U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-09-2014, 07:16 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,253,561 times
Reputation: 1317

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
How would the believer lose under the scenario I outlined?
Umm, I don't think you are actually reading what I am writing...

Like I said before, the promised afterlife is one in which you no longer have free will, you will not even be able to mourn your loved ones who did not believe. Instead you will spend eternity rejoicing in their suffering, and you won't have a choice. Removing your humanity seems pretty hellish to me...

I find it ironic that Christians tend to argue that God could not have created a world without the possibility of sin, because it would remove free will, and make us automatons as if it is a bad thing, and then turn around and extol the virtues of a sinless heaven where the saved will no longer have free will.

Again, as I said before, Pascal's wager is all based on false and incomplete assumptions, so even if you do find it compelling, it is because it is designed with faulty axioms to be so. And even then, it still has problem, as I pointed out above.

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2014, 07:28 PM
 
675 posts, read 442,297 times
Reputation: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Umm, I don't think you are actually reading what I am writing...

Like I said before, the promised afterlife is one in which you no longer have free will, you will not even be able to mourn your loved ones who did not believe. Instead you will spend eternity rejoicing in their suffering, and you won't have a choice. Removing your humanity seems pretty hellish to me...

I find it ironic that Christians tend to argue that God could not have created a world without the possibility of sin, because it would remove free will, and make us automatons as if it is a bad thing, and then turn around and extol the virtues of a sinless heaven where the saved will no longer have free will.

Again, as I said before, Pascal's wager is all based on false and incomplete assumptions, so even if you do find it compelling, it is because it is designed with faulty axioms to be so. And even then, it still has problem, as I pointed out above.

-NoCapo
Seems you are making a leap in your assertion of free will and the afterlife. God merely removes the memory of your love ones who did not believe. I am not seeing how that = not having free will. Rejoicing in their suffering? Another leap.

There is nothing false or incomplete about Pascal's Wager. It is quite straight forward.

Christian God is real - Nonbeliever is screwed

Christian God is fake - Believer is not screwed.

Your points about other Gods and what not are another topic altogether.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 07:39 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,253,561 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Seems you are making a leap in your assertion of free will and the afterlife. God merely removes the memory of your love ones who did not believe. I am not seeing how that = not having free will. Rejoicing in their suffering? Another leap.
In heaven, can you sin? Can you grieve for your loved ones in hell? Can you do anything that God does not want you to do? If the answer is no to any of these, then the part of you that can chose, that has volition, that is the essence of humanity has been stripped away. Will you be able to see the torments of those in hell and have any other response than praising God's goodness and justice? Will you be able to see God's eternal toment of his enemies as anything other than a wonderous, great, and holy thing?

As I understand it, at least for much of the eternal torment contingent, the answer to all these questions is no...


Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
There is nothing false or incomplete about Pascal's Wager. It is quite straight forward.

Christian God is real - Nonbeliever is screwed

Christian God is fake - Believer is not screwed.

Your points about other Gods and what not are another topic altogether.
Nope. It is incomplete if it does not include every god concept. You are asking me to rationally evaluate the expected value of two beliefs ( which I did, and explained my value calculation of why I think all option are losing ones with God), but realistically atheism and your specific brand of Christianity are not the only options. For me to make a rational determination of a belief system, I would need to weigh every option, I would need to be able to compare the options(which is better heaven with Jesus or Olam Haba?), and I would need a reasonable assessment of the probabilities.

Beyond all that the math only works if you assume heaven to be infinitely good and hell infinitely bad. If those two are finite, then there exists some probability of existence at which it becomes rational to disbelieve.

It really is a contrived example, using a poor set of axioms, and some dodgy math. But I have explained this three times now, and you seem to keep sticking your fingers in your ear and saying, "Nuh Uh!"

