Diversion

What Dominique Pagani says

Dominique Pagani understands diversion in Pascal's sense: faced with the anguish of death and his wretched condition, man does anything at all to divert himself, and kings are happy because they are constantly diverted1. He does not reduce it to "fun": it is anything that turns one away from thinking about the condition of someone who knows he will come to an end2. He sees in it a self-deprivation of truth, the refusal to think about a truth that is too unpleasant3. He takes up the example of hunting: the hunter seeks the hunt and not the game, but must persuade himself of the opposite4. For him, what motivates our actions is not in front of us but behind us: it is something we are fleeing5. He connects this analysis to the history of civilization and to worldliness in Clouscard. He allows for a diversion that is not culpable, provided it goes together with social justice6. He sets freedom apart: it is not one more diversion. Finally, he considers that the ruse of diversion may run deeper than the awareness of truth7.

1. 1F comme Farniente20 Dec 2014 · 4:03
2. 2La maladie, le malheur, le mal20 Sept 2024 · 1:19:11
3. 3#9 • Retour aux logiques du sujet30 May 2020 · 26:40
4. 4#5 Bien-et Mé-faits de l'amnésie...19 Nov 2020 · 1:04:06
5. 5#5 Bien-et Mé-faits de l'amnésie...19 Nov 2020 · 1:07:06
6. 6#9 • Retour aux logiques du sujet30 May 2020 · 40:52
7. 7La maladie, le malheur, le mal20 Sept 2024 · 1:27:27

Summary produced automatically from 10 of the passages below, to be reviewed; the numbers link to the moment in the session.