how does the tv show "lost" ends? i am from Spain and in here we have just seen seasons 1 and 2.
what is more annoying thanhaving abroken space bar and being dyslexic?
2007-10-01 12:54:50 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
so he sounds abit stupid this pascal...so why are atheists quoting him? let him rest in peace and be forgotten, there are much smarter people to be remebered
2007-10-01 13:02:11 · update #1
*drink*
Blaise Pascal was a mathematician and philosopher who lived in France from 1623 to 1662. His wager consists of this "hedge your bets" position on religion. He said that if you think there is a God and it turns out there isn't, you haven't lost anything by living as if there was a God. But if you think there isn't and it turns out there is, you are in deep doodoo. So he recommended acting as if you believe in God, just in case.
Of course, if there is a God, he certainly would not be fooled by such a "just in case" sort of belief. Also, it is not true you lose nothing by behaving as if you believe there is a God. You lose your personal integrity, for one thing. And probably at least half the love affairs, parties, etc.
2007-10-01 13:05:26 · answer #1 · answered by auntb93 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Blaise Pascal, a French mathematician and philosopher, suggested that it was a safe bet to believe in God, since one lost nothing by doing so, and stood to gain a great deal.
I have no idea how the tv show "Lost" ends, having never seen it.
2007-10-01 12:58:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pascal thought that people should believe in God out of fear of going to hell if they didn't. Because obviously there were only two sides to the issue, atheism and Christianity, and no other religions existed. We mention him because there are so many Christains that try to use the same argument, ignoring the fact that it's been ripped to shreds time and time again.
2007-10-01 13:11:34 · answer #3 · answered by Keyring 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pascal never published his book. When he died, his friends found rough drafts that he had been preparing for an eventual book. His friends tried to assemble the notes as best they could and then they were published.
Pascal was a brilliant Christian debater. He probably never intended for his wager to be interpreted as it is. If some modifications are made, then it is much harder to refute.
1) While we can't force ourselves to believe in God because of a wager, we are at least shown the worth of seeking God.
2) By whatever name we give to Him, it is only our Creator that we seek. There are not thousands of gods to choose from. We only seek the One who created us.
I think the intent of Pascal was to say this:
If we consider the worth of finding our Creator to be great, we will be willing to seek Him even without proof that He even exists. The fact that we are unwilling to seek Him indicates that we consider our Creator to be without worth.
Those who would refuse to seek God do so because they don't want the authority of God in their lives. We want to be the captain of our soul and the masters of our fate.
2007-10-02 09:03:41 · answer #4 · answered by Matthew T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
very circular wager
In the seventeenth century the mathematician Blaise Pascal formulated his infamous pragmatic argument for belief in God in Pensées. The argument runs as follows:
If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
How should you bet? Regardless of any evidence for or against the existence of God, Pascal argued that failure to accept God's existence risks losing everything with no payoff on any count. The best bet, then, is to accept the existence of God. There have been several objections to the wager: that a person cannot simply will himself to believe something that is evidently false to him; that the wager would apply as much to belief in the wrong God as it would to disbelief in all gods, leaving the the believer in any particular god in the same situation as the atheist or agnostic; that God would not reward belief in him based solely on hedging one's bets; and so on.
2007-10-01 12:57:25 · answer #5 · answered by voice_of_reason 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager
what, they don't have search engines where you come from?
2007-10-01 12:57:43 · answer #6 · answered by Morey000 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