Ok that's it. Pascal's Wager question to settle it once and for?

Question

well. .the next hour, because we know that it'll come up again and again.
Please state WHY Pascal's Wager doesn't work. (I have a list myself but I'm doing the asking)
For those of you who don't know Pascal's Wager, it basically says, what do you have to lose by believing in the christian god versus being an atheist?

Um, Dude? Did you actually read my question? I didn't say once and for all.

Answer 1

Because it's a logical fallacy! More than one, actually.

Pascal's Wager is flawed in several ways. First of all, we don't KNOW that this "God" will punish people who don't believe. That's what one book says. Not everyone believes this. Just because YOU do doesn't mean we should ALL believe out of fear of being punished for non-belief.

Secondly, if this "God" really DOES want people to believe, would it really value belief born of fear? If people are going to worship this thing strictly as a means to avoid Hell, what good is that? Is that genuine belief or merely "a back-up plan"?

Thirdly, this Wager assumes a LOT. Why are we faced with only two choices? The Judeo-Christian god and atheism? Aren't there hundreds (if not thousands) of other beliefs out there that we should believe in "just in case" if that's the logic by which we're living our life? To imply that there are ONLY two options when in fact there are many more is to argue a "false dichotomy" (which is a LOGICAL FALLACY).

Answer 2

My generic answer for Pascal's Wager that has been used many times on here before:

This idea just makes a mockery out of "God" because it's saying you can make God look like an idiot by just playing along with the little game and get into heaven, instead of truly believing like all the good Christians.

Answer 3

1.) It assumes that the probability of a deity existing is 50%.
2.) It assumes that, if a deity exists, it must be the deity that the person offering the wager believes in.
3.) It makes the assumption that belief in something is a choice.
4.) It assumes the false premise that belief in a false deity does not result in loss, which it clearly does.

There's more, but I'm sure everyone's got a list a million miles long about it. We need to stop people from posting for a while, at least...it's too early to start drinking...

Answer 4

The central problem is that it assumes there are only two possible wagers -- for the Christian god, or for atheism -- while of course there are countless options. Perhaps you'll wager on the Christian God and come face-to-face with Odin. Or Mithras. Or Obatala.

Answer 5

I lose millions of years of earth's history, for one little trivial thing.
I must believe that Adam and Eve and their kids, and their kids' wives who magically appeared out nowhere, btw, slew the great dinosaurs 6000 years ago. Yeah.

Also, I get to NOT take responsibility for the planet and what we do to it, hooray! because it's all part of the 'great plan'.

I get to believe that little children dying in the streets and other, senseless wastes of life is 'God's Will'. That's a load off.

I get to not worry about my children's future because, well, the rapture is surely coming any day now, right?

But, NOW I know what's been happening to all those little things that have turned up missing! Raptured! Yep.

Cave

Answer 6

I say because you waste your life adhering to religious principles.

A life hindered, is no life at all.

I want to Live, (with a capital L), not be a slave to doctrine.

Pascals wager is ultimately meaningless.

Answer 7

The big one for me is that it assumes that one loses nothing by accepting Christianity. The loss of intellectual integrity alone is troubling enough.

Answer 8

Once and for all on Yahoo Answers?

That's cute.

(What if it's a Hopi deity, though?)