2007-05-23 07:24:53 · 38 answers · asked by monkeymanelvis 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Oooh some good answers. Lets spice this up and say that we use Pascal's Wager with the example of Zoroastrianism VS atheism.
2007-05-23 07:33:22 · update #1
Many very good answers - choosing the best one will not be easy.
2007-05-27 11:08:52 · update #2
Pascal's wager is busted. It assmues a 50/50 points spread. If there were only 2 possibilities, then by all means, sure - convert. But there are thousands of choices. What if the Baptists are right, or the Catholics. What if Sprinkling really is better then dunking? What about Moslems - they seem to have an opinion, or Jews (wouldn't God be mad if Christ weren't who He claimed and you show up wearing His Pendant?
More to the point, The Wager bring us back into a place where we love God merely for the hope of reward or the fear of punishment. Shouldn't there really be more to the relationship then that? If a woman stayed married to a man because if she stays he's going to let her keep her fabulous life style, but if she leaves, he's going to torture her - we'd call him a monster and help her pack. So, if you are a Christian just because you fear hell or want heaven, let me help you with your things.
You should be religious because you want to help yourself and your fellow man, because you believe there is something greater then you, Because you feel that Grace, because you love your Creator. Not for some silly bet.
2007-05-23 07:36:06 · answer #1 · answered by Cindy H 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
To my mind Pascal's wager is little more than a justification for arrogantly dismissing a carefully considered decision, based on reason and the scientific method, not to believe in God. This arrogant dismissal of atheism is unfortunately still common among those who hold religious beliefs today, in most if not all faiths.
As an atheist, I have the greatest of respect for the deeply held beliefs of others. Unfortunately the majority of religious people I come into contact with do not accord my atheism that same respect. Indeed, Pascal's Wager is all too easy to use as an excuse for such disrespect. For that reason, I actually find the use of Pascals Wager as an argument against atheism mildly offensive.
2007-05-23 10:38:19 · answer #2 · answered by Spacephantom 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It does point out a theoretical disadvantage of atheism but with one key problem: If you do not believe in God, then you do not believe that you will go to hell. Also, Pascal is not arguing the truth of the matter. Believing in what you think would be BETTER does not necessarilly make it true. I may choose to believe that tomorrow afternoon I will win £30,000,000. I may BELIEVE it, but that doesn't mean it will happen. And look at it another way: If you believe in God, and live your life according to the rules and there is no God, you've wasted years on something which was never true. Personally, though I can see Pascal's point, I am still an atheist. Besides which, surely if the theory of God is true, then God would see through someone like me and send me to hell anyway. I could go to church, but in my heart I would never really believe.
2007-05-24 04:36:56 · answer #3 · answered by Cpt. Willard 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My only thought is that this question is about as fresh as the coffee I made yesterday at 6 a.m.
Everyone, even the Christians, are tired of questions about Pascal's wager. If you search the answers archive, you will see that questions on PW have been asked multiple many times. It is a dead parrot... expired, defunct, an ex-parrot.
Now, I may admire Pascal very much for his Pensees, but I think here he's dead wrong. Believing is not a mere intellectual exercise. If a person truly DOES NOT believe that God's claims are true, that person cannot artificially make himself/herself "believe" it just for the sake of the possible (but in that person's view, wildly unlikely) rewards in the afterlife. If in fact, there is no afterlife, etc. then the person would have wasted a great deal of time and mental energy on it. That doesn't mean that a person can't change, and choose to truly believe (I did) later, but you can't just say you believe when you really don't.
Even for believers, we don't believe in God and His promises solely for the sake of the eternal rewards.... that's using God as "fire insurance", if you will. We believe because of who He is and that we want to participate in the life of Christ. I'm not expressing this the way I want to... but suffice it to say, it's all about the relationship, not the reward. We're not Christians because of heaven; we're Christians because of Christ.
****************
In case you didn't know this, I'll explain it-- the reason a bunch of people's answers say "drink!" or something like it, is that questions about PW have been asked SO MANY times that it's now a drinking game... a joke, on the order of "everybody take a drink every time X character does Y action in this movie".
2007-05-23 07:39:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
*LOL*
The problems with Pascal's Wager are so many that it's utterly useless.
First off, it assumes that the only two options are "Christianity is correct" or "There is no god at all." This is a false dichotomy -- it's possible that any religion man's ever thought up is correct, or even that the right one is one that hasn't been thought of yet.
Second, it assumes that you choose what you believe -- this is not true. You believe what you believe based on your experiences and available knowledge.
Third, it assumes that God somehow cannot or does not distinguish between believing to get a reward vs. believing because one feels its the right thing to do.
Pascal's wager, in short, is garbage, and Pascal even acknowledged as much.
2007-05-23 07:31:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Pascal's Wager rather ignores the disruption to ones life that has to be accepted if one does believe that God does exist.
The pragmatic compromise is to believe that God does exist but to profess uncertainty as to the true interpretation of the scriptures. This enables the wagerer to live a normal life unencumbered by formal religion but hedging against the possibility of meeting God at a later date.
The optimum is to end ones days with a death bed conversion combining a secular worldly life with a slim chance of an afterlife.
2007-05-23 08:00:24 · answer #6 · answered by Clive 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Logical disadvantage?
And believing in a magical, supernatural, invisible super-being living in another dimension up in the sky-- despite there being not a lick of proof (or even evidence) that such a thing even EXISTS-- isn't?
THINK about what Pascal's wager is telling you to do. It's telling you to just ASSUME that something exists. This being despite there being no evidence that it exists, and despite the fact that it's a completely fantastical, wild, ridiculous, implausible story. Are you going to assume that Zeus exists--JUST IN CASE he does? There's no more evidence that Zeus exists or doesn't exist than there is for the gods that people believe in today. If we were to take that wager, then we would be obligated to assume that ANYTHING the imagination can come up with is real--JUST IN CASE it is.
2007-05-23 07:34:53 · answer #7 · answered by Jess H 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, here we go. Let's sythesize a new god for a brief experiment.
Lets create A micro god between this line here
*
and this one here.
I marked my god with a "*" just for easy reference.
There is no other background padding to my religion apart from what follows.
In my micro religion, I believe "*" is going to make the time after my death very happy indeed.
Ok, all done and dusted. Not much of a bible was it? I didn't have to pay anyone, sing any crap songs, abstain from kinky sex etc. All I had to do was believe it for a few seconds. Now I can get on with the rest if my life in smug confidence that I'm sorted for the afterlife.
2007-05-23 07:35:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'll drink to that :)
If you think Pascal's wager is logical, then YOU must believe in Zeus, Thor, Ra, Osiris, Baal, and every other god ever invented by man *just in case they're real.* That's the only logical thing to do if you think Pascal's wager is logical.
Peace.
2007-05-23 07:30:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
What my fellow atheists express here is that Pascal's wager is fatally flawed. We celebrate by drinking.
- I can not force myself to believe in god(s) any more than I can force myself to believe in the easter bunny.
- Faking it is the best I could do. Would god(s) appreciate that?
- Which of the many gods should I 'pick'? Zeus, Allah, Ra, Odin, Zoltar?
- if God doesn't exist I have wasted a lot of time praying and talking and worrying about the opinion of nothing.
2007-05-23 07:31:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