695 (0r 445 for you, Blogmaster): Original sin is folly in the eyes of men, but it is put forward as such...but this folly is wiser than all men's wisdom, it is wiser than men. For without it, what are we to say man is? His whole state depends on this imperceptible point.
This is exactly what I brought up at the end of last class. For Pascal, you can say nothing about men without original sin, that is, you can say nothing about men without viewing them through a Christian lens. Is he really right about this? If you take away this lens is there really nothing to be said? I feel like a lot of non-Christian people have quite a bit to say about men. Is original sin absolutely required or is Pascal's preoccupation with original sin (and his own reverence for Christian custom) the Achilles heel of this whole text?
But since I brought this up last time I'll say something in another vein as well.
418 (233): God's justice must be as vast as his mercy. Now his justice towards the damned is less vast and ought to be less startling to us than his mercy towards the elect.
I'm certainly more startled by God's justice towards the damned than his mercy to the elect because who is damned and who is elect? Why am I more startled by damnation than eternal life? Is it because I don't have the appropriate level of focus on what will happen to me after I die? Also,
421 (535): It is untrue that we are worthy to be loved by others. It is unfair that we should want such a thing.
What does Pascal think about love? What does he mean "it is unfair that we should want such a thing"? It is unfair of God to make us desire the love of others?
No comments:
Post a Comment