Do you think that Pascal's Wager is a big pile of dooky?

Question

Explain.

Answer 1

yeah...

Ixulflibrashim! That word, my friend, is a curse. Now, I could tell you what it does, but needless to say its horrible.

Now I can remove the curse for $5.

So, there are several options:
A) the curse is real and you pay up: small expense
B) the curse is real and you don't pay up: eternal suffering
C) the curse is not real and you pay up: small expense
D) the curse is not real and you don't pay: no expense

According to pascal, you should pay me because its the worse that can happen is way less appealing than the middle suggestion. In short he ignores the ridiculousness of the ability to curse at all.

Answer 2

Sure it is. For starters, as has been pointed out, it only works if you're sure you're worshiping the right god to begin with. (Of course, all believers _think_ they are.)

But also, it presumes that the god you'd better be worshiping "or else" is just that--a petty, narcissistic god who is more concerned with being praised than with you leading a good life. If Pascal's wager were true, then an evil person like Hitler who repents in his dying moments could be let into heaven, while someone who spent his life doing good deeds for others but who was an atheist would burn for eternity. I would say that such a god is unworthy of worship.

Finally, Pascal's wager presumes that there is no cost or harm in believing, so why not? And yet there is, both to the individual and to society as a whole. The tithes one must pay to the church, the time spent worshiping instead of doing something fun or productive, the intellectual dishonesty involved in believing in ancient mythologies, the widespread strife and intellectual oppression caused by religions, are just a few of the very real costs of believing.

Answer 3

I think Pascal's intent was to encourage people to seek after meaning and truth even if they have become disillusioned with the church or religion. It is a plea to turn away from jaded cynicism and pursue questioning skepticism. Pascal's Wager is an argument in the favor of agnosticism verses atheism. It is an allegorical teaching tool and not a strictly literal posit.

Answer 4

While I wouldn't personally phrase it quite like that, I do have to concur with your statement. The problem with Pascal's Wager is that it does not take into account the number of religions around the world. He refers to the Christian god, but what about all of the Hindu deities, or Allah? Or even the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Its impossible to hedge all of your bets.

Answer 5

He was a typical religious fool. "Betting" in a religion that speaks against human vices. The religious make me laugh.

The next person who prays can ask to speak to Pascal. Ask him if the wager was worth it. What? No response. Figures.

Answer 6

In short, yes. What always bothered me about The Wager was that it mistakes the true nature of faith. You can't will yourself to have faith based on a cold analysis of logistical outcomes. Either you believe or you don't.

Answer 7

In poker it's called "hedging your bets"....I guess it's allowed.