New thought about Pascal's Wager

[Eudaimonist]

For me, the worst aspect of Pascal's Wager has nothing to do with the way it presents a false alternative.

It is rather the way in which it trivializes a finite life, making it sound like it has no value when compared with an infinite life. What it fails to understand is that a finite life lived with integrity is infinitely preferable to an infinite life based on a spineless decision to cower in fear of imaginary consequences. One's integrity is sacred, and what is sacred can trump even an infinity.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Black Dog]

For me, the worst aspect of Pascal's Wager has nothing to do with the way it presents a false alternative.

It is rather the way in which it trivializes a finite life, making it sound like it has no value when compared with an infinite life. What it fails to understand is that a finite life lived with integrity is infinitely preferable to an infinite life based on a spineless decision to cower in fear of imaginary consequences. One's integrity is sacred, and what is sacred can trump even an infinity.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I can't imagine anything worse than an infinite life. I once heard someone describe it as "Imagine a butterfly brushing an iron sphere the size of the Sun once every millennium. Now imagine that butterfly wearing that Sphere down to the size of a marble. Welcome to the first day of eternity."

 

[Black Dog]

Depends on the circumstances. It is certainly possible. Just like it is certainly possible the number of pieces of evidence does have a bearing on probability. Evidence can be equal and not equal.

And you would need to prove the equality/inequality of each piece of evidence, not merely assert it. I'm still waiting.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I can't imagine anything worse than an infinite life. I once heard someone describe it as "Imagine a butterfly brushing an iron sphere the size of the Sun once every millennium. Now imagine that butterfly wearing that Sphere down to the size of a marble. Welcome to the first day of eternity."

I wouldn't mind an infinant life, as long as I could continue to learn new things. If I couldn't expand my mind though, living would quickly become existing and then it would be as the undead. You would live for you memories and those we had been so important would be gone.

 

[Black Dog]

Because I simply stated facts. Pieces of evidence an be of equal merit and they can be of different merit.

But you haven't proven how much, if any, merit your evidence has. THAT's the problem.

 

[Black Dog]

I wouldn't mind an infinant life, as long as I could continue to learn new things. If I couldn't expand my mind though, living would quickly become existing and then it would be as the undead. You would live for you memories and those we had been so important would be gone.

I would be afraid that knowledge is finite, and that eventually you would know (or have known) everything, and have done everything there is to be done a quadrillion times. And that's just the first day of eternity. Speaking for myself, I would rather die and pass into nonexistence on schedule rather than risk this.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I would be afraid that knowledge is finite, and that eventually you would know (or have known) everything, and have done everything there is to be done a quadrillion times. And that's just the first day of eternity. Speaking for myself, I would rather die and pass into nonexistence on schedule rather than risk this.

Agreed. That's why i said we'd become more undead than anything. There would be nothing to live for, trapped in an existence where you'd see new fools falling for old schemes and dragging whole societies up for a time and then crashing them into oblivion.

you'd probably be hated for trying to help as if in standing in the way of someones collision with fate would seem to others to be censorship. Freedom of will would become an excuse. Freedom itself would have no meaning, since there would be no thrill at doing something you've already done for centuries.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

We are not talking the mind here. If it does come from the heart and permeate the soul than God will know the difference. You can brainwash all you want to, but there is a difference between coming to God open minded and openhearted and coming to God with an empty everything because what was placed there was placed there without the persons permission.

Um yes we are talking about the mind here. The whole from the heart thing is merely an expression. Your heart has no real feelings or emotion. All that comes from the mind.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

We've already been through this. The number of "points" about a religion say nothing about the probability of the religion. You would have to attach a probability value to each point first, along with a proof that each probability is accurate. You haven't done this.

It can or can not. Depends of the level of merit if point has. But most likely they will have different merit. In which case we just determine which deity has the most compelling / convincing points on a whole.

