Pascal's Wager... has this been discussed at length here?

I'm sort of new here.. been watching for a few weeks.

Seems like most of the antagonists here fall on one end of the arguments or the other, with a distinct preponderance of folks who have made honest decisions NOT to take the wager, to, in effect, just let their minds and their experience and training and education in life guide them, and be willing to turn to nothing more than dust after their life is over.

But, I DO SEE several people frantically trying to prove that not being able to prove anything religious, (especially anything Christian) seems to enervate them to some rather ridiculous claims. Claims like the following:

"When it is said there are other ways of knowing, it is meant that logical positivism or empiricism has limitations, and other more subjective ways do allow for the aquisition of knowledge"

"So to say that nothing exists besides science, as a way of obtaining knowledge, whether it be a method, epistemology, something like intuition, or any combination thereof, is ridiculous."


"Neither atheism nor religion, by themselves, kill people."

Just a small sampling from the many posts by those who insist their religious views are superior to the views of others.

Now, who walks into the "Pascal's wager"?

Is that the ultimate test of Crhistian belief?

"Pascal's Wager, also known as Pascal's Gambit, is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Blaise Pascal that even if the existence of God could not be determined through reason, a rational person should wager as though God exists, because one living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.

"The wager is described in Pensées this way:
If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us. We are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is.."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

Do people here live by that wager? If not, why not?

You behave as if god exists....in case he does....sort of covers your bases...I'd think if god does exist he would know...and you would lose your wager.

omniscient as to know you were hedging the bet to make sure you got into heaven.

So belief in a god for the reason of gaining personal reward for doing so is self-defeating.

He (or she) would know, and would reject you for hedging the bet.

topics that have been written about in the last 200 years.

From major philosophers inspiring the nation's Constitution you live under?

Not to be familiar with Pascal's Wager when talking about religion and philosophy is like not being familiar with the theory of jet propulsion for someone who loves to discuss moon walks, rocket ships, and space travel.

know what most people would know if they are going to post something on the internet without doing the research.

Either you know what you are talking about, or you admit you don't. You admitted you don't.


You have some work to do. It's called reading and thinking on your own. Very good! I admire you for admitting something fundamental has escaped your education so far in life. If you're 20, that's fine, if you're 65, well, you got cheated on that education thing.

It is inescapable.

That said, i hope you enjoyed the World's Fair.

And maybe that's not all you need to know about him, but it's enough for today.

Though I probably would have just put a link.

I really didn't find out about Pascal's bet until much later in my educational process. It didn't have that much of an impact on me, to tell you the truth. I went on with my graduate degree with no intellectual damage!

It is an mildly interesting subject, but I wouldn't give it too much resonance in your life...I don't and I'm happier for it...

I have also thought that it really doesn't hurt you to be a believer and be wrong. But it would be harmful to not believe and be wrong. Hell fire and all that.

But if there is a god, which god? And if there is an omnipotent god, he will be able to look inside a person's heart and know whether they are true believers or faking it "just in case". My problem is that I just cannot believe that there is a god, and he would know that I do not believe. So what would the point be for me to pretend?

and finding out at the end that you'd been had. That would hurt.

vengeful or otherwise, you will just be dead. You, unfortunately, would not know how wrong you were to live in fear all your life.

What a waste, huh?

That shows all kinds of wrong with the wager.

If one religion is right, then that usually means the other religions are wrong. For example, claiming Islam is true is indirectly claiming Hinduism is false.

...that he would subject me to eternal torment for not subjugating myself before him, given a complete lack of proof of his existence in the first place -- as if our entire existence was some sort of 'tricky test', then I'd have to hate him for being an unfair bastard.

As it is, I don't bear any deities any particular ill will, as I don't believe in the lot of them. It's better this way.

feel the same as I do.

I tend to think Pascal laid the groundwork for atheism to flourish in the last 3 centuries.

Of course, you would realize the absurdity of belief, if you were at all a free thinker, not bound by a lot of theological chains...

If you are believer, of course, you would take the opposite view and that would be that...

One of the most distinguishing characteristics of the last 3 centuries has been the increasing willingness of the mass of the people to speak their minds. It's hard to know what people 800 years ago really thought or believed. I probably would have bowed to any god put before me in the year 1130, as the alternative would have been the point of a sword.

Just one more of the many problems with Pascal's wager.

"Suppose we’ve chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we’re just making him madder and madder!"

When you step up to the plate swing for a grand slam home run. You'll never hit shit without proper follow through. Live as if your actions will have consequences far beyond your death, because they will.

That's about what I make of it.

