Pascal's Wager Research Paper

In this paper I will be discussing Pascal’s Wager. What I first plan to do in this paper is explain the argument of Pascal’s Wager. Next I will explain how Pascal tries to convince non-theists why they should believe in God. I will then explain two criticisms in response to Pascal’s argument. Finally, I will discuss whether or not these criticisms show Pascal’s reasoning to be untenable.

Through the previous example we can see that god clearly rewarded those who believed in him with tremendous wealth in Potosi. For another example of this we can look at the story of Sebastian and His Golden Spurs. In the story Sebastian is a poor man, and through his belief in god throughout his ordeal in the mine, he is rewarded with good health, and significant wealth for his family to live. God rewarded him with this wealth by “a good supply of very rich ore that could not have been in that place by any natural agency, but must have been put there supernaturally by god”. For those that achieve longevity in Potosi it seems that wealth tends to promote righteousness among them.

Arguments 1 and 2 only takes into consideration two choices for religion, Roman Catholicism or atheism. However, numerous other faiths exist today, and regardless of the amount of evidence which may support or refute one faith or another, let us assume each to be equally as likely as the other. Since Pascal’s Wager fails to tell us which God to believe in, we end up with “a great probability that we picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion’s version of Hell” (Bendz). With an increasing number of potential faiths or religions, the probability of believing in the right God (or even Gods) likewise becomes increasingly small. Therefore, we have an increased probability of choosing the wrong God, and as a result, we miss out on the eternal happiness from one religion and instead receive the eternal torment of another. Similarly, varying religions have different concepts of afterlife. For example, Hinduism and Buddhism believe in the rebirth and reincarnation of souls, in which the actions one engages in throughout their life simply accumulate to either good or bad karma. Therefore eternal happiness would not truly exist in these religions, but instead happiness would be finite and a result of good actions, not a

Pascal immediately mention the Christian God in Premise one.” It is possible that the Christian God exists and it is possible that the Christian God does not exist.” There are thousands of religions outside of Christianity many of which that have their own Gods, some religions even with multiple Gods. The probability of choosing the correct God is chance at its greatest. It posits that humans all bet with their lives either that God exists or not. Another weakness in Pascals wager is that it reflects a bias. Blaise Pascal was a Christian; this immediately is evidently shown through his bias representation of the Christian God in Pascals wager. The wager constantly reiterates the Christian God and constantly accepts anything in favour of the

Lorenzo Lotto was born in 1480 in Venice, Italy and died in 1557 in Loreto, Marche, Italy. Lotto was an Italian painter from the late Renaissance. Lotto was known for his perceptive portraits and mystical paintings of religious subjects. Lotto represents one of the best examples of the valuable relationship between the Marche schools. Lotto was one of the leading Venetian-trained painters of the earlier 16th century. He mainly painted portraits and religious paintings. Lotto worked mainly outside Venice. He was at Treviso in 1503, then in the Marches, around 1508. From 1513 to 1525 he was mainly at Bergamo in Lombardy, where he painted several major pieces. In 1526, there were long times when he was gone, which was followed by his retirement

A common argument used to disprove the existence of God is Pascal’s Wager. This argument states that it is more rational to believe in God as you will be rewarded. If God existed, and the person believed in God, he would be rewarded. If the person did not believe, he would be punished .If God did not exist it would make no difference. For this reason it would be more rational to believe in God rather than to not. Pascals Wager was defined by seventeenth century Philosopher Blaise Pascal. The argument can be standardised as follows:

Blaise Pascal’s position is not a yes, or a no, but bets on yes. For Pascal, there is no rational proof for or against the existence of God. However, it is unavoidable to not chose whether you believe or not. Pascal’s argument does not support the existence of God, but does support that it is a reasonable and natural tendency to believe in God. Meaning that his argument does support religion, but not the philosophical arguments that support religion. Pascal describes God as infinitely incomprehensible because he does not have parts or limits, and therefore has no affinity to us; leaving us incapable of knowing what or if He exists. Therefore, no one can blame Christians for not being able to give a reason as to why they believe in what they do, since God does not have any affinity to us.

