"The principle of secularism is discretion in civic space"

INTERVIEW

It is a principle known to all but the application of which is sometimes complicated: secularism.

A few hours after a new homage to Samuel Paty, this professor assassinated for having shown the caricatures of Mahomet in class, the philosopher Pierre-Henri Tavoillot takes stock of this fundamental notion of French society.

According to the author of

secularism is declined according to the places where a person is.

"In the private space, it is freedom that takes precedence. In the public space, secularism implies neutrality, while in civic space (the places where we meet), it is discretion which applies. The principle of secularism is therefore discretion. "

A discretion "at the same time of religious expressions, but also of criticisms with regard to religion", details Pierre-Henri Tavoillot.

"Secularism does not aim to erase religions but to fight against proselytism. Because the latter causes a nuisance to others."

Therefore, is it normal to feel wronged when someone attacks their religion, for example by caricaturing it, as the satirical newspaper

regularly does 

?

Does freedom of expression have limits?

On such a thorny question, Pierre-Henri Tavoillot points to the need to clarify the difference between offense and prejudice.

"The offense is an insult but the question is whether it produces harm. Concretely, are our interests being harmed?"

Thus, feeling upset is in no way a valid argument to limit freedom of expression, since no harm is suffered.

It is a simple offense.

On the other hand, in the event of defamation for example, the damage is real (and it can moreover be punished by the law). 

>> Find Patrick Cohen's interviews in Europe midi in replay and podcast here

Distributing Muhammad cartoons to provoke outrage

A distinction that is especially important to make in the context of blasphemy, where it is a person's belief that can be undermined.

In the case of the cartoons of Mohammed republished by

, Pierre-Henri Tavoillot recalls that "no one is forced to look at them".

Moreover, "they are addressed to people who read the newspaper, who are subscribers. And those who have an interest in widely disseminating these cartoons are the people who surf on the outrage." 

And that's what happened with the

cartoons

When they were first published on September 30, 2005 in the Danish daily 

, these drawings had been widely distributed, in particular by Danish imams, who also accompanied them with fakes, in the hope of triggering a wave of indignation in the Arab-Muslim world.