If you act as if you believe in the Christian God and it turns out the Muslims are right, you lose.
If you act as if you believe in the Muslim God and it turns out the Romans were correct, you lose.
If you act as if you believe in the Hindu Gods and it turns out the Wiccans are right, you lose.

Of course, a lot depends on what kind of god you are betting against. Pascal only saw one possible kind of God; the Christian God. Some gods are pretty benign and will forgive you for not believing in them. Other versions of God are angry and wrathful. In other words, psychotic. If you bet on any but the correct one of those psychotic gods, you lose.

In Pascal's wager the odds are overwhelmingly stacked against you no matter which version of God you chose to put your chips on.

What happens if there are more than one god??
And you pick the wrong one because you state we are unable to
comprehend god.

There is a force or forces in the universe that transcends man
is this a god or gods?? or is it just a force or forces??

If I am unable to understand god how am I to fully know what this god wants??
If I believe in a force am I saved??

Which god? What if you choose the wrong god? As to the claim there's nothing to lose, that could easily be debated. Many religions disparage and restrict the rights of certain groups (women, LGBT people, etc). Those individuals certainly have something to lose by bowing to certain gods.

could intersect much with game-theoretic strategies. Nor do I think good theology has very much to do with questions about intellectual assent to propositions

The ultimate disabling of theology is to reduce it to a creedal assent.

I've never felt the wager was more than a mental tail-chase. I kind of believe and pray even though I'm very sympathetic to the
freethinking/atheist position. I don't know why I'm like this, but I guess I satisfy my emotional needs for spirituality by believing
and praying and fulfil my intellectual needs by listening to people like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNcWdV0LYG4&feature=resu...


This is Zinnia Jones' video, "Pascal's Wager: Seriously?". She really picks apart the logic of the wager and I have to hand it to
her for the detail she goes to in doing so. This has not, however, dissuaded me from praying to God as if he's really there.
My way of thinking is kind of a contradiction, but I think most of us are contradictory like this, we just don't admit it to
ourselves. I hope this contributes something. Best regards,


Moe

Welcome to DU.

:hi:

Being praised and hosannaed all the time is bo-ring, if not immediately then after a split millennium or three.

Now God gets all the praise and hosannaing He wants from the Angels and Cherubim and Seraphim and so forth so He decided to create a filter to keep bo-ring people who just want to praise Him somewhere they can't bother him with their incessant prayers. The ingenious filter that God came up with was religion, if you're gullible to believe that stuff, God don't want you around, He wants to talk to people who have active minds and will engage Him intellectually, that's hard to do when you are prostrate in either fear or rapture and babbling nonsense.

It's the free thinkers that God really wants and He created religion in order that he could find them by their conspicuous absence from the houses of worship..

Hey, it's as logical and self-consistent as any theology and more than many if not most.

Oh, and it makes Pascal's wager a major losing bet..

Unsung Philosophers: Blaise Pascal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTHN_eQaEaI&feature=relmfu

Uploader's comments:

"The philosopher you know for all the wrong reasons, Blaise Pascal is a certifiable genius. Forget The Wager, and bask for a few minutes in the stunning brilliance of one of the most penetrating intellects the world has ever known.

Ben Roger's Philosophy Bite on Pascal: http://philosophybites.com/2009/07/ben-rogers-on-pascals-pens%C3%A9es.html

Correction: the Nietzsche quote at 4:49 was inaccurate. The correct quote is "One should never forgive Christianity for having destroyed men like Pascal."--Notebook 11<55>."


At only age 19 at the time Pascal invented a calculation machine.

Full disclosure: Non-believer here.

Faith is the central tenet of Western religion. You can't generate it with the underlying logic being that the faith MAY be misplaced. You cannot "choose to believe;" rather, you either honestly believe something, or you don't.

Moreover, even positing Pascal's Wager as a reason to be a believer suggests that faith itself is disingenuous -- that people should profess a belief they do not truly hold -- in a literally superstitious mode.

Saying you believe in a god "just in case" there is one isn't really religious belief at all.







edited for speling

belief in a higher power.

The video I linked to, done by an Associate Professor of Philosophy who has studied Pascal, his life, his works, the envirnment within which he spent his short 39 years...will point that out to you.

If it's satire a LOT of people have been not getting the joke. I couldn't begin to count the number of times I've seen the principle that people should get on board with religion / church "just in case" it would save you from Hell, etc. argued earnestly.

:evilgrin:

opened the worlds with simple, cogent synthesis of his observations.

The understanding of the margin note of Pascal's wager in his writngs has been largely blown out of perspective, given the entirety of his life works in his brief time on Earth, 39 years.

Do watch the video.