     Pascal goes on to state that once we have made this rational decision to believe in God then we start to act like we believe in this god and from practicing these actions habitually your belief will strengthen Pascal, 78). The problem here lies in the basis of the strength for this belief. To make a decision and then act on that decision seems pretty consistent; but, to make a decision and have that decision become a belief based on habitual actions does not follow at all. Is this belief that your holding to a product of sincerity of habit? If you start to act you

Born in Clermont-Ferrand, France on June 19, 1623, Blaise Pascal was among the most variously gifted philosophers, artists, and physicists of the 17th century. His most notable achievements include the inventions of a roulette wheel and the Pascaline, one of the earliest examples of mathematical calculators; as well as the publishing of various scientific and theoretical works such as Les Provinciales (Provincial Letters), a collection of letters which defended his Jansenist beliefs and criticized those of the Jesuits, while at the same time providing an innovative writing style, and Pensées, a posthumously published series of theological notes regarding his thoughts on personal faith.

I will be using the form of rationality which focuses on an individual’s expected utility. Expected utility focuses on the gains and losses of options to decide which would provide the most optimal outcome for a believer. One instance of an expected utility argument is found in Pascal’s Wager, in which the benefit arises from believing in God rather than not God, according to both truth-dependent and truth-independent arguments. The truth-dependent form of this argument focuses on the benefits obtained if the relevant beliefs are true (Jordan). In this context, if God is real then the individual will have an infinite amount of benefits; however, if God is not real then there is nothing the individual loses. Additionally, if one does not take this wager, then there is no possibility to obtain the benefits regardless of God’s existence. Another component of this argument is the truth-independent form which argues that regardless of the trueness of the belief, there are still benefits in the mere act of believing (Jordan). These benefits can be psychological, moral, and social. Looking at expected utility in both ways will allow this paper to focus on the contribution to an individual’s happiness regarding validation and community

There exist three possible affiliations to the question of god; theist, atheist, and agnostic. Each affiliation believes itself to be most true, but each also recognizes that they are mutually exclusive with each other and that they potentially are wrong. Jeff Jordan looks at the question of god and concludes that reason alone cannot uphold philosophy and if held to the same degree of certainty as theist beliefs it falls short. Because of this Jordan sees faith as a possibility and when struck with the wager of believing and finding eternal salvation or not and finding dreamless sleep, Jordan is quick to stick to his reformed Catholic beliefs. It seems to me that this wager does not take seriously the negatives of faith and does not fully explore

A philosopher of the 17th century, Blaise Pascal, focused on religion, math, and science. One of his most famous arguments in philosophy is Pascal's Wager, a debate over whether or not God exists. Not only does it provide another proof, it brings in a new light in a debate that has been going over for a long time.

While both short stories can be considered entertaining, W. W. Jacobs’ “The Monkey’s Paw” does an overall better job at using characterization, irony and foreshadowing to create the long-lasting effect of suspense. Throughout the story, Jacobs creates a theme which can be interpreted in many ways such as: “Be careful what you wish for.” or “Evil can come in the most unexpected forms,“ (such as the paw). If the theme of evil and regret is present before the story is even introduced, the reader is automatically pulled into this preconceived idea that there will be a great amount of suspense. This idea continues to be confirmed as the story develops.

In the debate “Is Goodness Without God, Good Enough?” we hear Dr. Paul Kurtz and Dr. William L.Craig debate whether or not you need to believe in God to be moral. Dr. Kurt defends the affirmative and Dr. Craig arguing the negative of this topic. Dr. Kurtz starts of his debate by saying that goodness without God is not only good enough but better than a religious morality. Dr. Kurtz then goes on to state that a person can be moral without God and that millions of Americans believe in morality but do not believe in God. Dr. Kurtz then suggests that religion is often an impediment to morality, but can have some positive consequences such as consolation, hope, and good will. He then notes that religion could have some negative consequences such

But, I’m not entirely convinced that believing the Christian God is the best bet for me to enter heaven and avoid hell, even though Pascal’s Wager is an argument that looks beyond the evidence of God. I will be talking about one of the three criticisms against Pascal’s Wager and that is “Entrance Criteria to Heaven”.