A casual observer might suspect that the two of you are being deliberately obtuse in order to cast the Precautionary Principle in negative light so that it migh

A casual observer might suspect that the two of you are being deliberately obtuse in order to cast the Precautionary Principle in negative light so that it might be more easily dismissed. I'll respond as if you are earnest students of reason, seeking to see the difference. Fortunately, the main difference is very simple: Pascal was wagering to gain something that cannot be shown to exist (an afterlife). The Precautionary Principle is counseling us to guard something known to exist (the environment in which we live) that is demonstrably essential to our own existence. Had Pascal been arguing as an atheist about why not to play Russian Roulette with his one and only life, the two arguments might be similar enough to legitimately confuse.