertions as false or even wrong (Brians). On the other hand, Camus has presented us with a different side of human nature. Upon reading the Myth, I could fairly deduce that Camus wanted to convey the idea that Sisyphus ordeal could be taken in twofold.
First is that it may just be pure torture to not be able to fulfill an ultimate goal and it could be seen as a victory on his part viz. being able to fulfill the destiny and be happy about it (Keefer). Reading what was said above and reading further the original text, there seems to be a connection between the two philosophers. The connection here is that Plato in his search for the truth is like Camus where it could be inferred that Camus discussion about life in general could mean finding the truth about life by doing the best we could in what we have in life.
The connection may be arbitrary for others but this is what I could fairly deduce, so far. This certain connection then is making it hard for me to actually choose which philosopher had best described the meaning and struggles of human life. I could always go for the idiosyncratic or eccentric way that people tend to cling to ignorance and half-truths, which would be taken here as the little t, or I could always go for the peculiar way where people would tend to find happiness in the absurd.
Whichever philosopher I would choose, it would still trickle down to one idea, which is that the meaning and struggles that is present in human life could no longer be grasped in just choosing between the two philosophers. What they could present to us though is that a certain view about it but taking this question into the big picture would make it hard for a person to actually present an answer as quickly as one could blink the eye. Alas, the specifications had been set. In lieu of what were mentioned above, it is in great belief that Albert Camus has presented us a unique and dark approach in the struggles and meaning of human life.
Not because his time is much closer than the present time but his approach has given me a new perspective that Plato did not. Camus, description of human life could be construed as something absurd. It seems that he believed in finding happiness in the absurdities that are presented to us and still say that all is well (Keefer). In a way, his assertion could be observed through other people in this world. Some people rejoice in the merest things and some people find it hard to be happy about the simplest things.
To sum up what constitutes human nature and life would take me a lifetime or more to make me come up with an answer. What could be done though is the speculation that Camus claim could be justified in few of the people that I know. What is essentially a big score for Camus work is that he had been able to deduce a certain aspect of human nature and life where there are those who could rejoice in the mundane thinking that this is their life and the struggles that they have vary with such embracing of life. Plato, by using his works, could be deemed as an idealist.
His concept of the world of forms and world of objects (The Philosophy of Plato), itself could be a way to rationalize his idealism. Yet, Plato had been one of the first few philosophers of his time and his deductions are commendable. This would not mean though that Plato would not have his flaws. One of this could be his assertion that man would continually find truths and few or nobody could be able to truly grasp the Truth since this Truth resides in the world of forms and it is what could be found in our soul (The Philosophy of Plato).
What could be presented to us then is the replica of those Truths. This assertion may have been reasonable enough but as the course of the changing path of philosophy, Platos work could now be compared to other philosophers. The struggle then that a person would have according to Plato is to be able to find the truth and hopefully discover the big T, Truth (Brians). In this aspect, what could be the strongest point that the opposition could present then is the fact that indeed some people are still struggling to find the truth.
The meaning of life or our real identity is few of the truths that could still be found. This may be a big point for the opposition but not all of the people would believe this as so. They would naturally attribute this as curiosity that we have regarding the concept of life and some people usually get lost along the way that they tend to just accept the absurdities that are happening around them. Finding the meaning of life and wondering about the struggles that presents us would have taken us a lifetime.
It is actually a tedious and sometimes a disappointing exercise. Yet most of the people are still, consciously or unconsciously, tries to resolve this big matter. I may not be in a position to prescribe how a person would be able to achieve these feats but I may be able to give out my own opinions about it. Choosing Camus work would definitely imply that I am under the impression that human life and conditions would not be easily resolved by trying to look for it in the form of the big T or Truth like Plato had insinuated in his allegory.
It is in my opinion that some people would not be actually be able to find the real meaning of life but he/she could more or less find a certain idea of what it would mean to live out the life that he/she has. Camus had summed it up through his Myth. In a way, it would be up to us on how we would be able to address the jackpot question that is life. We may be the defeated hero or we could take it out as the defiance against the forever frustration of the question and try to live out the life that we already know it to be.
Although this would not necessarily mean stagnation but it would be called embracing what we have and try to make it our own ultimate goal to succeed. This mean then that people would be able to change the course or path that they could take especially when it could change in the long run. The only assertion that I could make then is that it would then depend on perspectives.
Article from the link given : Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus The Allegory of the cave. htm The Philosophy of Plato. 2002. September 21, 2007.