That's a hell of a reason to believe, right?
2006-12-28 11:52:23 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
"Pascal's Wager" is hardly a foundation for religious belief. It seems to me to be more of a criticism of certain religious doctrines.
2006-12-28 12:03:58 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. Bad Day 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Good point. When I was a kid attending Presbyterian Church, I also got the impression from the minister that God does not forgive people when they repent simply for fear of punishment. Of course my minister may have interpreted the scriptures incorrectly. Some OT passages do indicate that "the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom." But as an agnostic, I think the "real" Christians are those who have immersed themselves enough in the study of Jesus's words that they have actually come to love Jesus -- Jesus and the God who supposedly sent him. Whether or not God really exists and whether or not Jesus was/is God's son, I think true Christians are supposed to be motivated by love, not mostly by fear of punishment. Perhaps Pascal's logic represents a real advance in the philosophy of logic, however. In the same way that some of Pascal's mathematical findings later proved important to the development of statistics.
2016-03-28 22:54:22 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Geez what is up with the Pascal's Wager questions today? Ok here we go.. AGAIN. NO it does not. And here's why...
Given that there are more than 2,500 gods known to man, and given Pascal's own assumptions that one cannot comprehend God (or gods), then it follows that, even the best case scenario (i.e. that God exists and that one of the known Gods and theologies happen to be the correct one) the chances of making a successful choice is less than one in 2,500.
Second, Pascal's negative theology does not exclude the possibility that the true God and true theology is not one that is currently known to the world.
For instance it is possible to think of a God who rewards, say, only those who purposely step on sidewalk cracks. This sounds absurd, but given the premise that we cannot understand God, this possible theology cannot be dismissed. In such a case, the choice of what God to believe would be irrelevant as one would be rewarded on a premise totally distinct from what one actually believes.
Furthermore as many atheist philosophers have pointed out, it is also possible to conceive of a deity who rewards intellectual honesty, a God who rewards atheists with eternal bliss simply because they dared to follow where the evidence leads - that given the available evidence, no God exists!
Finally we should also note that given Pascal's premise, it is possible to conceive of a God who is evil and who punishes the good and rewards the evil.
So, with all those possibilities.. it does not make "believing" in the Christian god any more of a safe bet than any other.
Fire Insurance isn't going to help in this case.
2006-12-28 11:58:10 · answer #3 · answered by Kallan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a bad bet. What if you pick the wrong god and the real one gets all bent up about it, or what if a religion that offers ever lasting life + 2 weeks is a better deal than the one your god offers. The better bet is that in the unlikely event that a god exists, it would be a better bet that this god wouldn't be as vane or vindictive as the god portrayed in the Bible or Quor'an, and that it would cut you some slack for not believing at all.
2006-12-28 12:33:15 · answer #4 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well I don't believe I'll hit the lottery, but I'll but a buck on it. It's a hunch that I'm dealing the best I can with my superstition. Optimists live a healthier an happier life. Pascal's wager is rational, but it neither proves nor disproves the presence of a god, and if so does he/she/it care? If not,why bother to do anything?
2006-12-28 12:14:25 · answer #5 · answered by lyyman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. There are thousands of other religions. You only increase your odds 1 in a few thousand. And they are all equally likely given the available evidence. How do you pick?
I think the real safe bet would be to figure out what one has the worst hell and follow it. That would keep you out of the absolute worst.
2006-12-28 11:57:31 · answer #6 · answered by Alex 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
unless you believe in the wrong deity! and there are thousands from which to choose, assuming that we have explored to the fullest and have not neglected any potential god. what if god rewards those who do evil and intentionally tricked humanity by sending the holy books? since we cannot know for sure the ways of god, this is not IMPOSSIBLE, however improbable it may seem. furthermore, it is equally improbable that any of the given thousands are the right one by the mere fact that there are thousands of different gods. if god existed, there would be one account of god. one description.
EDIT:
LIVES, here's why it would "hurt"
Matthew 18:8-9 (Mark 9:43-47)
"And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire. "
jesus' commands cannot be ignored!
2006-12-28 11:57:04 · answer #7 · answered by Shawn M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No reason at all. Never would have worked on me in a million years. Either I give my life for what I believe in or nothing at all.
2006-12-28 11:58:40 · answer #8 · answered by Pilgrim 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"safe" is a human word, a human perspective, and more importantly, YOUR subjective perception.
For all you know, many may prefer to live in what you think of as hell, as opposed to living in the eternal glow of an almighty trickster.
2006-12-28 12:18:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep! Better to guesstimate on the safe side. And truly what would it hurt to follow the teaching of Jesus Christ.
2006-12-28 11:55:48 · answer #10 · answered by Lives7 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