4 ms·

Pascal's Wager is ridiculous. It is rooted in a false dichotomy and attempts to salve the conscience by the acceptance of a contradiction.

jswinghammer 16y ago
I'm not sure there is a false dichotomy present there. You're either going to burn in hell or you're not. The downside of trying something to get out of that sentence is small and upside is big. It's terrible theology but it's decent logic.
- Tycho 16y ago
  I think it's a false dichotomy because there is more than two possible outcomes. At one end you have 'there is no god' in which case it doesn't matter, fine, but then at the other end there's more than just 'worship God' - there's also 'worship multiple Gods', or 'worship the devil', or endless other possibilities of worship, with no strong reason to pick any one of them. Unless I have misunderstood the Wager.
  - jswinghammer 16y ago
    I think the assumption is that you are considering believing in a Christian God and on those terms the wager is valid. As far as I know other religions offer little promises in terms of what happens if you stick with it. I think category A would be believing in Jesus and category B would be not believing in Jesus whatever that means to you.
    - djacobs 16y ago
      If the wager deals with only the Christian god, it's arbitrarily limited and has little value.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- mgkimsal 16y ago
  It's false in the sense that it only provides two options and seems to indicate those are the only two options. Believe in the Christian God or don't. It doesn't take in to account Jupiter or Zeus or any other potential deities in determining the 'logic' of choosing to believe or not.
sliverstorm 16y ago
Ok, if you feel it is not a dichotomy, you are right. I only ever interpreted the dichotomoy as 'there are zero deities' or 'there are one or more deities'. Perhaps I like Pascal's Wager more than it deserves because it reminds me of: http://xkcd.com/525/ http://xkcd.com/525/
- Gormo 16y ago
  The zero vs. one-or-more dichotomy hits the nail on the head. The problem with Pascal's wager is that its rationale can apply to every proposition. If you're committed to err on the side of safety, you need to accept every possible non-falsifiable idea, because, hey, what if it's true? Taken to its logical conclusion, accepting Pascal's wager would at best generate immense amounts of cognitive dissonance as you attempted to integrate potentially infinite contradictory ideas into your worldview.

jswinghammer 16y ago

I'm not sure there is a false dichotomy present there. You're either going to burn in hell or you're not. The downside of trying something to get out of that sentence is small and upside is big. It's terrible theology but it's decent logic.

Tycho 16y ago
I think it's a false dichotomy because there is more than two possible outcomes. At one end you have 'there is no god' in which case it doesn't matter, fine, but then at the other end there's more than just 'worship God' - there's also 'worship multiple Gods', or 'worship the devil', or endless other possibilities of worship, with no strong reason to pick any one of them. Unless I have misunderstood the Wager.
- jswinghammer 16y ago
  I think the assumption is that you are considering believing in a Christian God and on those terms the wager is valid. As far as I know other religions offer little promises in terms of what happens if you stick with it. I think category A would be believing in Jesus and category B would be not believing in Jesus whatever that means to you.
  - djacobs 16y ago
    If the wager deals with only the Christian god, it's arbitrarily limited and has little value.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
mgkimsal 16y ago
It's false in the sense that it only provides two options and seems to indicate those are the only two options. Believe in the Christian God or don't. It doesn't take in to account Jupiter or Zeus or any other potential deities in determining the 'logic' of choosing to believe or not.

sliverstorm 16y ago

Ok, if you feel it is not a dichotomy, you are right. I only ever interpreted the dichotomoy as 'there are zero deities' or 'there are one or more deities'. Perhaps I like Pascal's Wager more than it deserves because it reminds me of: http://xkcd.com/525/ http://xkcd.com/525/

Gormo 16y ago
The zero vs. one-or-more dichotomy hits the nail on the head. The problem with Pascal's wager is that its rationale can apply to every proposition. If you're committed to err on the side of safety, you need to accept every possible non-falsifiable idea, because, hey, what if it's true? Taken to its logical conclusion, accepting Pascal's wager would at best generate immense amounts of cognitive dissonance as you attempted to integrate potentially infinite contradictory ideas into your worldview.