AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Pascal's Wager

82 18641
camm95
offline
camm95
52 posts
Nomad

Hopefully you have all heard of the wager. It states that if the belief in the existance of God was a bet, a rational person would choose to bet on the existance of God and therefore be some sort of Theist. The wager was modeled off of Christianity, and the claim that Pascal makes is that by believing in God, an individual has nothing to lose in their own lives, and if God does exist one has everything to gain in the afterlife. I am specifically wondering what you guys think of that claim. By being a theist there is nothing to lose in this life, and everything to gain in the next. So what do you guys think?

Please entertain the thought of an afterlife and don't claim that this entire thought is crap because there is no afterlife.

Also, if you believe there are things to lose or gain in this life, please elaborate as to what they are and why.

  • 82 Replies
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HiuhSe3w7X8/TGe8C7MGcxI/AAAAAAAAAFs/sZyU4Ya3Ybo/s1600/Pascals-Wager.jpg

Pascal's wager is based on two things.

1. That there are only two choices.
2. That both choices have an equal amount of probability.

In reality, there are a ton if choices. Why choose Christianity? A religion with a better afterlife would be a better choice if this was true. Or to make it actually effective, you would have to convert to EVERY religion to make sure you get into some kind of afterlife.

Second, the fact that the afterlife described by many religions is completely impossible, it would be a bar bet on riods. It is impossible to happen, it would be like betting a number that isn't in the lottery and expecting to win.

Then there is the fact that you are, in fact, effected by the religion while living if you choose to follow it, most of the time in a negative fashion, which further makes this completely useless.

Sonatavarius
offline
Sonatavarius
1,322 posts
Farmer

maybe pascal was talking to christians?

and Allah's the same entity xD.... Isn't Vishnu Hindu?... I'd be ok with reincarnation... as long as its not like as a roach or anything buggy like that.

and something from so long ago would need to be modernized... "do you think there's nothing or do you think that that there might just be something else after this life... whatever it is is irrelevant...just something?"


i don't see how him patterning his "wager" to his intended audience changes the wager when you factor in other deities and religious faiths. apply a little relativity to it and find something else to pick at.

2. That both choices have an equal amount of probability.


isn't it just a proposition saying that when push comes to shove that people will hope and want for there to be something after death? ...and that "hope" would be strong enough to say my money's on "God" even against the known insurmountably high and impossible odds? a wager is a bet and a bet doesn't have to be 50-50 for there to be one. I don't think its implying anything other than asking you which horse you're going to put your money.

hypothetically if you put your "money" on God and there is no God then you've lost nothing because you're dead. (inb4 ur estate... ur estate =/= you).. If your money was on God and God treats you as with some positive action for putting your money on him then there was something to gain... even tho he might just give everyone the same happehness regardless of whether or not you hated him in this life if and when we all die and he's there to greet us... (granted he's there to greet us).

...and ur only in trouble if those entities do in fact have ill will towards you.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

...and ur only in trouble if those entities do in fact have ill will towards you.
in case of which, everyone will get into trouble regardless of bet.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Or to make it actually effective, you would have to convert to EVERY religion to make sure you get into some kind of afterlife.


Even then we run the risk of it being a religion no body thought of.

and Allah's the same entity xD.... Isn't Vishnu Hindu?... I'd be ok with reincarnation... as long as its not like as a roach or anything buggy like that.


There are variations between what the Christian and Islamic versions want and expect, even there in we have variations depending on which denominations. So let's so you got the right religion, you could still be doing it wrong.

i don't see how him patterning his "wager" to his intended audience changes the wager when you factor in other deities and religious faiths.


It no longer be come a 50/50 chance. By adding other religious faiths the odds that the particular one you chose being correct drop significantly. Once we factor all the odds your chances are nearly 1/infinity.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

314d1 and Mage pretty said everything. Also isn't it kinda stupid to rationalize about belief in afterlife? Either you believe in something or you don't. Pascal's wager kinda forces you to convince yourself of a belief you maybe didn't hold before, only because of probability..

qwerty1011
offline
qwerty1011
554 posts
Peasant

God should be able to tell the diffrence between false belief and real belief. And as it is really likely you would be wrong I think god would be more pleased with a logical rational find than false fearful belief.

zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

Guys, if you want another choice, choose Judaism. WE DON'T HAVE HELL!

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Guys, if you want another choice, choose Judaism. WE DON'T HAVE HELL!


