# Pascal's Wager **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 29, 2010, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323 "2010-11-29T20:50:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/301 "2010-12-10T17:45:46Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > All you have to accept is that there is at least tiny, tiny amount of evidence for the truth of at least one of the religions. No here is a list you need to accept. 1. An afterlife could exist 2. There is some chance that the religion you select could get you into said afterlife. 3. That the afterlife would be something you would want to be in forever or conversely that the alternative would be worse. 4. That you can fulfill the requirements to get into the afterlife of choice. (Belief is a potential biggy here.) 5)The cost (things you must do to fulfill the requirements) is worth the payoff. (Now this is key as it involves the odds of the afterlife being real; the odds that the religion you pick is correct; the odds of you successfully getting in; the odds of liking it etc). Probably more as well. For example is I think the odds of there being an afterlife is 1% and there are 10 religions I feel in competition for this reality. Now that means that there is a 99% chance that this is the only life I will have. That means to play pascal’s wager I will use up some of my precious life fr a very low chance there may even be an afterlife and then if there is there is only a 10% chance of getting the right one and then there are the odds of getting in. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/302 "2010-12-10T17:48:49Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > \*“Non-belief is the only logical option.” \* You haven’t taken the time to look at the evidence; you haven’t, I presume, read through the Bible. You haven’t evenly applied your uber-skepticism that you apply to Jewish history which you claim doesn’t go back to Moses, when studying biblical criticism. Why? Why when it comes to our unanimous national history, you find it to be false. And when you read biblical criticism - i.e., that Moses didn’t write the Torah - you shut down all your skepticism. Indeed, why do you think that Moses didn’t write the Torah? Well I have read through the bible and simply because it mixes history with religious elements does not make those religious elements any more believable. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/303 "2010-12-10T17:52:24Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > No here is a list you need to accept. > > 1. An afterlife could exist > 2. There is some chance that the religion you select could get you into said afterlife. > 3. That the afterlife would be something you would want to be in forever or conversely that the alternative would be worse. > 4. That you can fulfill the requirements to get into the afterlife of choice. (Belief is a potential biggy here.) > 5)The cost (things you must do to fulfill the requirements) is worth the payoff. (Now this is key as it involves the odds of the afterlife being real; the odds that the religion you pick is correct; the odds of you successfully getting in; the odds of liking it etc). > > Probably more as well. > > For example is I think the odds of there being an afterlife is 1% and there are 10 religions I feel in competition for this reality. > > Now that means that there is a 99% chance that this is the only life I will have. That means to play pascal’s wager I will use up some of my precious life fr a very low chance there may even be an afterlife and then if there is there is only a 10% chance of getting the right one and then there are the odds of getting in. At least you are being realistic. You admit that there is a tiny chance that you will be squandering away eternal happiness. But you think this life is too much of a sacrifice. Is that really true? We are talking about eternity, here. You aren’t willing to give up seventy years - and once it’s over it’s over - for even a tiny shot at eternal happiness? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/304 "2010-12-10T17:57:47Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > Also, I don’t really care whether your conservative/reform rabbi said this or that. I’m too skeptical to take whatever they have to say on mere whim. Sorry if you’ve already explained this, but when does testimonial become evidence? Is there a certain number of people who have to say the same thing to make it more valid? ETA: I don’t think we share the same meaning of the words “evidence” and “skeptical.” ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/305 "2010-12-10T17:57:53Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > At least you are being realistic. You admit that there is a tiny chance that you will be squandering away eternal happiness. But you think this life is too much of a sacrifice. Is that really true? We are talking about eternity, here. You aren’t willing to give up seventy years - and once it’s over it’s over - for even a tiny shot at eternal happiness? Again your are missing a number of points. What if that eternity is composed of praising of god? It that what I want to do for eternity? And no I am not willing to give up my life on some minuscule chance. Again it must be real, I must pick the correct religion (and there are many more than 10), the judge must not care if I believe or not. That is a lot of risk and there is no real evidence of any of it. It makes no sense. