Why Pascal's Wager is foolish?

Question

BLAM: you have angered God! fear me!

the guy with characters i can't see... they're just squares: Good, my minion! you amuse me... perhaps i will award you with the 10 points.

DL Miller: c'mon, you have to admit that the reasonin i just applied is the same people use for God... it doesn't make sense!

Rob and others with a similar idea: yeah, i know, but i figured this was the most comical way to get my point across. The sensitive ones get lost in the sarcasm, but i think most people read it and it makes them think about it.

Answer 1

It is one of the most outdated defense mechanisms that Christians still use.

Answer 2

But Pascal's argument is seriously flawed. The religious environment that Pascal lived in was simple. Belief and disbelief only boiled down to two choices: Roman Catholicism and atheism. With a finite choice, his argument would be sound. But on Pascal's own premise that God is infinitely incomprehensible, then in theory, there would be an infinite number of possible theologies about God, all of which are equally probable.

First, let us look at the more obvious possibilities we know of today - possibilities that were either unknown to, or ignored by, Pascal. In the Calvinistic theological doctrine of predestination, it makes no difference what one chooses to believe since, in the final analysis, who actually gets rewarded is an arbitrary choice of God. Furthermore we know of many more gods of many different religions, all of which have different schemes of rewards and punishments. Given that there are more than 2,500 gods known to man [2], and given Pascal's own assumptions that one cannot comprehend God (or gods), then it follows that, even the best case scenario (i.e. that God exists and that one of the known Gods and theologies happen to be the correct one) the chances of making a successful choice is less than one in 2,500.

Second, Pascal's negative theology does not exclude the possibility that the true God and true theology is not one that is currently known to the world. For instance it is possible to think of a God who rewards, say, only those who purposely step on sidewalk cracks. This sounds absurd, but given the premise that we cannot understand God, this possible theology cannot be dismissed. In such a case, the choice of what God to believe would be irrelevant as one would be rewarded on a premise totally distinct from what one actually believes. Furthermore as many atheist philosophers have pointed out, it is also possible to conceive of a deity who rewards intellectual honesty, a God who rewards atheists with eternal bliss simply because they dared to follow where the evidence leads - that given the available evidence, no God exists! Finally we should also note that given Pascal's premise, it is possible to conceive of a God who is evil and who punishes the good and rewards the evil.

Answer 3

Cute refutation, but the fact that you can walk and talk and be b*tched slapped means you can be "proved" to not have the attributes one would assume a "god" has...I suppose you could make the case that people today believe in Jesus, and he could walk and talk etc - but the story goes that he rose from the dead...unless you are sure you can do that too, I wouldn't push it...

the best refutation to Pascal's Wager is that it is simply not honest...lying to yourself about what you truly believe is still lying...

EDIT:  "C) Kitteh, ur word "assume" is telling. I am almighty! i can pretend to be weak if i so do choose :]"

I think we can agree your word "pretend" is equally telling, can't we?

Thanks...this question was at least fun!

"I will never forgive Christianity for what it did to the mind of Blaise Pascal."  - Neitzche

Answer 4

This is one of the usual straw men arguments that atheists use to make Christians look foolish.

Belief in Christianity is not worth anything if it is not a genuine belief, you can't expect to be saved by claiming to believe, just to hedge your bets. No sensible Christian believes such nonsense. Of course, it is possible to stubbornly refuse to accept evidence for the truth because you do not like the truth. If you do this then you are deliberately depriving yourself of the possibilty of belief, and this is the essence of atheism.  

Answer 5

Of course pascal's wager is irrational, but I'm absolutely convinced that it's the primary justification for most christians to believe in their religion.

Answer 6

Hael Joseph!

Answer 7

Thanks, but we sorted this all out here in 2006.

Answer 8

Pascal was a brilliant man.  If we think his wager is dumb, it is because we don't get it.

Pascal is not asking us to pick a religion, he is asking whether we will seek our Creator or not.  We are either created beings or not; only two possibilities and we have no way to tell the probabilities.

If our Creator exists, He must want us to seek Him for He has not revealed Himself directly to us.  

Wouldn't our Creator be of infinite worth?  And so even with the "slimmest of chances" (how did you derive probabilities?), shouldn't you at least seek Him?

The fact that we don't even want to seek Him shows that we have something else in mind to do with our lives that is more important than seek our Creator.  In fact, we want to find our happiness in our own independence from Him.  Evidence has nothing to do with it.

Answer 9

It also assumes god is impressed by devotion, even if it was just devotion brought about by edging their bets, rather that substance of thought.

Answer 10

yawn.

Answer 11

The latter.

Definitely lengthens my laughing fit.

Answer 12

I think there is a worse problem with Pascal's Wager.  You can't fake belief or will yourself to believe.  Any omnipotent being worth its salt would know you're just covering your bases.

Answer 13

It may be dumb to YOU.  Of course you have a right to your opinion, but it's arrogant of you to feel that everyone ought to agree with you.

Answer 14

Pascal's wager is flawed but for a different reason than yours. It is flawed because it ignores the benefits of atheism. If god doesn't exist it is a waste to worship him

Answer 15

Exactly. Pascal is possibly the dumbest philosophe to walk the Earth.

Answer 16

It's foolish because for those who it may pertain wouldn't know if God wanted to be worshiped, for all we know, God doesn't want to be worshiped and sends anyone who believes in him to h**l.