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.
Pascal built in the assumption that god = Jehovah / Jesus = god of Christianity. Whose "one true god" are you supposed to believe? And why is one god-claim better than another?
Pascal built in the assumption that god = Jehovah / Jesus = god of Christianity. Whose "one true god" are you supposed to believe? And why is one god-claim better than another?
Besides, the notion that pretending to believe / living a lie (which is all you can really do, since belief either exists or doesn't, it is not something you will into existence) is a good option is inherent nonsense unless you already believe. Therefore I have always regarded Pascal's Wager as something to bolster the faith of people who have already made up their minds, than anything of use to a free mind.
Pascal's Wager is just a subset of the false dilemma fallacy - a choice between atheism and the religion/god espoused by the challenger. In our case, that's usually Christianity.
Thus the Wager is presented as having nothing to lose by simply converting. Other religions are not even factored into the equation. Christianity is but one possible choice among thousands, and if there are, say 50,000 choices with only one of them being correct, a Christian has the same 1 in 49,999 of being correct as the atheist has. The Truth might end up being one of the 49,998 choices that have nothing to do with either Christians and atheists.
Logically and mathematically, Christians are just as likely to be wrong as atheists ... which means it is not a very good bet.
There are two possibilities:
1) No deity of any sort exists, or
2) A deity exists. His name is Ed and he is an invisible orange iguana (I know, you don't think this makes sense, but that is only because you do not understand the Holy Duality). Ed, our scaly cold-blooded Father, is generally unconcerned with a lack of belief. He is, however, being a jealous lizard, driven to fits of incandesent rage when someone believes in any deity other than himself. Consequently, Ed malevolentely devotes himself to devising all sorts of horrific eternal suffering for those who upset him with their beliefs in other deities.
Let's now examine the various consequences:
*Ed does not exist and you believe in one or more other deities - you're safe.
*Ed does not exist and you do not believe in one or more other deities - you're safe.
*Ed exists and you refrain from believing in one or more other deities - you're safe.
*Ed exists and you believe in one or more other deities - you are doomed, doomed, doomed!
Naturally, the safest course of action is simply to refrain from believing in any deities other than Ed. You can believe in him or not; it does not matter.
Now, I know what some of you Pascal's Wager fans will be saying. "Wait a minute! There are other possibilities! Lots of other possibilities!"
Well... duh... and now you know the baselessness that is not only Unsettomati's but Pascal's Wager as well.
Pascal's Wager is just a subset of the false dilemma fallacy - a choice between atheism and the religion/god espoused by the challenger. In our case, that's usually Christianity.
Thus the Wager is presented as having nothing to lose by simply converting. Other religions are not even factored into the equation. Christianity is but one possible choice among thousands, and if there are, say 50,000 choices with only one of them being correct, a Christian has the same 1 in 49,999 of being correct as the atheist has. The Truth might end up being one of the 49,998 choices that have nothing to do with either Christians and atheists.
Logically and mathematically, Christians are just as likely to be wrong as atheists ... which means it is not a very good bet.
Actually the wager need not have anything to do with the specifics of any religion or beliefs ABOUT God. It could simply involve belief in the generic existence of God . . . presumably that would suffice to ingratiate one into God's favor posthumously.
Pascal built in the assumption that god = Jehovah / Jesus = god of Christianity. Whose "one true god" are you supposed to believe? And why is one god-claim better than another?
Besides, the notion that pretending to believe / living a lie (which is all you can really do, since belief either exists or doesn't, it is not something you will into existence) is a good option is inherent nonsense unless you already believe. Therefore I have always regarded Pascal's Wager as something to bolster the faith of people who have already made up their minds, than anything of use to a free mind.
Not only that, but why would you want to worship a god so powerless that it can be tricked by humans looking to lie for a payoff in the afterlife? Seems like a being which would be tricked by these sorts of games isn't a god in the classical sense at all.
Actually the wager need not have anything to do with the specifics of any religion or beliefs ABOUT God. It could simply involve belief in the generic existence of God . . . presumably that would suffice to ingratiate one into God's favor posthumously.
Why do you say that? Pascal was implicitly making an argument for the christian god. He was talking about avoiding being sent to hell for eternity, and that is a christian concept. If you have any reason to think that Pascal meant a generic, non-christian god, please post a cite from his writings.
Why do you say that? Pascal was implicitly making an argument for the christian god. He was talking about avoiding being sent to hell for eternity, and that is a christian concept. If you have any reason to think that Pascal meant a generic, non-christian god, please post a cite from his writings.
I don't think Mystic was suggesting Pascal meant a generic god, but that one could apply the reasoning to a generic god. The problem is, that doesn't remove the assumptions that are implicit in Pascal's reasoning -- assumptions that only work with, most charitably, the Abrahamic god. When you start taking on liberal notions of god, there is generally no hellthreat to make the wager seem attractive. There is no infinite risk in unbelief because there is no eternal punishment and perhaps no punishment at all. In fact this even falls apart with Christianity if you are a believer in universal reconciliation.
In other religions there are different carrot-and-stick mechanisms of course such as better odds with reincarnation (better status or advancement in the next life) or rebirth (better progress towards getting off the treadmill of existence) or some other method of accelerated progress within whatever that belief system conceives as the purpose or goal of existence. But then you still have the problem of deciding which belief system to wager on. The wager contemplates a simple binary choice between the One True theistic belief system, and atheism. Even if, as Mystic proposes, you turn it into a choice between the One True belief about reality and not believing that, this simply doesn't represent the infinitude of choices in the Real World.
Actually the wager need not have anything to do with the specifics of any religion or beliefs ABOUT God. It could simply involve belief in the generic existence of God . . . presumably that would suffice to ingratiate one into God's favor posthumously.
Then you have already moved beyond the idea of a "generic" deist god - and instantly moved into the realm of theism by assuming that this god has a "favour" to ingratiate oneself into - or that it is arrogant and suffering from enough hubris to care what we humans think about it at all.
Assuming a god even cares what we think or believe about it - is already assuming more about it than merely a genetic god entity.
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.
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.
