# 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:** 8
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/141 "2010-12-03T17:57:21Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > which they all believed was initiated by Moses to be binding forever Again assuming facts not in evidence. And again hoisted by your own petard. Unless you contend that the number of people who follow the practices of lent means that Jesus is really the son of God and all of Judaism is wrong. This is, of course, the problem with religious fundamentalism; you’re perfectly willing to twist reason and logic to support your own position, but that same twisted reason and logic can be used to support any other religious belief, even a diametrically opposed one. ---
**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 3, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/142 "2010-12-03T17:57:30Z")
Burdensome in the sense that lighting a fire on the Sabbath would receive divinely inspired death. (Can you imagine sitting in the dark, or not collecting wood, or not carrying objects for an entire day.) What about not working your field for an entire year? ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/143 "2010-12-03T17:59:09Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > No, it isn’t. The notion that an object’s weight determines how quickly it falls appears to be true only if you look superficially, but it’s easily dispelled. > > Take an ordinarily tissue, unflattened, and drop it. Then pick it up, crumple it into a was, and drop it again. The crumpled was will fall more quickly though its weight has not changed. If I had said it’s the only factor then you’d have a point. Go draw a free body diagram of any object in free fall. Weight is part of it. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/144 "2010-12-03T18:09:07Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > If I had said it’s the only factor then you’d have a point. > > Go draw a free body diagram of any object in free fall. Weight is part of it. Galileo died in vain. In the first place, I believe I am the one who brought falling bodies into discussion, and I wrote that most persons in history have probably believed that the speed an object falls is dependent on its weight. In trying to recast my statement you are arguing against a straw man. In the second place, weight _appears_ to be the determining factor of how quickly an object falls. But it isn’t, not even in atmosphere. Two iron spheres – one weighting 10 pounds, the other 1000 – will fall at the same rate. By contrast, a sheet of paper will fall at different speeds depending on how it it shaped. And to end the hijack, there is a parallel to the essential silliness of Pascal’s wager here. The notion that the quickness of an object’s falling is dependent on its weight appears reasonable only if you only look at the matter in the most superficial fashion. If you look closely, it collapses, as does Pascal’s wager. ---
**Author:** ![Ramanujan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/51bf81/32.png) [@Ramanujan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramanujan)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/145 "2010-12-03T18:13:22Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > I have yet to see any sort of flaw in Pascal’s Wager that I find even remotely compelling. Ramanujan, what would you claim is the greatest flaw in the wager? as i’ve stated three times, one has simply to deny one of the premises. particularly, the requirement that the wagerer believe in the idea that god+belief=eternal reward, i find at least as suspect as the conclusion the wager reaches. that is, if i don’t already believe in a god that rewards belief, the wager doesn’t work. i simply say, “but i don’t think i will receive eternal reward for believing in god.” then again, i feel like i’m shooting at a moving target here. could you provide some formal statement of “abele’s wager” so that we’re talking about the same thing? ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/146 "2010-12-03T18:15:59Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > Galileo died in vain. > > In the first place, I believe I am the one who brought falling bodies into discussion, and I wrote that most persons in history have probably believed that the speed an object falls is dependent on its weight. In trying to recast my statement you are arguing against a straw man. > > In the second place, weight _appears_ to be the determining factor of how quickly an object falls. But it isn’t, not even in atmosphere. Two iron spheres – one weighting 10 pounds, the other 1000 – will fall at the same rate. By contrast, a sheet of paper will fall at different speeds depending on how it it shaped. > > And to end the hijack, there is a parallel to the essential silliness of Pascal’s wager here. The notion that the quickness of an object’s falling is dependent on its weight appears reasonable only if you only look at the matter in the most superficial fashion. If you look closely, it collapses, as does Pascal’s wager. In your example you are changing multiple variables at the same time and claiming that means something. If the only variable changed is weight (not weight and shape or weight and size) then a heavier object in an atmosphere will fall faster. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/147 "2010-12-03T18:17:57Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > No. If it makes you feel better, call it “Abele’s Wager.” I bet Pascal wouldn’t appreciate that. 😉 > [@abele\_derer](#): > > As an orthodox jew, I actually hardly read the Bible – I spent most of my time studying the Talmud. I decided to go through the Bible (with all the classic commentators) and I realized just how stunningly difficult (though not impossible), to get a nation to buy into this story. That might be true, but you could also say it about hundreds of other religions. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/148 "2010-12-03T18:19:49Z")
nvm ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/149 "2010-12-03T18:20:18Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > In your example you are changing multiple variables at the same time and claiming that means something. If the only variable changed is weight (not weight and shape or weight and size) then a heavier object in an atmosphere will fall faster. You are completely ignoring my point. Is it deliberate? ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/150 "2010-12-03T18:33:38Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > You are completely ignoring my point. Is it deliberate? Your point is that the speed of falling objects doesn’t depend on weight. Right? I don’t see how I am ignoring that since it’s the only thing I’m discussing. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/151 "2010-12-03T18:39:48Z")
Terminal velocity=sqrt[(2mg)/(density_projected area_drag coefficient)], yes? ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/152 "2010-12-03T18:42:37Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Your point is that the speed of falling objects doesn’t depend on weight. Right? Wrong. > [@](#): > > I don’t see how I am ignoring that since it’s the only thing I’m discussing. The speed at which an object falls to Earth is NOT dependent on the weight of the object. The acceleration due to gravity is a constant; intervening factors & forces (i.e., air resistance, a magnet, a chair, the shape of an the object) can decrease that, but the weight by itself means nothing. But that wasn’t my point anyway. My point was that, with only a cursory examination, it SEEMS that weight is the determining factor of the speed an object falls, just as Pascal’s Wager seems reasonable if you only look at it casually. But both fall apart if you examine them closely. I am not going to discuss falling bodies further in this thread, as it is a hijack. If you wish to continue the discussion I am willing, but I suggest you start a thread in GQ or GD. ---
**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 3, 2010, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/153 "2010-12-03T18:54:55Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > Magnets also violate a law of physics: gravity. “Fucking magnets, how do they work?” The other day I repeatedly dropped magnets. They fell to the ground in the same fashion every time, just like anything else I’ve dropped. I don’t think they violate the law of gravity. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/154 "2010-12-03T19:01:44Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > (and Der is an anti-theist, not an atheist) I’m both; they are compatible positions. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/155 "2010-12-03T19:42:24Z")
> [@abele\_derer](#): > > Czarcasm: It’s funny that I used to be a unsure regarding the Kuzari argument (and I was always agnostic about Pascal’s Wager), so I can at least sympathize with your positions (I was always a believer in the Torah, but it was mostly because of the Biblical prophesies, not the Kuzari argument). Y’know, for someone who repeatedly says he doesn’t want to bring up “the Kuzari argument” you sure do bring it up a lot. Unless this is deliberate, I suggest that if you do not want to bring something up, you do so by _not_ doing so. ---
**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 3, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/156 "2010-12-03T20:27:01Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Terminal velocity=sqrt[(2mg)/(density_projected area_drag coefficient)], yes? Just to be clear, are you claiming that two identically sized balls, of different masses, will fall at different velocities? I have a book with parts of original scientific papers starting with Copernicus. Galileo did this experiment, rolling balls down ramps, not dropping them from a tower, and of course found that their speeds were identical. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/157 "2010-12-03T20:34:53Z")
Quote: Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post I would estimate that well over 70% of all persons who have ever lived believed that the speed an object falls at is dependent on its weight. That proposition is still untrue. > [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > It is true in the vast vast majority of actual circumstances. Completely the opposite. It is true in the vanishingly small sliver of the universe of day-to-day human perception within an atmosphere with lightweight objects of comparable scale to the air resistance. In 99.9999…% of the universe, air resistance is effectively zero and an object’s weight plays no role in falling speed. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/158 "2010-12-03T20:39:10Z")
With that, it’s time to end the gravity hijack and return to the main topic of the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/159 "2010-12-03T20:40:27Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > With that, it’s time to end the gravity hijack and return to the main topic of the thread. Heavy, man. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323/160 "2010-12-03T21:37:58Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > With that, it’s time to end the gravity hijack and return to the main topic of the thread. For those interested in continuing the hijack, it appears that Snarky opened a [GQ thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=587890) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pascals-wager/562323.md?page=9)