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:01 PM
 
675 posts, read 442,297 times
Reputation: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
In heaven, can you sin? Can you grieve for your loved ones in hell? Can you do anything that God does not want you to do? If the answer is no to any of these, then the part of you that can chose, that has volition, that is the essence of humanity has been stripped away. Will you be able to see the torments of those in hell and have any other response than praising God's goodness and justice? Will you be able to see God's eternal toment of his enemies as anything other than a wonderous, great, and holy thing?

As I understand it, at least for much of the eternal torment contingent, the answer to all these questions is no...
Didn't the angels have free will to rebel against God?

We simply do not know the parameters of heaven. Thus any speculation is just that, speculation.


Quote:
Nope. It is incomplete if it does not include every god concept. You are asking me to rationally evaluate the expected value of two beliefs ( which I did, and explained my value calculation of why I think all option are losing ones with God), but realistically atheism and your specific brand of Christianity are not the only options. For me to make a rational determination of a belief system, I would need to weigh every option, I would need to be able to compare the options(which is better heaven with Jesus or Olam Haba?), and I would need a reasonable assessment of the probabilities.

Beyond all that the math only works if you assume heaven to be infinitely good and hell infinitely bad. If those two are finite, then there exists some probability of existence at which it becomes rational to disbelieve.

It really is a contrived example, using a poor set of axioms, and some dodgy math. But I have explained this three times now, and you seem to keep sticking your fingers in your ear and saying, "Nuh Uh!"

-NoCapo
Nope, you might would have a point if Pascal never disclosed which God his wager was for. However we know he was talking about and made the wager on the grounds of the Christian God.

You have yet to show me how believers lose in the wager proposed by Pascal.

As I pointed out in the previous point. Pascal's Wager is pretty straight forward.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:12 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,253,561 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Didn't the angels have free will to rebel against God?

We simply do not know the parameters of heaven. Thus any speculation is just that, speculation.
Exactly! We cannot assume heaven will be of infinite value, nor can we assume hell will be of infinite negative value without making some assumptions. One of those is that there can be no sin, pain or sadness in heaven, which removes choice, empathy and compassion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Nope, you might would have a point if Pascal never disclosed which God his wager was for. However we know he was talking about and made the wager on the grounds of the Christian God.

You have yet to show me how believers lose in the wager proposed by Pascal.

As I pointed out in the previous point. Pascal's Wager is pretty straight forward.
Again, you prove my point. The wager is made on the basis that there are only two options, Christian God or nothing. regardless of the internal consistency of the argument, we know this precondition is not true! There are countless options other than a single version of the Christian God. Thus the argument is founded on a false axiom. Thank you for agreeing with me! A statistical evaluation is only as good as the data you feed it. Give it false inputs and you get false outputs. Garbage in, Garbage out.

if you restrict it to the exact limitations proposed, and assuming you force me to accept your assessment of the values for heaven and hell, then of course it works. It is a contrived example that requires you to place a tremendous amount of restrictions and caveats on it to make it pan out. That is why it is not taken seriously.

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:19 PM
 
675 posts, read 442,297 times
Reputation: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Exactly! We cannot assume heaven will be of infinite value, nor can we assume hell will be of infinite negative value without making some assumptions. One of those is that there can be no sin, pain or sadness in heaven, which removes choice, empathy and compassion.
We can assume that which the Bible tells us ie heaven will be good and hell will not be good.

Quote:
Again, you prove my point. The wager is made on the basis that there are only two options, Christian God or nothing. regardless of the internal consistency of the argument, we know this precondition is not true! There are countless options other than a single version of the Christian God. Thus the argument is founded on a false axiom. Thank you for agreeing with me! A statistical evaluation is only as good as the data you feed it. Give it false inputs and you get false outputs. Garbage in, Garbage out.

if you restrict it to the exact limitations proposed, and assuming you force me to accept your assessment of the values for heaven and hell, then of course it works. It is a contrived example that requires you to place a tremendous amount of restrictions and caveats on it to make it pan out. That is why it is not taken seriously.