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/306 "2010-12-10T17:58:17Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > You aren’t willing to give up seventy years - and once it’s over it’s over - for even a tiny shot at eternal happiness? Why are you willing to give up seventy years for a tiny shot at something that has only the smallest chance of existing in the first place, if it exists at all? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/307 "2010-12-10T17:59:48Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > At least you are being realistic. You admit that there is a tiny chance that you will be squandering away eternal happiness. There is no possible choice that does not contain the exact same degree of risk. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/308 "2010-12-10T18:05:53Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Why are you willing to give up seventy years for a tiny shot at something that has only the smallest chance of existing in the first place, if it exists at all? To be clear, I am (effectively) 100% sure that there is an afterlife. I am merely arguing here for you guys, who aren’t sure, or who are close to sure that there is not an afterlife. Of course I would be willing to give up my life for an afterlife! As small as the odds are for the existence of the afterlife, it is something which will provide endless rewards. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/309 "2010-12-10T18:08:35Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Sorry if you’ve already explained this, but when does testimonial become evidence? Is there a certain number of people who have to say the same thing to make it more valid? > > ETA: I don’t think we share the same meaning of the words “evidence” and “skeptical.” Yes, when a large number (or even a small number) of people claim they saw something, there is evidence that the event took place. How else would you know anything at all, if you aren’t willing to trust reports. Even Diogenes, the uber-skeptic during our Kuzari debates, frowned upon the proof because we don’t have reports going back to the time of the sinai miracles. He implied that if there were reports, he would be more willing to trust the history. Why? Because he takes evidence seriously. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/310 "2010-12-10T18:11:00Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > Again your are missing a number of points. What if that eternity is composed of praising of god? It that what I want to do for eternity? > > And no I am not willing to give up my life on some minuscule chance. Again it must be real, I must pick the correct religion (and there are many more than 10), the judge must not care if I believe or not. That is a lot of risk and there is no real evidence of any of it. It makes no sense. God said that the afterlife will be a happy place. I trust Him at his word. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/311 "2010-12-10T18:12:55Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > There is no possible choice that does not contain the exact same degree of risk. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this point of yours. I think, and I think most people think, that there is a minute amount of evidence for the religions. If you disagree, then indeed pascal’s wager is not compelling. So, yes, if you think the religions have ZERO evidence, there you are right for not taking the wager seriously. But I have a sneaky suspicion that you aren’t as sure as you make yourself sound. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/312 "2010-12-10T18:16:18Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > God said that the afterlife will be a happy place. I trust Him at his word. Did he tell you this personally? Is it in any context? I am sure if he is real it will be happy for him. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/313 "2010-12-10T18:20:20Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > I think we will have to agree to disagree on this point of yours. I think, and I think most people think, that there is a minute amount of evidence for the religions. And they believe based on this minute amount of evidence? And if it is spread across “the religions” that makes it far worse. > [@abele\_derer](#): > > If you disagree, then indeed pascal’s wager is not compelling. So, yes, if you think the religions have ZERO evidence, there you are right for not taking the wager seriously. It would require some extraordinary evidence to have me believe an extraordinary claim like this. > [@abele\_derer](#): > > But I have a sneaky suspicion that you aren’t as sure as you make yourself sound. Well I am not 100% certain that there are not god. There can’t be evidence of that, but I am 1 step below it. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/314 "2010-12-10T18:27:28Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > And they believe based on this minute amount of evidence? And if it is spread across “the religions” that makes it far worse. > > It would require some extraordinary evidence to have me believe an extraordinary claim like this. > > Well I am not 100% certain that there are not god. There can’t be evidence of that, but I am 1 step below it. You are sure that there is no god. But you aren’t one step below it. YOU ARE ONE STEP ABOVE IT. You hold that not only is there no god, but any new evidence for god - i.e, reports of miracles - must be dutifully ignored. Any evidence for god, is for you, NO EVIDENCE. ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/315 "2010-12-10T18:29:40Z")
What’s extraordinary about God? Why is God more extraordinary than magnets? Furthermore, how would you define “extraordinary evidence.” This seems quite vague and self-serving. Define, please, extraordinary evidence, and if it is “evidence which can’t be wrong,” then you can never have any evidence for god, since all evidence is fallible. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/316 "2010-12-10T18:33:59Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > You are sure that there is no god. But you aren’t one step below it. YOU ARE ONE STEP ABOVE IT. You hold that not only is there no god, but any new evidence for god - i.e, reports of miracles - must be dutifully ignored. Any evidence for god, is for you, NO EVIDENCE. Please don’t put words in my mouth. I look at all evidence in the same way as science or a court would. Would you want to be convicted of murder because someone said their god told them you committed the murder? Do you want drug trials to be based on one or two people who claimed to be cured by the drug in question? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/317 "2010-12-10T18:37:09Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > What’s extraordinary about God? Why is God more extraordinary than magnets? We can see magnets. They are directly observable. Also, humanity doesn’t have thousands of years of history in which people manipulated each other in the name of magnets. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/318 "2010-12-10T18:39:18Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > What’s extraordinary about God? If I am not mistaken even religions claim that their deities are extraordinary. In this case for me is I have never witnessed anything of any deities in my my ordinary day to day life. > [@abele\_derer](#): > > Why is God more extraordinary than magnets? Because I can go out and get a magnet and use it to test any characteristics of a magnet. > [@abele\_derer](#): > > Furthermore, how would you define “extraordinary evidence.” This seems quite vague and self-serving. Define, please, extraordinary evidence, and if it is “evidence which can’t be wrong,” then you can never have any evidence for god, since all evidence is fallible. I agree that is tricky. Lets rephrase that to say we need clear, objective evidence like anything else we expect others to concretely believe, such as evidence in court or science. For example why do we consider someone who is delusional differently that someone who sees evidence of their god than no one else does? ---
**Author:** ![abele\_derer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@abele\_derer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abele_derer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/319 "2010-12-10T18:50:43Z")
Your responses about the magnets were merely that the EVIDENCE for magnets are more substantial than the evidence for God. Agreed (actually, not really agreed, but I will agree for the sake of the argument). But that doesn’t make magnets inherently more extraordinary than God. You are really saying that God doesn’t have much evidence, and therefore reports of His existence must be ignored. But THAT is a complete non-sequitor. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/320 "2010-12-10T18:52:17Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > \*“Non-belief is the only logical option.” \* You haven’t taken the time to look at the evidence; you haven’t, I presume, read through the Bible. You presume wrong. Like many atheists, I’ve read the Bible cover to cover, and took notes, and my atheism was far stronger from doing so. > [@](#): > > You haven’t evenly applied your uber-skepticism that you apply to Jewish history which you claim doesn’t go back to Moses, when studying biblical criticism. Why? Why when it comes to our unanimous national history, you find it to be false. And when you read biblical criticism - i.e., that Moses didn’t write the Torah - you shut down all your skepticism. Indeed, why do you think that Moses didn’t write the Torah? Archeological evidence. The curious fact that the Torah is never mentioned in Judges - though the Ark is. How could the most important part of our culture seem to take no part in our culture as recorded in this history? For various reasons, I am quite the fan of King David. It was very disappointing to discover that the Davidic empire never existed - though there is at least some evidence that David did. > [@](#): > > _I’m quite willing to tell him to go screw himself._ You sound very brave and full of bravado. But you aren’t being realistic. To give up an infinite afterlife simply because you think that God is not fair, is silly. Where else are you so brave? Did you fight in the military? Are you a cop, or a fireman? No, because you are a pussy-cat. And I don’t blame you for being a pussy-cat. But be honest with yourself. > > Also, I don’t really care whether your conservative/reform rabbi said this or that. I’m too skeptical to take whatever they have to say on mere whim. Nothing to do with bravery - I don’t do well with authority figures. My research has been better thanks to that. Would you kiss the ass of an evil deity just because he is powerful? What my rabbi said only reflect the common view of an afterlife. He also said Moses wrote the Torah, so I’m hardly parroting his words. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323.md?page=17)