This is what kept me from moving on a long time

the_end_of_eternity

Pascal's bet

In this principle it says that if you are not sure, your best bet is to believe in God. The reasoning the bet follows is like:

- If you do believe in God and God exists then you gain everything..

- If you do not believe in God, but he does exists, you loose everything.

- If you do believe in God but he does not exists, the result is neutral. You do not gain, nor you loose.

- If you do not believe in God, and he does not exists, the result is neutral. You do not gain nor loose.

So it follows that if you believe in God, you gain all, or it is neutral. On the other then, when you do not believe in God, you loose everything or it is neutral. With other words, better to choice value for your money and believe in God.

This seems like a logical reasoning. But is it really solid? No, the way of reasoning is not correct. Lets look a bit deeper into some points :

This same bet is valid for everything. It is also according to this arguments, the best bet to believe in Allah, Zeus and Santa Claus, and whatever more. But you can’t of course believe in everything, just to be sure..
If you do believe in God, but he does not exists, it says that you do not loose anything. This is not true. You loose your money, time spend and things you did for your God. Believing in God is not free.
Most religions believe that just believing in a god is not enough. It must be believing in the right god. That makes the chances in this scheme not fifty-fifty, but very small. You have to select the exact right God, otherwise everything is in vain anyway.
This bet says implicit that it is a fifty-fifty chance. That both choices are equal. But are they? Maybe the chance that there is a god is much lower then that there is none
This way of reasoning does not cover all possibilities. For example it could be very well possible that there is a god but that he does not care if you believe in him or not. In that case you would loose nothing my not believing in god .
Believing in god is not something that you do as a kind of insurance. That just is not believing.

So this reasoning looks like very plausible. But is it? No actually it is full of holes. So we can not take this bet of Pascal very seriously.

so this is what kept me inside for a long while. But now I think I see it better? Can you agree with the things that I write above or did I miss something here completely? - the end of eternity

Gopher

Thanks for that good analysis of Pascal's bet.

This part is questionable:

- If you do not believe in God, but he does exists, you lose everything.

Who says you "lose everything"? If there is a god, there's no proof he inspired or wrote any book that people attributed to him. If you assume he inspired or wrote a book, there's no proof that the interpretation that non-believers lose everything is the correct interpretation. As you said, it could be that God just got the universe rolling, but is not vain enough to want or need your endless devotion and/or praise.

Satanus

If there really was this super powerful, super smart god that is supposed to have caused everything, then why the eternal dispute about whether he even exists? Why is it supposedly impossible for him to make himself visible, in order to remove the doubt? The existence of most mundane things are not disputed, why is the existence of this most important being disputed because of lack of evidence?

D

the_end_of_eternity

gopher:

yes that is also exactly what I mean. Who says you loose everything. That is one of the wrong assumptions of this equality.

satanus:

yes very well said. not logically at all

dawg

Lets fact it, if God exists then he's pretty useless... try praying to him sometime and see what happens...Last night I saw on the telly two conjoined twins about 35 years old, they couldn't be separated. One lived her life on some sort of dolly and her sister moved her around.

Why didn't God help them just to be born normal... and before someone says they may have a good life or the like, please don't say something that stupid... their lives suck plain and simple. I mean, they can't even masturbate alone without the other being present.

I don't want to beleive that God is a waste, but he certainly doesn't help in this life... next time someone thinks he does, remind them of the myriads of birth defects that peope have to deal with.. why would he let others suffer and let any of us win? Nah, just be happy you're healthy and let it go at that.

By the way,I know this rant has little to do with this thread, but I needed to vent

VoidEater

Hi Gopher: It is a slippery slope, though, to presume that our preferences (even when they seem universal) should be applied to other people. After all, some people seem to NEED to be manipulated and controlled, and they find religious organizations to provide that for them...and, as the Stones sang, You can't always get what you want - but you get what you need. Mmm...on second thought, that's too scary a God to believe in...

Yes, end_of_eternity, you accurately lambast the argument. It's predicated on a simplistic view of God, attributes human desires to him/her/it, does not take into account even a portion of the variables, and does not even allow for regression analysis. But, you know, if that's the only world you've been brought up to see, I understand why it takes so long to break free.

Liberty

This Pascal's wager thing never made any sense to me anyway. If God is omniscient He would know you were just believing as a technicality, hedging your bet... so wouldn't you be worse off than an honest nonbeliever when it came to being judged?

I never understood how one can "make" themselves believe anything at all. If I don't believe in bigfoot I can't will myself into believing. You either believe or you don't. I can say anything but as far as I know I cannot will myself to really believe in something which I think isn't true because somewhere in my mind I will know it is not true. I came to a point in my life when I just no longer believed in God and try as I might I couldn't change this through an act of will power.

Even "worldly" governments punish people more harshly when you swear an alligiance or pledge loyalty and then by your actions you reveal that it was not heartfelt. For example an enemy soldier sworn to fight as your enemy is usually just captured and imprisoned while a soldier who betrays his own country is quickly executed or even tortured for his deception and disloyalty. At least you can respect your honest opposition's position...you know where they stand as opposed to a faker who is willing to say anything just to hedge their bets.

I'd honestly rather face God as my truthful self and just be wrong instead of facing Him as a liar who thought I could outsmart/trick Him.

Nathan Natas

Good work!

The immediately obvious weakness of Pascal's argument is:

Which god shall we believe in?

Would Shiva be amused if we worshipped Odin? Would Allah forgive us for praying to KwanYin? Would Jehovah understand worship that was misdirected to His created Son?

On what basis did Pacal assume that all religious devotion was directed to only one invisible imaginary entity?

Pascal was a coward, and he made a coward's bet. Cthulhu will suck the marrow from his bones for all eternity.

B_Deserter

I think this Russell's Teapot strip sums it all up in a much more entertaining fashion:

AudeSapere

When I became a walk-away believer, I rationalized that *if* there is a god - and at the time I really did believe - then he knows better than I why I cannot sit in the Kingdom Hall anymore.

I believed that there comes a point when each of us has to make our own decisions about right and wrong when it comes to gross negligence and error. I believed that the org was on a seriously wrong path and I could not morally sit there anymore because to say nothing would be to condone what I knew was wrong. To speak up would - in the org view - be contentious.

I chose to quietly leave and thought I would return at some point in the future and just lived a quiet, lonely life for about 12 years.

Then I found Freeminds and JWD, experienced 3 days of shock and awe. It's a whole new world now. Too bad I wasted my better, younger years.

-Aude Sapere (meaning: Dare to Know; Dare to Think for Yourself.)

This is what kept me from moving on a long time

Share this