What is 'Pascal’s Wager'???

Question

I don't understand what it is at all...
i thought maybe some outsiders oppinions on the subject would help me understand Pascal’s Wager better.

thanks =]

Answer 1

Basically, Pascal is saying

1) That this is one wager that every man (woman) must place because there either is a God or there is not a God. Each person lives their life according the the wage made, i.e. their belief that there is or is not a God.

2) He states that one cannot use reason to determine whether or not God exists.

3) He makes the point that the safer wager is to believe that there is a God.

a) If you choose to be live there is a God and live your life accordingly, you will be rewarded upon death.

b) If you choose to believe there is a God and live your life accordingly and you are wrong, you haven't lost anything.

c) If you choose to believe there is not a God and live your life accordingly and you are right, you have neither gained nor lost any thing.

d) If you choose to believe there is no God and live your life accordingly and you are wrong, you will be doomed to hell.

So, according to Pascal's Wager, choice A is a much safer bet than D. However, if you follow Christianity, you may want to consider the bit about God preferring the hot and cold and will spit out the luke warm believers. Believing out of convenience seems luke warm to me.

PS I just read teh Wiki page on this topic. It does a good job of describing Pascal's Wager and the opposing arguments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

Answer 2

The simple answer is this: It's best to believe in God because if when you die you find that there isn't a God, you really haven't been a terrible person and the consequences are non-existent. However, if you refuse to believe in God, die, and go to Hell, the consequences are pretty obvious. In other words, Pascal's Wager is a "safe bet."

Answer 3

Kinda basic - it's a "question" that's been asked so often that it's become a drinking game in here.

Atheists - if you believe in God and are wrong, nothing happens and you haven't lost anything. If you don't believe in God and you're wrong you end up in hell for eternity. isn't it better not to take the chance and believe in God?

There are arguments that the atheists and pagans use against it that are fairly common too.

What if the Christian is wrong and you've picked the wrong religion and god and Zeus zaps you? * What if you're wrong and you've wasted a lifetime bowing to a myth? * Is your religion based on fear? * Do you want to convert people with threats? * How can I believe in something that is a myth? * Show me proof of a God and I'll believe

And more

Answer 4

It's an argument for why people should believe in God. There are different versions of it, but the basic argument is as follows:

You have two choices: you can believe in God or you can not believe in God. There are also two options, one of which is correct: God exists, or God doesn't exist. To understand the argument, you must look at the "expected value" of each of the possibilities.

1. God exists, and you believe God exists: You will receive infinite reward.
2. God doesn't exist, and you don't believe God exists. You will receive neither reward nor punishment.
3. God exists, and you don't believe God exists: you will receive infinite punishment.
4. God doesn't exist, and you believe God exists: you will receive neither punishment nor reward.

As long as God has a nonzero probability of existing, the believer will always have a higher "expected value" in the afterlife than the non-believer.

Answer 5

The mechanics of Pascal's Wager have been explained already. As a Christian, I consider it to be a fundamentally immoral argument to make. It calls upon those who reject Christianity to accept it on purely self-centered and selfish grounds.

Answer 6

Basically it says it's better to be innocent than to be sorry.
Although I cannot reconcile the idea of a loving God punishing anyone merely because of disbelief.

Answer 7

its the argument where christianity and atheist are the only 2 options.

that is:

if atheists are wrong they lose eternal life.
if christians are wrong they lose nothing.

if christians are right they gain eternal life.
if atheists are right they gain nothing.

give: atheists are wrong then they lose eternal life. if christians are wrong atheists gain nothing.

so they can lose everythign and gain nothing. vs gain everything and lose nothing.

again this argument only works if those are the only 2 possible mindsets. it doesnt account for the other thousands of religions that also have a punishment in the afterlife for lack of belief.

Answer 8

OK here Goes......

Basically Pascal proposed that there is no reason not to believe in God.

Its the what do you have to lose philosophy.

He claimed that if you believe in God and he exists you go to heaven. If you believe in God and he doesn't exist then you didn't lose anything. But if you don't believe in God and he exists, you Go to hell, and if you don't believe in God and he doesn't exist you gained nothing. So he proposed its safer to believe in God just in case.....

This is nice, but ignores all of the problems that come with religious belief, like which one is the right one, and in order to be a Christian, I have to create a relationship with someone who is ready to torture my family if they choose not to believe.

Answer 9

Short version...It's better to believe and find out there is no God, then to not believe and find out that he exists.

Answer 10

*drink*