• Aboriginals in North America
  • Beast Literature
  • Canadiana.1
  • Dances & Music
  • Europe: Ukraine & Russia
  • Fables and Fairy Tales
  • Fables by Jean de La Fontaine
  • Feasts & Liturgy
  • Great Books Online
  • La Princesse de Clèves
  • Middle East
  • Molière
  • Nominations
  • Posts on Love Celebrated
  • Posts on the United States
  • The Art and Music of Russia
  • The French Revolution & Napoleon Bonaparte
  • Voyageurs Posts
  • Canadiana.2

Micheline's Blog

~ Art, music, books, history & current events

Micheline's Blog

Category Archives: Philosophy

André Villiers’ Meditation on Molière’s “Dom Juan”

19 Monday Aug 2019

Posted by michelinewalker in Comedy, Molière, Philosophy

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

André Villiers, Dom Juan, Meditation, Molière, Philosophy, Staging Molière's Dom Juan

800px-Don_Juan_and_the_statue_of_the_Commander_mg_0119

Dom Juan par Alexandre-Évariste Fragonard (commons.wikimedia.org)

worksofmoliere05moli_0010

Pierrot, Charlotte, Dom Juan et Mathurine (Google)

langue20_donjuan_maxi (2)

Don Juan, Zerlina et Donna Elvira par Alexandre-Évariste Fragonard (Google)

My posts on Molière’s Dom Juan overlap. I must apologize. Space is needed when reading Molière’s Dom Juan. There are several layers of meaning. Moreover, Molière’s version of the Don Juan myth differs substantially from other versions.

For instance, we do not see Dom Juan seducing women time and again and marrying them. We see a Dom Juan who has abandoned a loving wife, Elvira. The deal Dom Carlos and Dom Alonse, Elvire’s brothers, propose cannot be faulted.  Dom Juan has saved Dom Carlos and met Don Alonse. Both have assessed the problem and are ready to devise a way of restoring their sister’s honour. Dom Juan must return home to his wife. Society has its rules.

Freedom is not a free-for-all, or unlimited. One’s freedom stops where the freedom of others begins. This is the principle that allows human beings to live together in an orderly fashion, or safely. A driver stops at the red light. If he or she doesn’t, the consequences could be devastating. Similarly, love has its rules. André Villiers writes that:

“Love serves in effect as a chopping board for questions regarding the excellence of nature and the freedom of man. Many other developments are possible, but the relations between man and woman, which aliments [feeds] the most incendiary literature, pose in themselves the whole problem of individual freedom and social pressures. The behavior of a man in love points to his inclination and the value he places on it, to the limits he assigns to it and those imposed on him. This is the most pressing of concerns, the one that in the absolute is translated by defeat, and in practice, by all the compromises of everyday morality and the liberties taken in marriage.”[1]

The obligations, stopping at the red light, society has created are not based on religious beliefs.

“The limits imposed on the free exercise of our natural rights are not prejudices or religious beliefs, but the duties ‘necessary for human survival,’ as Locke was to say later on—the rights of Society. There is no other rule of virtue. However, this moral principle is equally valid for the inspiration of a love of humanity.”[2]

In the 17th century, France had yet to enter its “age of enlightenment,” but as peasants became bourgeois, buying offices, they had to devise rules that would allow them to live in freedom, protected, however paradoxical this may seem.

Molière was not harsh on his characters, but he knew there were societal covenants.

“Molière clearly saw the reciprocal relationship between spiritual problems on one side, and social and moral problems on the other. The pretext of a fable [the Dom Juan myth] allowed him to seize the subject in its most vital spot [marriage].”[3]

At no point does Molière admonish his libertin, the womanizer, except through Sganarelle’s words that are nonsense, but true. Womanizing is not freedom, but libertinage érudit was a fruitful meditation on the co-existence of the individual and society, societies that would be increasingly diverse.

