A Question for Atheists, Agnostics and Believers of any religion

Question

Okay combined group, what's your opinion of Pascal's wager? For those who don't know, Pascal theorized that one should believe in God because if God doesn't exist you never know differently and if He/She does it's like an insurance policy, protecting you from punishments given to non-believers.

Would any Atheist readers be willing to compromise their beliefs to follow this? Would any Agnostics make this their great deciding factor? Finally for the religious followers, do you feel many of your beliefs are due to a "fear" of God, specifically in dealing with punishment? Do you fear h**l and thus do you believe?

This question has flaws, I know. I just want people to consider the thought. I'm putting it in the philosophy section as I think it'll reach a far wider, more open-minded audience. My owns beliefs in this don't matter, I'm just looking for yours (if you feel like sharing that is).

Thank you!

Answer 1

Regarding Pascal's wager, I would put it this way.  Saying you believe, and going through the motions, does not make one believe.  If there really is a God, according to all I've heard they would be all knowing enough to know I didn't truly believe, and therefore I'd be treated no differently than living a life of openly not believing.  I can't lie to my friends, how am I supposed to lie to God?  Basically, you can't hedge your bets when it comes to faith.

Answer 2

Brought up as a catholic.

I am an atheist - we are here today, gone tomorrow.  Enjoy this life, as it's the only one you get.

Personally if someone is only relgious becaue they are scared of being purnished in some kind of afterlife, that is just rediculous - thats like being bullied into believing something (remember I am a non believer) - intimidation I think its called :-)

To be fair, there is not much that would make me belive in a (any of the versions) god.  Aliens maybe - a one higher power being respoinsible for all of us - No, not for me.

We can question our monarchy, we can question our government, but question a faith and you're screwed?  What are people so scared of?

Answer 3

I actually subscribe to a personal variation of Pascal's wager. Where it is reasonable to assume that if god is the creator of the universe and the universe appears to be rational, then it is likely the case that god is a rational agent and in all probability would expect me to utilize my intellect and reasoning abilities to pursue ethical and moral standards, not to irrationally gamble on the odds of a particular religious morality as being the one of which god approves above all others.

Further that as a rational god he would not approve of any religion that does not base itself firmly upon reason and intelligence.

Nor would he expect me to profess his existence where I am unable to reasonably assert that this conclusion is absolutely valid.

Thus to live as though god exists is to rely upon rational thought, intellect and the power of reason.

Pascal had the right idea but he seemed to ignore that if god created the universe then there are some things we can reason about god by extension based upon knowledge of how the universe exists as an example of the works of the infinite agent.

Answer 4

Fallacy One: It assumes that there is only one god which can be believed in, the Christian one. This is not true, since there are a plethora of gods that have been believed throughout the millennia. This would have to be applied to each and every one of those gods to be true, and this would clearly be impossible, due to the clashing natures of many of the said gods.

Fallacy Two: It assumes that simply wagering on [the Christian] God will buy one entrance into Heaven. While this may be so, the Wager does not instill a belief, it instills an appearance of a belief. Since the god in question is presumed to be all-knowing, he would be able to tell a false from a true belief. Therefore, the belief from the Wager would not qualify should belief be the requirement for entrance into Heaven, you'd be bounced down to h**l.

Fallacy Three: It creates a moral dilemma. You, by using this, are sending the most dedicated humanitarians, who just happen to not be Christian, to h**l, while you set a place in Heaven for those mass-murders who happen to be Christian. Since [the Christian] God is supposed to be a loving god, how then could he entertain the embodiment of hatred, yet turn away the embodiment of love?

Fallacy Four: It ignores too many alternate possibilities - some of which are addressed by existing religions, and some which are not. Some examples: A God could reward on criteria which seem meaningless to us - hair colour, taste in clothes, music etc. or A God might not be concerned with humans at all - the universe could be here for hydrogen for all we know. Or God may even reward those who don't believe.

Fallacy Five: It assumes any person is overly fearful of death to be worried about it being a conclusion to their life.

Fallacy Six: It assumes that a belief in God is all that is needed, when many Christians would disagree and would suggest that there are "guidelines" that you should live by (and that God requires you to live by if your belief is sincere). If these guidelines require a change on your part (for example: No s*x before marriage, no smoking, denying you are a homosexual, not marrying a non-Christian, etc.), then it could be argued that you have lost something if the Christian God turns out to not exist.

