Using Pascal's gambling theory and probability theory to discuss the morality and ethics of men and women, compared with the director's other works, there are more direct philosophical discussions, and the plot is sufficiently tortuous. Next, analyze the film:
That night at Maude's house, Louis was constantly questioned by two other people (Viagle said that Louis was actually more of a Pascalist than him, and that Louis' beliefs were hypocritical; Ashamed), because on the one hand he denied the asceticism advocated by Pascal, and believed that Pascal was wrong to ask people to give up their feelings and passions completely. Catholics can also enjoy all worldly pleasures; on the other hand, he believes that as a Catholic, there is also a certain moral height; this is reflected in when he was asked if he would have a one-night stand with a woman. He said he had it before, but after joining the church, he would not be able to sum it up in one sentence. He opposed both Pascal's asceticism and anti-Pascal's hedonism.
Continuing the deduction: Here, Louis does not agree with Pascal for another reason. Pascal's gambling theory is based on infinity, ∞*a=∞ (a≠0), under the condition that if God exists, huge profits can be obtained, even if the possibility of God's existence is small, as long as it is not 0 , then a person should give up everything else and bet everything; it stands to reason that Louis is not an atheist, so naturally he should bet everything, but he didn't. why? From his words and deeds that night, it is not difficult to see that probability is only a matter of mathematics for him, and the real problem of destination can only be solved by God. That is to say, for human beings, only worldly things like wine and intercourse with women have probability at all, and other issues related to fate are untouchable and only God can decide. It can be seen from this that Pascal connected probability and fate through faith, while Louis believed that fate was far beyond the control of man.
That's why he is said to be a Jansenist, "emphasizing that God had chosen those who were destined to be saved before the creation of the world, and that without God's grace and election, redemption could never have been achieved by human effort. , because human nature has been corrupted after the fall, sinners cannot save themselves, and as a result of being held hostage by sin, the will is not free. If people do not have special grace, they will be held by the flesh, unable to do good or avoid evil, and unable to achieve God. Commandments" (from Baidu Encyclopedia). But Louis himself couldn't bear to be put on such a hat for one reason: he, like thousands of Catholics, believed that his strong inner belief and moral height could make him chosen by God. Interestingly, this again mirrors his complicated attitude towards a previous proposition.
It is quite interesting that Françoise was later described by Louis as a Jansenist, for the simple reason that she just denied some of Louis's views, that is, she thought that what a person is in his heart and what he does is nothing more than that. affect whether it will be saved. But if you look deeper, you will find that she is not a Jansenist either, which she argues herself: she says it has nothing to do with God, but because she firmly believes that human beings have absolutely free will at all times.
The logic of the whole film is rigorous, and while striving to highlight the diversity of contradictory individuals, the language is humorous, and the plot is not without twists and turns.
View more about My Night at Maud's reviews