Molière was conscious of his obligations. He had to house and feed his comedians and their families. La Grange (who played Dom Juan) kept a registre: earnings, expenses, the fabric and making of costumes, renovations to theaters and the daily life of Molière’s comedians. La Grange entered the troupe in 1659 and, after Molière’s death, he worked on publishing the complete works. That registre kiis a gift to posterity. Molière’s troupe was a “just society.” Molière’s health worried him considerably. There were people who counted on his writing comedies. They made a living as comedians. Having La Grange on board was a blessing.

“Dom Juan is not a dispensation from rules of conduct, nor is it a course in practical morality; but the wealth of ideas that its five acts suggest is considerable. It is a play that offers us ample material for meditation that is not limited to the problem of a particular period, and that leaves us marveling over so unique a work.”[4]

I read, but do not own a copy of Villiers’ Le Dom Juan de Molière, un problème de mise en scène (a problem of staging), 1947. I was in Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. So, I borrowed books or read them in a library, which is what students do. It is still available. Great!

Beth Adler translated the above, and Jacques Guicharnaud included Villiers’ comments in his Collection of Critical Essays. The chapter madame Adler translated is entitled: L’Essence profonde du drame. In Guicharnaud’s book, the title of this chapter is “Molière Revisited” (pp. 79 – 89).

My favourite words in Villiers’ excerpt are Molière “made a metaphysical shudder go across the stage.” Two and two make four, but there is an unquantifiable dimension to the life of human beings. Sganarelle tells Gusman that he can’t understand why Dom Juan does not believe in the loup-garou (the werewolf) (Act One, Scene One). Molière is incredibly funny, even in farcical tragi-comédies.

In short, Molière’s Dom Juan is about an atheist who abandoned his wife, Done Elvire, was given every opportunity to mend his ways, but seized none. The beggar (le pauvre) is acceptably uncompromising, but Dom Juan isn’t. His behaviour is a transgression of social norms and stems from hubris. The death of the Commandeur may be looked upon as Dom Juan’s original sin. Therefore, when he refuses to return to Done Elvire, the Statue takes his hand and throws him in a fiery abyss. Those who boast… burst.

I could not include André Villiers’ comments in Part Three. Villiers’ chapter is a cogent meditation on Dom Juan.

Don Juan2

Dom Juan par François Boucher (dessin) (wikipedia)

You may have noticed that I now make more mistakes than before. Sometimes, I misspell words, and must correct posts after they are published. My posts overlap and I repeat myself. Life inflicted damages. But writing posts on Molière forces me to reread each play very carefully.

I am very grateful to all who read my posts despite delays and some editing.

RELATED ARTICLES

  • Reading “Dom Juan” (Part Three) (16 August 2019)
  • Reading “Dom Juan” (Part Two) (11 August 2019)
  • Reading “Dom Juan” (Part One) (6 August 2019)
  • Don Juan: the Cycle & the Traditions (30 July 2019)

Sources and Resources

  • toutmolière.net
  • Molière 21
  • Brett B. Bodener

____________________

[1] André Villiers in Jacques Guicharnaud, Molière, a Collection of Critical Essays (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1964), p. 87.
[2] Guicharnaud, Loc. cit.
[3] Guicharnaud, Op. cit., pp. 86-87.
[4] Guicharnaud, Op. cit., p. 89.

Don Giovanni – Festival di Spoleto – “Don Giovanni a cenar teco…”

The Shipwreck of Don Juan by Eugène Delacroix

The Shipwreck of Don Juan by Eugène Delacroix, 1840 (wikiart.org)

© Micheline Walker
19 August 2019
WordPress

45.410497 -71.910311

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Pascal and Leibniz: Details

19 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by michelinewalker in Enlightenment, Philosophy, Science

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Calculators, Efficacious Grace, Le Pari Fatal, Leibniz, Leibniz's Wheel, Pascal, Pascal's Wager, Sufficient Grace, Sufficient Reason, The Pascaline

Blaise_Pascal_Versailles

Baise Pascal, Versailles (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

images

Portrait of Blaise Pascal made by François II Quesnel for Gérard Edelinck in 1691 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Blaise Pascal and Gottfried Leibniz

Voltaire‘s Candide was a satire of Leibniz‘ metaphysics, but not a criticism of Leibniz himself or all of his theories (1 July 1646 – 14 November 1716). Gottfried Leibniz, who lived in Leipzig, was a great mathematician, inventor, logician and diplomat. He believed in God and assumed that God was good, hence his “best of all possible worlds.” It was a noble thought, but nearly three centuries later, we remain very short of good.