By living a good life, or being good in life, you may betting the 'come' line, but at least you're covered.....  

Answer 5

No its seriously important for me to live my life as the most real I can be

I don't have the luxury of voluntary self deception because I have mental health symptoms to cope with.

There isn't the time in my day to play at messing my head up in this way. I',m not a mathematician by any means but I can see that with upwards of 30,000 gods and thousands  of divisions about the way to worship them I'd be on to a loser.

Yes any god worth their salt would see through a cheap trick like that.

This life and staying in the moments is my greatest challenge what comes next if anything, will have to wait.  

Answer 6

Which god do you suppose this wager should apply to? All gods or just one? How do you know if you pick the right one?

Assuming god is omniscient, wouldn't he/she/it know you're only "believing" to avoid h**l. Can someone truly believe in something solely on the basis of 'just in case'?

Who says god rewards believers with heaven and non-believers with h**l anyway?

No I would not be willing to alter my beliefs based on Pascals Wager, and I hope no one else would either. In my opinion, it really is a silly argument.

Answer 7

Pascal's Wager is a fruitless attempt to convince people to believe in the Judeo-Christian.  The problem is that you insert the name of any deity and make the same argument.

For example:

1.  One does not know whether Krishna exists.

2.  Not believing in Krishna is bad for one's eternal soul if Krishna does exist.

3.  Believing in Krishna is of no consequence if Krishna does not exist.

4.  Therefore it is in one's interest to believe in Krishna.  

Answer 8

I think you've slightly misunderstood the wager, which doesn't say you have to believe in God, just to ACT as if there were one (any one).  After all, it isn't possible to just believe something merely by thinking it, because you would still know that there is no evidence, let alone proof, and you wouldn't really believe at all.

The question still remains about what acting as if there were a god actually means.  Constant lifelong worshipping and praying or devotion to making the lives of others better?

In the UK satirical/comedy magazine/comic VIZ this month there is a brilliant spoof letter, something along the lines of "'Acts of God' include things like hurricanes and Earthquakes, while 'playing God' usually means doing things like saving people's lives, yet stupid religious people are always trying to stop the latter."  Food for thought.

p.s. I am Dawkinsist when it comes to religion.

Answer 9

I will state I am Agnostic and no Pascal's wager is not going to be the deciding factor in my belief. I understand the concept and *some* people do believe in a God because of this reason. Actually, I will tell you I went to church at one time in my life and followed the Christian religion and I will say the pastor sat up on stage and said this exact same scenario. He said and I quote “I am sure going to believe it if gets me to heaven”.  Looking back on it I wonder if his belief was really because he believed in what he preached or if the root of it was fear.

I have a belief that if God existed (and as Agnostic I cannot confirm or deny) and if he created me in his image, then why would I be damned to h**l for using my intelligence and reason to pursue truth? I can give an example of this, such as, say with my 10 year old son. Say I tell him a certain *fact* in life and because it came from me he is to believe it without other inquiry and research. I cannot feel any less of him if he decides to use his intelligence and reason and actually look for other substantial probability to support what I told him is fact. Actually, instead I would be proud of him and that is because it would show his independence and the fact that he used intelligence to seek fact and probability to support what I have told him.

In the end if there is a God I just cannot fathom that he would punish me for using my intelligence to inquire and seek truth.

Answer 10

No.

I don't believe in God's words. I don't believe in his teachings. And if "God" would disown me because I'm trying to live my life in a way I see fit and humble and modest while accepting someone over me that doesn't really believe but is banking on pretending to, I wouldn't want to follow him anyway. Besides, if "God" were all knowing, he would know the person didn't believe in him anyway.

People always ask "is God real" but the real question is if I would want to follow him if he was.

*edit*

and if people truly believed in God, they wouldn't need a present at the end of their lives to convince them to continue believing.

Answer 11

i justify it a little differently. if there is a god he or she is necessarily just therefore has no potentiality to punish you for simply not believing in it! so as long as one is a good person then will be in heaven and enjoy that one too. you don't even have to believe in god. it is a win win situation either way! peace