-NoCapo
No the wager is made on the basis of contrasting a nonbeliever with a believer in the context of Christianity. Nothing more nothing less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:32 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,253,561 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
We can assume that which the Bible tells us ie heaven will be good and hell will not be good.
But that doesn't get you to the infinite value that is required for the wager to be universal... If heaven is merely "god" and hell"not good" then there is some likelihood of god existing below which it is not statistically rational to believe. No, it must be infinitely good, and that leads us examine what that means, which when described in the Bible seems to be pretty awful, actually...

Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
No the wager is made on the basis of contrasting a nonbeliever with a believer in the context of Christianity. Nothing more nothing less.
Then the wager is useless in determining if you should rationally believe. Pascal's point was that it is a rational choice based on statistics to believe. What you have pointed out is that you have to ****** the assumptions to make it come out that way. I agree, thus I claim that as a tool for determining if one should believe in Christianity it is well nigh useless.

I will concede that if you ignore reality, and kind of squint when assessing the worth of heaven and the probability of it existing, you can make it work out. If you step back and honestly evaluate it, however, Pascal's wager is well nigh useless when trying to decide rationally which god , if any should be worshipped.

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:40 PM
 
675 posts, read 442,297 times
Reputation: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
But that doesn't get you to the infinite value that is required for the wager to be universal... If heaven is merely "god" and hell"not good" then there is some likelihood of god existing below which it is not statistically rational to believe. No, it must be infinitely good, and that leads us examine what that means, which when described in the Bible seems to be pretty awful, actually...
That is assumptions and opinion. Heaven and hell is a pretty easy concept to grasp. Any sane person would deem heaven as a more desirable outcome than hell. Which for this wager, is all one needs to know.


Quote:
Then the wager is useless in determining if you should rationally believe. Pascal's point was that it is a rational choice based on statistics to believe. What you have pointed out is that you have to ****** the assumptions to make it come out that way. I agree, thus I claim that as a tool for determining if one should believe in Christianity it is well nigh useless.

I will concede that if you ignore reality, and kind of squint when assessing the worth of heaven and the probability of it existing, you can make it work out. If you step back and honestly evaluate it, however, Pascal's wager is well nigh useless when trying to decide rationally which god , if any should be worshipped.

-NoCapo
Useless? Again that is merely opinion.

Based on statistics? Not as I see it.

It's merely a rational choice based on 2 outcomes within a set parameter. ie a wager b/w a agnostic / atheist and a Christian. Again you are trying to overthink / complicate a simple scenario.

Last edited by medellinheel; 06-09-2014 at 08:49 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:51 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,253,561 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Useless? Again that is merely opinion.
It is useless because we don't have binary choice. It doesn't represent reality well, so it cannot be relied upon to give guidance in the real world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Based on statistics? Not as I see it.
You clearly don't understand who Pascal was or what he did... It is absolutely a statistical parlour trick (due to the use of the infinities), which I explained above. You are comparing Expectations of two events with weights and probabilities of occurrence. This is probability 101.

Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
It's merely a rational choice based on 2 outcomes within a set parameter. ie an atheist and a Christian. Again you are trying to overthink / complicate a simple scenario.
As I said, within a limited parameter set, with a set of weights that have some potential logic problems, and a lot of implicit assumptions, yes it is valid, it is just kind of meaningless, because it is based on a limited parameter set and unfounded assumptions. You could just as easily come to the conclusion I did that oblivion is preferable to both Hell and Heaven.

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2014, 08:57 PM
 
675 posts, read 442,297 times
Reputation: 134
At the end of the day the wager still stands and has "potential' validity regardless of the things you mention ie heaven/hell, limited parameters, etc.

Christian God is real - Non believers suffer
Christian God is fake - Believers do not suffer

Whether you think it is meanless is beside the point.

Enjoyed the exchange none the less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top