Neither does Wicca, Buddhism, Some versions of Christianity like the Quakers... What's your point?
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

So, basically, to sum things up:

1. If you believe in a single God, you will have to choose one out of infinite possible varieties.
2. If any percent of the possible gods will punish you eternally, then there are an infinite number of hypothetical gods who, if they exist, would punish you for eternity.
3. If there is only one god, then your chance of worshipping it, and not a nonexistent entity instead, is one out of infinity.
4. Therefore you will almost surely fail to pick up the correct "One True God".
5. So if a god does exist, the chance of you going to any variety of heaven is infinitesimal, regardless of whether you are religious or not.


I've always found Pascal's Wager to be a desperate last defence, it doesn't even bring much to the table, it's really just a rehashing of "You'll go to hell if you don't believe" with a little bit of "What've you got to lose?" thrown in.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

Avorne, the main fallacy of what you have just displayed is the word "infinite". So your summary is false. In case you say "I can invent many gods" I say that a single person's invention will remain as such, regardless of how many people will believe in it. So your actions are mostly to confuse those who wish to seek truth in God with false imaginations.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Avorne, the main fallacy of what you have just displayed is the word "infinite". So your summary is false.

His point remains no matter what. Just replace "infinite" with "numerous". That is already enough to invalidate Pascal's wager.

My point also remains unanswered: Pascal's wager encourages people to convince themselves of the existence of a god (if you take only one god in account) only because it seems more probable to win and improbable to fail. This kinda seems wrong to me.
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

How do you know that there aren't an infinite variety of Gods? It's possible.

vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

Just replace "infinite" with "numerous". That is already enough to invalidate Pascal's wager.
Ah I think I now get the point. There is also a belief that a benevolent God, seeing our beliefs, be them in another "god" or in Himself, will judge people by their capabilities of discerning the truth as well as perseverance in their beliefs. So this adds a whole 0.5 factor of success prior to successful guess of "right God", that if you believe, God might (or might not, therefore a 0.5, with an omniscient and omnibenevolent God this can raise up to 1.0!) take your faith as faith in Him regardless of the name people use. However, if one does not believe, this chance is not applied. So, ANY belief has about 0.5 chances to "win" Heaven. And a 0.5 chance of a win is enough to play for anyone, especially if the jackpot is way bigger than bet.
My point also remains unanswered: Pascal's wager encourages people to convince themselves of the existence of a god (if you take only one god in account) only because it seems more probable to win and improbable to fail. This kinda seems wrong to me.
I have read some research (I have to find it) where people were to choose between two games, one having a 1M win at 1%, and X (variable) at 99%, and another having ~10M win at 1%, the same X at 98% and zero at 1%. Or there was some other constant within both games, like winning 10k in 20% chance, lowering the variable win chance. The research showed that despite the mathematical expectance of amount to win in the second game was higher, most people chose to play first game while X remained above zero. When X becomes zero, people's favors instantly shifted to second game. The same case applies here, if a person is capable of winning a -INF aka eternal suffering if playing atheistic "game", he won't consider playing it.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Ah I think I now get the point. There is also a belief that a benevolent God, seeing our beliefs, be them in another "god" or in Himself, will judge people by their capabilities of discerning the truth as well as perseverance in their beliefs.

Well... do you think your god is such a god, that jews and muslims also go to heaven?

The same case applies here, if a person is capable of winning a -INF aka eternal suffering if playing atheistic "game", he won't consider playing it.

Interesting example, yet it still is purely an egoistic choice on probabilities, which doesn't have a lot in common with what I understand under true beleif. A believer will take risks and not hop to the most probable thing only to save his skin. Applying Pascal's wager to recruit believers seems wrong.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

Well... do you think your god is such a god, that jews and muslims also go to heaven?
Pascal's wager takes only belief in regard of a "win", while there are also deeds of a human and God's justice. So IMHO, in case the particular Jew or Muslim did a good life, strongly believing in God in whatever form he's presented, he can receive access to Heaven. I still think that there will be some punishment for not accepting Jesus as Savior of all, as this is also a deed and will also be judged. This is up to God to decide of course.
Applying Pascal's wager to recruit believers seems wrong.
It's not meant to "recruit believers", you can't force a person to believe. It's meant to make people consider if there is sense to believe. And yes, a true belief won't play probabilities, it will just be, and the person will persevere in his already existing belief.
Showing 1-15 of 82