Sufficient reason[1]

The word “sufficient” reminded me of Pascal (19 June 1623 – 19 August 1662: aged 39) who, despite illness, chronic pain, and his rather short life, contributed so much to the world of ideas and to science. While I was writing my posts on Candide, a monument to humankind, I was puzzled by Leibniz’s use of the word “sufficient.”

I remembered telling my students that after Étienne Pascal, Blaise Pascal’s father, lost his wife, he left Clermont-Ferrand, where Blaise was born and settled in Paris, where he often had guests who were prominent scientists.

Given that his son Blaise could not travel, due to ill health, whenever a scientist was in Paris, Étienne tried to introduce him to his son who was a child prodigy. In fact, the work done by Pierre de Fermat (17 August 1601 or 1607 – 12 January 1665) and Pascal into the calculus of probabilities laid “important groundwork” for Leibniz‘ formulation of the calculus. (See Leibniz, Wikipedia.)

At this point, allow me a slight digression.

The Calculator

As scientists, both Pascal and Leibniz invented calculators.

Blaise Pascal’s father was a tax farmer, the name given tax collectors during the ancien régime. This was a position one could purchase as was the case with many positions in 17th– and-18th-century France. Louis XIV was forever in need of money to pay for Versailles and finance his wars. Selling positions was yet another avenue allowing Louis to replenish France’s empty vaults.

As tax collector, Pascal’s father needed a calculator, so his son Blaise invented the Pascaline, an ancestor to our calculators and to computer science. It was a helpful machine and there are a few Pascalines left for everyone to see.

But Leibniz also invented a calculator, his Leibniz’s Wheel. Under Wikipedia’s entry on calculators, the reader is told that Leibniz’s calculator was never “fully operational.”

“Schickard [mostly] and Pascal were followed by Gottfried Leibniz who spent forty years designing a four-operation mechanical calculator, inventing in the process his Leibniz wheel, but who couldn’t design a fully operational machine.”

However, the Leibniz’ wheel entry tells a different story.

“Invented by Leibniz in 1673, it was used for three centuries until the advent of the electronic calculator in the mid-1970s.”

I wouldn’t dare refute that statement as we may be looking at two slightly different machines (“inventing in the process”). But I will point out that the “abacus,” was “a calculating tool that was in use centuries before the adoption of the written modern numeral system and is still widely used by merchants, traders and clerks in Asia, Africa, and elsewhere.” (See Abacus, Wikipedia.) It “was known to have been used by Sumerians and Egyptians before 2000 BCE.” I should think that humans have always had some sort of calculator. (See Calculator, Wikipedia.)

Let us return to the word ‘Sufficient’

Pascal may have provided an element to Leibniz’s vocabulary: the word “sufficient,” as in “sufficient reason.” This no one can prove, but it is either ‘probable’ or quite a coincidence. I should note that Pascal did not support fully the use of reason to arrive at scientific truths, in which he differed from Leibniz, at least initially. For Pascal reason, or “l’esprit de géométrie,” was the other half of “l’esprit de finesse,” a form of instinct or intuition (le cœur),[2] from which emanates the seminal idea that leads to an important discovery or further knowledge. Beautiful melodies are mostly inspired.

Cornelius Jansen, Évêque d’Ypres

Jansenism

Pascal was a Jansenist. Jansenism is neither a religion nor a sect; it is a concept within Catholicism that would later be condemned as heretical.[3] Jansenists believed in predestination, which meant that although one lived a virtuous life, virtue could not lead to salvation. Those who believed in God and lived a virtuous manner had been granted sufficient (suffisante) grace, but only efficacious (efficace) grace ensured one’s salvation. Therefore, however good a person could be, salvation was an arbitrary gift. It could not be attained, except by the chosen ones.

