Love and Purpose; and How Bad Philosophy can even prove Good at Times

In Chapter 4, I could hardly get over this certain passage where Candide is reunited with his old tutor, Pangloss, and upon hearing his story, questions such experience and Pangloss gives cause;

"Love is its name: love the consoler of humankind, preserver of the universe, soul of all sentient beings, sweet love-
To which Candide responds; "I too have known this thing called love, this ruler of hearts, this soul of our soul; it has never earned me more than one kiss and twenty kicks on the arse. But how can so beautiful a cause have produced so abominable an effect?

This gets me. Throughout, Pangloss practices this bad philosophy of connections being made with things that are clearly not effects of certain causes. However here, it irritates me that he is actually not wrong. Pangloss' response (in short) is this:

"It is an indispensable feature of the best of all possible worlds, a necessary agreement."

I of course see Pangloss' fanatical presuppositions in finding an effect for every cause, but for this one instant, on the topic of love, he sees the point to suffering an abominable effect for a beautiful cause because and for the greater picture of things. Is this a sorely flawed example of such a message? Indeed. However it remains- a greater purpose allows for suffering to lead to good.

I commented on Nate's and Noah's.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Honest Reaction to Reading "Honest to God"

Raphael and a man walk into Eden...

Extra blog