Pascal's Wager Gedankenexperiment

[Sigma_Tau_Theta]

This thread is dedicated to a gedankenexperiment (thought experiment) involving Pascal's Wager. If you choose to reply, please do so with civility, willingness to follow through, and keeping the theist/atheist bickering to a minimum. Devil's advocate's are welcome.

If you are not familiar with the Wager, here are some website which I have not read in their entirety (or least of all skimmed) as this thread was a spur of the moment.

Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pascal's Wager (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

The situation is that I am preparing to accept the Wager.

Using Wikipedia

1. "God is, or He is not"

2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.

3. According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.

4. You must wager. It is not optional.

5. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.

6. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

First of all, which "God" are we talking about.
Second, why? Why should I believe your in your "God"?

[Jack]

Another complication: Belief in gods doesn't simply promise rewards in the afterlife but many beliefs also include the element of punishment for wrong or inadequate belief. So if you choose to believe in a god but happen to choose the wrong god, you risk incurring the wrath of the "right" god. The wager is far from the simple 50/50 choice between "does god exist or doesn't he" that it's usually represented to be.

[Anguspure]

First of all, which "God" are we talking about.
Second, why? Why should I believe your in your "God"?

ln the opening chapters of the Torah the following God is revealed:
Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow. (But) the Blessed God shall come down teaching his death will bring (the) mourning, peace.
It is this God that would die for the sake of men, that I beleive in. l choose to place my trust in the account of this God, as extraordinary as it may be, simply because in my experience and as far as I can see this sort of life giving does not come from anyone who is untrustworthy.
This is not a matter that you should be under compulsion over however because death is inevitable for us all and certainly the evidence for any sort of peace beyond the grave beyond that of death itself is anecdotal.
Nevertheless the proof is in the pudding and the truth or not of the story of a loving God is wholly independant of whether any of us believe or not.
However, to be pursuaded that this God exists is to harbour the hope that there is a possibility of a reprieve from final death.

[Peter]

However, to be pursuaded that this God exists is to harbour the hope that there is a possibility of a reprieve from final death.

Faith is simply hope. I'm good with that. Why make it any more than that?

I too hope that death isn't the end but I don't build this simple hope into a pile of make believe crap with no evidence. Is the difference that I'm not afraid of death? I wonder.

[Sigma_Tau_Theta]

[/QUOTE]

I too hope that death isn't the end but I don't build this simple hope into a pile of make believe crap with no evidence.

I would prefer if comments like the underlined were avoided.

ln the opening chapters of the Torah the following God is revealed:

By asserting the Torah, I am assuming you are taking the side of Judaism.

1. Why Judaism?

2. I have just converted to Judaism. I am now part of the a ethnic group that is essentially hated by most people. Will I have to undergo circumcision as an adult? A number of crimes are punishable by death. And other sources for Jewish law that are not in the canon. Why should I follow the law that is not in the holy book?

3. I just died after a life of being the best Jew I could be.

3.1) I am wrong.

3.1.1) Some other religion was right and I could be in a form of Hell

3.1.2) Some other religion was right so I have become reincarnated as whatever.

3.1.3) The atheists were right so I am just dead.

3.1.4) If the Jewish "God" is incorrect, I have just wasted my life following the Judaism. Not mention punished by "God" if a "God" exists or wasted my only life following the wrong playbook.

3.2) I am right, so what's heaven like?

4. I never converted to being a Jew, but the Jews were right, so what is Hell like?

[Yarn]

If we could somehow be certain that heaven and hell existed and that every person's soul would go to one or the other of them forever, without reliable evidence as to what determines who goes to which location our rational subjective odds of going to hell and heaven would remain 50-50 respectively, meaning that Pascal's argument is ineffective in the absence of reliable evidence that, if heaven and hell exist, Christians go to the former and gentiles go to the latter.

[RickSp]

Blaise Pascal may have been a gifted mathematician but his wager is a sucker bet.

It assumes a single god instead of an infinite number of possible gods and it further assumes a single response from that single god, rather than a range of rational responses.

Pascal's wager has a much higher chance of success for those betting against the Christian god.

[Anguspure]

By asserting the Torah, I am assuming you are taking the side of Judaism.

Be careful about making such assumptions. Judaism does not embrace this teaching.

[Anguspure]

Faith is simply hope. I'm good with that. Why make it any more than that?

I too hope that death isn't the end but I don't build this simple hope into a pile of make believe crap with no evidence. Is the difference that I'm not afraid of death? I wonder.

Faith is to be persuaded to put ones trust in something. To be persuaded by evidence in some cases or by trusting the anecdote of another in some.
Hopefully faith in a person that has given their life for one will illicite an appropriate response inline with the will of the one who died.
As for the necessity of all of the other crap well I'm pretty much in agreement with you.

[Peter]

Hopefully faith in a person that has given their life for one will illicite an appropriate response inline with the will of the one who died.

Your faith is circular. Why do you have faith in jesus? Because you have faith that he sacrificed himself for your sins. Why do you have faith that he sacrificed himself for your sins? Because you have faith in jesus.

We're all here to try and determine the truth of the story and circular reasoning presented as fact is most unhelpful.

If the jesus story is true then christianity is a cult of human sacrifice and cannibalism. I'm so happy there's not a shred of good evidence for any of it so theists resort to presenting wagers.

[Thanatos]

Why do people keep trying the same things over and over again? Pascal's wager does not work unless there's only two choices.

It also assumes there's no inherent benefit to being an atheist. When all else fails, I'd like to at least face the darkness with a clear head.

[Anguspure]

Your faith is circular. Why do you have faith in jesus? Because you have faith that he sacrificed himself for your sins. Why do you have faith that he sacrificed himself for your sins? Because you have faith in jesus.

Not quite.
First of all l must decide whether l can trust the account of the Apostles.
Then having done so l must decide whether l can trust the teaching that the account relays (ie the inevitability of death and substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus against that death).
Then I have to decide whether l can put my faith in Jesus as a fit substitute for my eternal death.
Then finally l have to decide whether or not to acknowledge my need for a substitute, and whether or not to accept Him as such.
The appropriate response l refer to is the question of how l should then go on to live my life.
Would'nt it be appropriate to give consideration to the will of the one who saved it?

If the jesus story is true then christianity is a cult of human sacrifice and cannibalism.

No, that is if the story is not true.
If the story is true it is one of ultimate freedom, love, and mercy.

I'm so happy there's not a shred of good evidence for any of it so theists resort to presenting wagers.

l think a wager on the inevitability of death is pretty dead cert.