IMGP0420-copie-1

Port-Royal-des-Champs Abbey (destroyed by fire) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sufficient and Efficacious Grace

In other words, according to the Jansenists, who lived at Port-Royal-des-Champs and Port-Royal Abbey, in Paris, were friends of Pascal, there were two forms of grace: la grâce suffisante (sufficient grace) and la grâce efficace FR (efficacious grace), only one of which, la grâce efficace could ensure salvation and God, if He existed, which Pascal set out to prove in his unfinished Pensées (Thoughts), selected those who would be saved.

To complicate matters, Jesuits, also attacked by Voltaire, had devised a system that allowed people to sin without sinning. (See RELATED ARTICLES.) Nothing could excuse casuistry and it was injurious to all who lived a good life. In 1646, Pascal became a Jansenist and, a few years later, in 1656-67, when Jansenism was first condemned, he wrote his Provincial letters, 18 letters and a possible 19th, the masterpiece that inspired Voltaire’s Candide.

Cornelius Jansen‘s (28 October 1585 – 6 May 1638) is the founder of Jansenism, as his name suggests. His Augustinus (1640) was published posthumously in Louvain/ Leuven, Belgium and sparked a controversy.

I will not enter into details. Suffice it to repeat that one could not be saved even if one had led a virtuous life. Such thinking is extremely pessimistic, but given Jesuit Casuistry (la casuistique), the faithful defended the monks of the Port-Royal-des-Champs abbey, one of whom was Pascal. The issues raised by Jansenism were:

  • Pelagianism (man can save himself; but not according to the Augustinus);
  • the Original Sin (we are born guilty and are therefore in need of salvation);
  • the Divine Grace.

Divine Grace

The Oxford English Dictionary provides the following description of grace: “Grace in Christianity is the free and unmerited favour of God as manifested in the salvation of sinners and the bestowing of blessings.”

The Following are quotations from Wikipedia

In Islam, according to “Dr. Umar Al-Ashqar, dean of the Faculty of Islamic Law at Zarqa Private University in Zarqa, Jordan: ‘Paradise is something of immense value; a person cannot earn it by virtue of his deeds alone, but by the Grace and Mercy of Allah.’

This stance is supported by hadith: according to Abu Huraira, prophet Muhammad once said that ‘None amongst you can get into Paradise by virtue of his deeds alone … not even I, but that Allah should wrap me in his grace and mercy.’”

In Hinduism, “one Hindu philosopher, Madhvacharya, held that grace was not a gift from God, but rather must be earned.”

Pascal’s Wager: Le Pari fatal

Neither Jansenists nor Muslims can earn salvation. They cannot erase the original sin. Consequently, they may despair. Existentialism claims the opposite. Humankind makes itself, which cannot be entirely the case. Yet, quite astonishingly, Voltaire was an early existentialist. He stated that “[m]an [was] free at the moment he wishe[d] to be.”  

As for Pascal, he lived virtuously wagering that he was among the chosen ones. The text of the Wager is in Sources and Resources, below.

However, the wager can be summarized. According to Pascal, we cannot know whether or not God exists. For him, God existed. He was a man of faith. But had he not been a man of faith, he would nevertheless have wagered that God existed. By doing so, one has everything to gain and nothing to lose. 

The Theory of Probability and the Pari fatal

Here we sense that Pascal and his friends, the duc de Roannez FR but mainly Pierre de Fermat contributed in the development the theory of probability. It is possible to calculate the odds. The following quotation is in French, but the wager can be summarized. One has nothing to lose by wagering that God exists and everything to lose by not waging He exists. (See The Wager.)

« Vous avez deux choses à perdre : le vrai et le bien, et deux choses à engager : votre raison et votre volonté, votre connaissance et votre béatitude ; et votre nature a deux choses à fuir : l’erreur et la misère. Votre raison n’est pas plus blessée, en choisissant l’un que l’autre, puisqu’il faut nécessairement choisir. Voilà un point vidé. Mais votre béatitude ? Pesons le gain et la perte, en prenant croix que Dieu est. Estimons ces deux cas : si vous gagnez, vous gagnez tout ; si vous perdez, vous ne perdez rien. Gagez donc qu’il est, sans hésiter. » 

“if you win, you win everything; if you lose, you do not lose anything. So bet that God is, without hesitating.”