No, I have been very clear for numerous posts now. You need to prove your evidence affects the probability. Otherwise I can say my shoe is evidence that Yahweh doesn't exist, and you would have to accept that as evidence. So you need to attach a probability that each piece of evidence is true, along with a proof that each probability is accurate. You haven't done this.

Evidence needs to be relevant and cary merit. You saying your shoe blah blah has neither.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

Which has nothing to do with quantity, which was my objection to what you said.

If all the evidence is of equal merit then would need to look at quantity. Not sure I am following you or you me.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

As I said, if there is a God that actually exists and it is not Yahweh, and that God hates Christians and tortures them for eternity, but grants everyone else any and all wishes their heart desires, then it is better to not be a Christian. And AFAIK, and as far as you have been able to prove, this God is just as likely as Yahweh.

But that God is not as likely as Yahweh. Now if you want to debate that we can certainly do that. Present your evidence to support this God and i will do the same for Yahweh.

Pascal, not unexpectedly, omitted the third option: There is another God. So his wager is easily shown to be fallacious, which I have done.

Nope. You would have to prove Pascals Wager was designed for any made up fairy tale. It wasn't, it was designed specifically from an Atheist vs Christianity POV. Two widely accepted popular belief systems.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

I would be afraid that knowledge is finite, and that eventually you would know (or have known) everything, and have done everything there is to be done a quadrillion times. And that's just the first day of eternity. Speaking for myself, I would rather die and pass into nonexistence on schedule rather than risk this.

I would love it!

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

For me, the worst aspect of Pascal's Wager has nothing to do with the way it presents a false alternative.

It is rather the way in which it trivializes a finite life, making it sound like it has no value when compared with an infinite life. What it fails to understand is that a finite life lived with integrity is infinitely preferable to an infinite life based on a spineless decision to cower in fear of imaginary consequences. One's integrity is sacred, and what is sacred can trump even an infinity.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Intergrity won't mean much if one is in pain / suffering for all eternity. Sometimes things are just not worth it.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Um yes we are talking about the mind here. The whole from the heart thing is merely an expression. Your heart has no real feelings or emotion. All that comes from the mind.

Then you misunderstand the use of the term. Heart is the innermost feelings and your most concentrated intents and purposes. What is on your mind can be as shallow and as transient as a notion.

Jesus himself said we should love god in this way: Luke 10:25-27
25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Intergrity won't mean much if one is in pain / suffering for all eternity. Sometimes things are just not worth it.

Integrity means everything when honesty is being measured and isn't it the integrity of the faith you have that you will be judged?

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

Then you misunderstand the use of the term. Heart is the innermost feelings and your most concentrated intents and purposes. What is on your mind can be as shallow and as transient as a notion.

Jesus himself said we should love god in this way: Luke 10:25-27
25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

So are you trying so say one can not develop true faith when initially they had none?

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

Integrity means everything when honesty is being measured and isn't it the integrity of the faith you have that you will be judged?

Nope you are only gonna be judge whether you became saved or not. Did you put real faith in God and become born again.

Thats it.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Nope you are only gonna be judge whether you became saved or not. Did you put real faith in God and become born again.

Thats it.

The realness of your faith is it's integrity. It is an honest evaluation of what you believe

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

So are you trying so say one can not develop true faith when initially they had none?

First: Please do not dodge what I said in the post you quoted. I put effort into what I post and desire at least some acknowledgement in doing that. Thank you!

As for my response to what I quoted you as saying: Not from deceit, which is what pascals wager seems to promote. You either thirst for something or you don't. I think the old adage is that, "Standing in the middle of a church makes you about as much of a Christian than standing in the middle of a garage, makes you a Christian."

If you say you believe only to be heard in your head, saying it, there is no depth to it other than the loudness in which it's reverberated.

 

[SinaloaPaisa]

The realness of your faith is it's integrity. It is an honest evaluation of what you believe

there is no levels of faith in regards to salvation. you can't have 1/2 faith. their is either honest true full faith or not.