The doctrine of the three orders which distinguishes and hierarchizes flesh, spirit and charity is obviously one of the major themes of Pascal’s thought. But it appears that Pascal meditates as much on the disorder – and dis-order – induced by sin and the corruption of our nature as on the hierarchy and the heterogeneity of these three kinds of reality. In the world he describes, in fact, not only is everything overturned – the lowest order, that of the flesh, (...) now dominating the other two – but also everything is confused – pleasure, for example, obtaining the credence that normally belongs to science, and the flesh invading the order of the spirit through custom and imagination. To maintain then, as several commentators do, that no interference between the orders is possible, so that tyranny can only exist in the state of desire, is in our view to adopt a more Stoic than Pascalian point of view. For to deny disorder is also, according to Pascal, to deny sin by projecting into the second nature the memory of the first. (shrink)

When scholars inquire into the inspirational sources of Nietzschean perspectivism, they most often credit Leibniz's monadology. However, this overlooks the fact that Pascal — whose writings Leibniz had read — was the first person to introduce the idea of perspective into philosophy. Above all, it overlooks Nietzsche's own indications: he praises Pascal as one of those “good Europeans” who precipitate the devaluation of Christian values and, in particular, of truth, while on the contrary he considers Leibniz to be one of (...) the “greatest obstacles to intellectual probity in Europe.”. (shrink)

'Non seulement je lis, mais j'aime Pascal.' L'hommage réitéré que Nietzsche adresse au penseur français n'a guère retenu l'attention des commentateurs. Il semble que cette affection ait gêné, dérouté même. Comment, en effet, l' 'anti-chrétien', l'athée 'de rigueur' et 'd'instinct' aurait-il pu sincèrement aimer le pieux janséniste, qui portait le cilice, croyait aux miracles, et consacra les dernières années de sa vie à l'écriture d'une apologie du christianisme? Cette admiration n'a pas été prise au sérieux, parce que tout invitait à (...) y voir une fantaisie, une extravagance, une provocation même, chez ce penseur qui aime tant choquer. Nietzsche nous avertit cependant qu'il se joue bien davantage dans cet attachement, comme en 1885 lorsqu'il écrit : 'Il ne s'est rien passé depuis Pascal : face à lui, les philosophes allemands n'entrent pas en ligne de compte.' Afin d'élucider ce qui pourrait bien apparaître comme une énigme, cette étude entreprend d'examiner la place et le rôle accordés à Pascal dans la pensée de Nietzsche."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

Pascal and the „Proof by Power“. Nietzsche’s Examination of a wounded intellectual conscience. This paper sheds new light on Nietzsche’s praise of Pascal’s probity by analysing what the German philosopher calls the „proof by power“. This proof, adopted by Christianity at large, consists in making pleasure and well-being the very criteria of truth and, as such, it represents for Nietzsche a sheer dishonest form of reasoning. When Pascal finally decides to use this proof in the Pensées, he is already conscious (...) of its lack of scientific value and of its dishonesty. Nietzsche thus reveals in Pascal’s thinking the torments of a wounded intellectual conscience, torn between its fidelity to the Christian tradition and its probity inspired by this very piety. In this respect, the famous wager’s argument appears as a testimony of this tension: it is a brilliant but desperate attempt of giving this „proof by power“, which the scientific rigor it is fundamentally lacking. (shrink)