Conclusion

In a world where Jesuits could take sin away from sinners, it is understandable that Christians in France should have chosen to defend Jansenism. Casuistry allowed kings and aristocrats to have a mistress without remorse. If one’s intentions were good, one could kill, rape and pillage. Pascal therefore took the defense of Jansenism and the priests of Notre-Dame-des-Champs, Cistercian nuns and monks. They avoided sins, were truly devout, and lived according to their vows.

Voltaire was not a Jansenist, but he believed in God. Many humans believe in God because they see orchids, the amaryllis, dawn, and glorious sunsets. The birth of a child seems a miracle. However, Jansenism did not give anyone the chance to go to heaven and imperiled happiness. Humans must atone. Therefore, happiness during this brief lifetime could point to eternal damnation.

Antoine Arnauld
Antoine Arnauld
Jean du Vergier
Jean du Vergier

Leibniz visited with Antoine Arnauld, who succeeded Jean Duvergier de Hauranne as abbot of the Port-Royal-des-Champs abbey. As a diplomat, Leibniz was invited to Paris in 1672. (See Leibniz 1666-1674.) Leibniz had visited France earlier but, in 1672, he met with Antoine Arnauld, the superior at Port-Royal des Champs.

The “sufficient” of “sufficient reason” may well be related to the “sufficient” of “sufficient grace.” But more importantly, neither concept support the likelihood of a “best of all possible worlds.”

RELATED ARTICLE

  • Casuistry, or how to sin without sinning (5 March 2012) ←

Sources and Resources

  • Les Provinciales.pdf FR
  • Les Pensées, Internet Archives FR
  • The Provincial Letters.pdf EN
  • Les Pensées is Gutenberg [EBook#18269] EN
  • The Wager

(My computer was hacked and has not been fully repaired. So this post is not altogether complete. I must discuss free will, Les Provinciales [the syle], original sin, etc. Les Provinciales were published under a pseudonym: Louis de Montalte.)

My best regards to everyone.

Marin Marais: Sonnerie de Ste Geneviève


pascal_blaise2

© Micheline Walker
19 March 2015
WordPress

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Thoughts on Descartes & the Latest Events

07 Saturday Feb 2015

Posted by michelinewalker in Extremism, Philosophy, Rationalism, Terrorism

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Descartes, Immanuel Kant, mental content, Pascal, reason, tabula rasa, The Discourse on Method, The Middle East

DP234080

Black Stork in a Landscape, ca. 1780 India, probably Lucknow, Colonial British Watercolor on European paper (Metropolitan Museum of Art, NY)

The Tabula rasa: a Rupture

I mentioned René Descartes‘ (15 February 1564 — 8 January 1642) concept of tabula rasa (Discours de la méthode)[1] in a post entitled “There are limits,” says Pope Francis (19 Jan 2015). If I may, I will return to this subject and point to one of history’s most significant ruptures with mental content: Descartes’ tabula rasa. In order to seek truth in the sciences, Descartes cleared the table. He needed a clean slate, proceeded methodically —Descartes uses four steps— guided by reason.  In other words, Descartes discarded all that he had learned since birth. The tabula rasa, is the clearing (se raser means to shave) of the table (tabula).

Descartes was a polymath and therefore combined several intellectual abilities, from philosophy to science. However, he defined himself as a scientist, un géomètre, and did so from the moment he wrote his first work, his Regulæ ad directionem ingenii, (the rules for conducting one’s reason; 1628), written in Latin.

Le Discours de la méthode
Le Discours de la méthode
The Discourse on Method
The Discourse on Method

 The Discourse on Method (1637)

In the Discourse, Descartes finds it unavoidable to rid his mind of all knowledge acquired since birth, as this knowledge is not necessarily based on reason, but “desires and our preceptors.”

