What do you think about Pascal's Wager?

Question

This is mainly directed at people that don't believe in God or any other type of supreme being.

If you do not know what Pascal's Wager is, here is an overview on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

Essentially, here is what it says. It takes two variables. The first is if God exists or not. The second is if you live like God exists or not. There are four possible outcomes. If you live like God does exist, then you can gain everything if God exists but lose nothing if God does not exist. However, if you live like God does not exist, you gain nothing if God does not exist but lose everything if God does exist.

It's not meant to convert people and make them believe. All it is designed as is a way to convince people that it's worth looking at.

Answer 1

Glug glug.
================
Pascal's wager assumes that believers are right about everything except possibly the existence of god, and then goes on to "prove" that we should behave as though there is a god. I don't buy the basic assumptions. Pascal apparently wasn't able to imagine that anyone wouldn't.

For example, how do we know that if there is a god, he doesn't take only the NONbelievers up into heaven? Pascal's wager assumes that if there is a god, it is the believers who wind up in paradise and nonbelievers in hell. But there's no reason to believe that.

Answer 2

How does one live as if God exists. I know God exists, but do not have any blue print for living other than my own conscience, which I believe is my contact with him. I think the most interesting aspect of the wager are the assumptions. Being that they are assumption they make the wager pointless because there is really nothing to win. My belief in God is based on proof. What proof you may ask? The fact that there is life is the proof. To try to convince someone in the existence of God is pointless. The problem being that anyone with an Ego large enough to block the obvious will never be convinced.

Answer 3

It's a bad argument with a false premise. There aren't only four outcomes. The argument ignores the fact that if you believe a god to actually exist, there are an infinite possible gods that could be. There's no evidence for any of them, so they are all equally possible.

Since there are an infinite possible gods, then taking the chance on following only one of them has the chance of pissing off a good many that care if you do.

However, another good many of them might like the fact that atheists don't follow something just based on old books of superstition. There may be gods that really value honesty, logic, and reason.

Then again, even if that one specific god happens to exist, the Christian god who people call "God", it would probably be smart enough to figure out that you're only following him on a bet.

Also, if there are no gods, then people are being intolerant, bigoted, inciting violence, waging wars, torturing people, and passing repressive laws based on a superstition. Religion does a lot of harm to society. If the promises of reward after death that religions claim are as empty as they seem to be, then this is a tragedy of enormous proportions. It is a huge waste of life.

Answer 4

It has two fatal flaws.

1: If its very unlikely that God exists and following him ruins your life (which it largely does) then the wager works the wrong way to the one Pascal intended. Ie it is based on a flawed assumption that at worst the chances of God existing are 50:50.

2: It makes the a priori assumption that believing in God is of itself sufficient to expiate all of the negative consequences of not believing in a God that does exist. Now this is based on the notion that God damns those who do not believe in him, and on this basis it is extremely unlikely that God would be nice enough to save anyone. Its just not rationally acceptable. Again Pascal's wager works in the opposite way to the one Pascal intended.

In other words, its a badly thought out attempt to bully the vulnerable on the basis of supposed dreadful consequences to non belief.

As an aside, I could use the same argument with a fictional tooth fairy god. If you do not believe in my tooth fairy god then when you die you will spend eternity having your teeth pulled. You cannot prove my tooth fairy god does not exist (many people do believe in the tooth fairy), and on the basis of the wager and the dire consequences of non belief I presume you now believe in and give due worship to the tooth fairy.

Answer 5

It's rather silly. It's full of holes*. Here's a better one:

Live as if there are no gods, enjoy life, and be a decent person. If there is indeed a just god, you will be rewarded. If there are no gods, you had a worthwhile life and that's the end of it. If there is an unjust god, then you're probably screwed anyway, whatever you do.

* If you believe in the Christian god, and it's actually the Muslim god who exists, you're going to burn in hell for all eternity - the Quran says so. If you believe in the Christian god and he's an evil sadist rather than a benevolent god (a reasonable assumption, considering the incalculable suffering that he - supposedly - presides over in the world), then he will take great delight in sending the most fervent believers to eternal torture and keeping us atheists in paradise, just to make your torment that much the worse. If there is a god and he values reason over blind faith, he will reward atheists and punish believers (since they have no justifiable reason to believe that any gods exist).

Any genuinely religious person would spend their lives eternally tormented by the possibility of believing in the wrong god and ending up in some other hell, or offending the Christian god and ending up in his. If you don't feel this way, then you can't be a genuine believer.

Atheists, of course, have no such worries, since we know that when we die, we simply cease to exist.

Answer 6

"If you live like God does exist, then you can gain everything..."
Assuming you pick the right god.

"...but lose nothing if God does not exist."
Questionable. Donating money and time to church/studying/evangelism when you could do more useful things with them.

"However, if you live like God does not exist, you gain nothing if God does not exist..."
Again, questionable. You gain time and money that you would otherwise spend worshiping a non-existant God.

"...but lose everything if God does exist."
Assuming God rewards based on belief rather than another standard, such as actions, or merely on a divine whim.

Answer 7

Pascal's Wager only works on cowards. I know it's harsh, but very true. What person who has any moral courage at all could be taken in by such a way of thinking. It's like being willing to hop on one foot your entire life, even though you think it's stupid, just in case God exists and that's what it will take to go to Heaven. Pathetic!

Answer 8

Pascal's Wager is flawed because it does not specify which god to belive in, there are thousands to choose from. And even if it did specify a particular god, how do you know it's the right god? You can't believe in them all.

Answer 9

If there is a god, cruel or kind, then they would know in my heart I was living a lie. Even in the Christian religous system, they reiterate that if you do not actually accept Jesus into your heart (and he knows!)...then you have not truly been saved.

I would rather not live a lie, and deal with the consequences if I was wrong...than to live dishonestly, and still deal with the consequences of not truly honoring whatever god might have actually existed.

Either way, I won't know until I'm dead...and until then...live and let live, I say.

*Cheers! But drinks soda, not alcohol*

Answer 10

Of course, if you check the profile and see the "Member since: 06 June 2007" date, you'll realise it's not the real =42 answering this question. Just some pathetic identity thief.