pascals wager

[pandunppp]

Please read Part 1: 185 of Philosophy Investgation if anyone needs an explination from me.
We can not decide which one is ‘the correct one’(God’s rule):
1000, 1002, 1004, 1006 or
1000, 1004, 1008, 1012?

[ed1 (ed)]

id rather you explained it here i want your view on it…

[pandunppp]

we don’t know what God is thinking at all

and two guys try to persuade people about how to earn our everlasting nextlife or something like that

one says

if we believe the existence of God and God exists, we win
this is God’s rule

another one says

if we don’t believe the existence of God and God exists, we win
this si God’s rule

i find i don’t have any idea to know who is correct in this case so i can only give up

now the third one says since he believes the existence of God and God exists so he does win

i agree him but have to remind him it means his answer is a match

like i say it’s a rat you say no it’s a rabbit and it’s a rabbit so you win

nothing about your next life etc

[Magius]

Ed stated about Pascal’s Wager:

it is unreasnoble to be an athesit. It is impossible to disprove the existance of God and so the only way forward is to hear God. To assume that god exists in order to find the way of life that God wishes us to lead. Once an individual has enterd a personal relationship with God, the individuals belief in God will be affirmed when God addresses the individual. This requires that the existance of God is presumed at the outset, (think i worded that right)

I just wish to explain my understanding of Pascal’s Wager. Being a mathematical genius, Pascal was well versed in numbers and hence it may not be surprising that he also believed in the concept of infinity. It is infinity that led him to his Wager. He argued: “We know that there is an infinity of numbers, yet we do not know what that infinity is, it is neither odd nor even, yet it is a number.” (Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology. Louis P. Pojman) Pascal believed that we can know a thing exists without knowing its nature in the same way as infinity. Hence, we can know of infinity and God, though he is infinitely incomprehensible, says Pascal.“If there is a God, he is infinitely incomprehensible. We are then incapable of knowing what he is or if he is.” ~Pascal (Ibid) It is from the above that he derived the next four options:

---

You Believe:

1. God Exists: This means are will be infinitely happy
2. God Doesn’t Exist: you will still be slightly happy from the rewards of prayer, kindness, and so on that comes with believing in God, or so says Pascal.

You don’t Believe:
3) God Exists: You will be eternally unhappy (it’s possible he meant hell)
4) God Doesn’t Exist: You will still be slightly unhappy because you are missing the proper elements of goodness in your life that come with believing in a God.

---

There are a number of problems with this argument. The primary error is that he states that God is infinitely incomprehensible, yet his Wager assumes many things about God. Like 1) That God likes those who believe in him. 2) That God punishes, or makes unhappy, those who do not believe in him.

Pax Vitae stated:

I’ve seen Pascal’s wager discussed a number of times here on ILP. Personally I think it’s funny. True you have more chance at salvation if God exists and you believe a religion, then not believing. But what happens when two religions come along, both claiming to be the one and only road to salvation? You’ve accepted the usefulness of believing in God, but now, how do you choose which one of these religions is the best bet?

My response to Ed should clear up that you do not necessarily have a greater chance at salvation if God exists and you believe, then if you don’t. Taking Pascals assumption that God is infinitely incomprehensible, then for all we know God may actually be upset with those of us who would believe in him blindly, and reward those who are positively athiestic and only come to believe in God through his gift to us, reason. Furthermore, your above argument assumes that this God is one who brings salvation to those who believe in him. What if God has nothing to do with Salvation?

What’s your take?

[Warrior_Monk]

No. I don’t really care if my immortal soul burns in hellfire for eternity. No big deal.

[Logo]

Good. Cause God’s not gonna let you in with that attitude.

[detrop]

“Good. Cause God’s not gonna let you in with that attitude.”

I placed a cardboard sign over a phone booth downtown that said “Talk To God.” Among those who did so, I found six questions that were most commonly asked:

1. Did I wake you up?

2. What time is it there?

3. How much is that in dollars?

4. Is that a castle, or what!?

5. What’s the weather like there?

6. When are you coming to America?

[homunculus]

Gadfly wrote : There are a number of problems with this argument. The primary error is that he states that God is infinitely incomprehensible, yet his Wager assumes many things about God. Like 1) That God likes those who believe in him. 2) That God punishes, or makes unhappy, those who do not believe in him.

I think this is the biggest problem with Pascal’s wager. He’s taking on two arguements here, that God exists and it’s the Christian God. It could very well be the case the believing in God puts you in hell, and using reason to come to a viewpoint like agnosticism or atheism puts you in heaven. There could very well be a God and it is unlike anything we could imagine, or hope for, perhaps it would be something we most certainly wouldn’t hope for. Who says if God exists then Christianity is the one true faith? Where is the link there? If God exists maybe Zeke the drunken hobo wearing the cardboard sign/shirt saying “the end is nigh” proclaims the one true faith…