“And because we have all to pass through a state of infancy to manhood, and have been of necessity, for a length of time, governed by our desires and our preceptors (whose dictates were frequently, while neither perhaps counselled us for best), I farther concluded that it is almost impossible that our judgments can be so correct as they would have been, had our reason been mature from the moment of birth, and had always been guided by it [reason] alone.” (Discourse, p. 10)

Consequently, among Descartes’ personal four rules in seeking the truth,

“[t]he first was never to accept anything for true which I did not clearly know to be such that is to say, carefully to avoid precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise nothing more in my judgment than was presented to my mind so clearly and distinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt.” (Discourse, p. 15)

However, Descartes knew that clearing off the table and marching ahead was dangerous. Galileo (15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642) had been found guilty of heresy in 1633. Galileo supported Copernicus‘ heliocentrism (the sun is at the centre of the universe) and had determined that the planet earth moved. He had to abjure his findings and was placed under house arrest for the remainder of his life: 9 years.

Similarly, if Descartes’ quest for the truth in the sciences was to be guided by reason alone, it could lead to observations that might contradict the teachings of the Church, which meant that he too could be tried and found guilty of heresy.

Raif Badawi was condemned to a harsh sentence, possibly death, for asking that liberals in Saudi Arabia be tolerated.

At any rate, the Discourse on Method was not written in France.

“I was in Germany, attracted thither by the wars in that country which have not yet been brought to a termination; and as I was returning to the army from the coronation of the emperor, the setting in of winter arrested me, and was besides fortunately undisturbed by my care or passions, I remained the whole day in seclusion¹ with full opportunity to occupy my attention with my own thoughts.”
¹ literally in a room heated by means of a stove.—Tr. (p. 10)

In fact, Descartes (adjectival form: Cartesian) spent most of his life in the more tolerant Dutch Republic.

Mental Content

The tabula rasa could be considered a conscious removal of knowledge acquired since birth. Descartes could do this. But his rationalism was critiqued and criticized. As Pascal (19 June 1623 – 19 August 1662) wrote, there are two entrances to the soul, l’esprit de finesse and l’esprit de géométrie, which I will translate as instinct and “pure reason,” a term I am borrowing from Immanuel Kant‘s Critique of Pure Reason(1781). Kant critiqued Descartes. Descartes, however can at least be credited with setting about his research using an uncluttered mind.

One cannot expect a tabula rasa on the part of persons whose thinking is rigid: extremists, fundamentalists, terrorists, racists, etc.

There is nothing reasonable about the burning alive of an innocent Jordanian pilot, locked in a cage. There is nothing reasonable in the pain he was subjected to. Nor is there anything reasonable in filming the dreadful event for a father to view and die a thousand times.

I pity the converts who have flocked to the Middle East only to watch the raping and killing of children, serial cold-blooded beheadings and the burning alive of captured Jordanian Lieutenant Muath al-Kasasbeh. In the 21st century, no faith should allow depravity incarnate, and this is depravity incarnate.

I have already quoted King Abdullah II:

“King Abdullah of Jordan described ISIS today [5 February 2015] as a ‘criminal and misguided group which is not related in any shape or form to our great faith.’” (Daily Mail, UK)

As for Safi al-Kasasbeh, Muath al-Kasasbeh’s father, he is asking for revenge.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/father-of-burned-jordan-pilot-muath-alkasasbeh-demands-revenge-20150205-136fmg.html

We can all understand, but revenge has its price…

The Muslim world has just had its 9/11. So has Japan. 

Francisco Goya

The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters, Francisco Goya (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Raif Badawi

Saudi blogger Raif Badawi is again before a court. I believe there’s hope for Mr Badawi. He has not been flogged since King Salman ascended to the throne. King Salman is an absolute monarch. He may pardon Mr Badawi. However, ideally, a court should find Raif Badawi innocent.

Saudis are attached to their customs, customs Europeans and other people may look upon as barbaric, but…  In view of the burning alive of a Jordanian pilot and the grief of his father and family, the people of the Middle East may feel more divided on the subject of torture, but I am speculating. All we know is that ISIS crossed the line, and that the conflict has taken on new dimensions.

