2007-01-16 09:42:14 · 13 answers · asked by STFU Dude 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Well, to be fair, Pascal did discuss Islam and Judaism in his Pensées and the wager was about belief in God. Furthermore, he lived in a smaller world than that which we live in today, so he wasn't as aware of the diversity of opinions and faiths that were out there.
In today's world, it's a bit ridiculous to think of Christianity as an either/or proposition, considering more than 5 billion people are not Christians and that they simply follow the beliefs of the place in which they are born.
But apply Pascal's wager to the Aztec religion, and you'll get a pretty nasty conclusion about what we should do "just in case" - I mean, what's a few thousand sacrifices a year compared to the chance we're taking every year by not making them, that the sun will go out of existence?
Jimbo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaise_Pascal
2007-01-16 09:47:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The wager was aboput god and an afterlife. ITherefore it can be applied to other religions
2007-01-16 17:47:45 · answer #2 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Too many variables for the level of math they had then.
Now that I read the answers, yes like Niel says but he did not even have calculus. It had not been invented yet.
2007-01-16 17:49:39 · answer #3 · answered by U-98 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was a single variable calculus guy.
2007-01-16 17:46:05 · answer #4 · answered by neil s 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Christ is the only Truth.
Naw, I'm just kidding.
2007-01-16 17:47:10 · answer #5 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He probably didn't know much about other religions. No phones, no TV....
2007-01-16 17:46:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because he was in a predominant Christian area?
2007-01-16 17:53:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He just didn't have a very broad mind. Can't you tell that from his question?
2007-01-16 17:47:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He was too narrow minded.
Of course, there are many other flaws in his argument.
2007-01-16 17:45:50 · answer #9 · answered by eldad9 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because if he had done that, it would have made his argument null and void.
2007-01-16 17:45:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