Human Rights

Freedom of speech is a Human Right according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[2]

Moreover, flogging Raif Badawi is torture and, therefore, a second infringement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Flogging can kill and it has.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/what-actually-happens-when-you-get-flogged-death

At the moment, however, humanity is in violation of several articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Conclusion

We have a better self both as individuals, i.e. individually, and as nations, collectively. At the individual level, it’s called the soul, the conscience, compassion… That has been trampled upon. At the collective level, our better self has at times been called “justice.” Justice? That has also been trampled on and it varies from country to country:

Vérité en deçà des Pyrénées, erreur au-delà.
Truth on this side of the Pyrenees, error beyond.
Pensées, Blaise Pascal (posthumous)

My dear mother once remarked that I was fortunate to work in a morally superior institution: a university. I told her the truth. Universities are human institutions and, therefore, they are at times very difficult milieus. My universities have asked me to do what they have also prevented me from doing.

And if King Salman does not release Raif Badawi, love has died. Or is reason faltering?

I apologize for recycling images.

I hope this was my last post on this subject and wish all of you a good weekend.

RELATED ARTICLES

  • Thoughts on Descartes & the Latest Events (7 January 2015)
  • Muath al-Kasasbeh burned alive: fathers grieve (4 February 2015)
  • Comments on Racism (2 February 2015) (mental content)
  • President Obama in Saudi Arabia (29 January 2015)
  • An Incident in Quebec: Raif Badawi (25 January 2015)
  • An Appeal to King Salman of Saudi Arabia (23 January 2015)
  • On Freedom of Speech: from Pope Francis to Raif Badawi (21 January 2015)
  • “There are limits,” says Pope Francis (19 January 2015)
  • Raif Badawi: Flogging Postponed (16 January 2015)
  • “Je suis Raif:” an Appeal to King Abdullah (14 January 2015)
  • Paris Besieged: an “Assault on Reason” (12 January 2015)

Sources and Resources

  • Descartes’ Œuvres complètes, Le Discours de la méthode is the Gutenberg Project [EBook #13846] (V. Cousin; 1824 – 1826) (FR)
  • Descartes Discourse on Method is an Internet Archive publication (EN)
  • Pascal’s Pensées is the Gutenberg Project [EBook #18269] (EN)
  • Pascal’s Pensées is an Internet Archive publication (Édition princeps des Pensées, publiée en 1669 – 1670 par MM. de Port-Royal.) (FR)

Photo credit: Internet Archives (Descartes)

_________________________

[1] René Descartes, André Bridoux (ed), Œuvres complètes (Éditions Gallimard, Collection de la Pléiade, 1953). (my copy)

[2] The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights /Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme (UDHR) was adopted on 10 December 1948 and ratified on 16 December 1949.

Maher Zain – Number One For Me | Official Music Video

Ensaf Haidar

Ensaf Haidar, Raif Badawi’s Wife

© Micheline Walker
7 February 2015
WordPress

45.409158 -71.933825

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Europa

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,510 other subscribers

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Winter Scenes
  • Epiphany 2023
  • Pavarotti sings Schubert’s « Ave Maria »
  • Yves Montand chante “À Bicyclette”
  • Almost ready
  • Bicycles for Migrant Farm Workers
  • Tout Molière.net : parti …
  • Remembering Belaud
  • Monet’s Magpie
  • To Lori Weber: Language Laws in Quebec, 2

Archives

Calendar

March 2023
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
« Feb    

Social

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • WordPress.org

micheline.walker@videotron.ca

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker

Social

Social

  • View belaud44’s profile on Facebook
  • View Follow @mouchette_02’s profile on Twitter
  • View Micheline Walker’s profile on LinkedIn
  • View belaud44’s profile on YouTube
  • View Miicheline Walker’s profile on Google+
  • View michelinewalker’s profile on WordPress.org

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker
Follow Micheline's Blog on WordPress.com

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

  • Follow Following
    • Micheline's Blog
    • Join 2,478 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Micheline's Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: