Talk:Pascal's Wager

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Evil/unconventional god)
(Evil/unconventional god)
Line 26: Line 26:
  
 
The mere possibility of such a god makes the expected outcomes for each column undefined, but more importantly, equal.
 
The mere possibility of such a god makes the expected outcomes for each column undefined, but more importantly, equal.
 +
[[User:Gary|Gary]] 21:35, 11 September 2009 (CDT)

Revision as of 21:35, 11 September 2009

Do you think it might help to mention the idea of "if you roll a die, what are the chances of a 6 or a not-6?" which seemed to be a good way to get the point across that the argument is unbalanced? Obviously this would need to be inserted at the correct point and explained a little more eruditely than what I've just described. Blu Matt 17:50, 31 July 2006 (MST)

Evil/unconventional god

Is there a need to mention the possibility of a god who rewards unbelievers and punishes believers? Such a god would be consistent with the fall-back response of theologians "we cannot understand the ways of god", so it is feasible that such a god would want to reward atheists. This god would not need to be malevolant, merely inactive (mirroring deism with regards to creation), and wanting to reward those who take a rational approach to their beliefs.

The new table would thus be the following

Table of Payoffs Believe in God Don't believe in God
God doesn't exist 0 0
Legalistic religious god exists +∞ (heaven) −∞ (hell)
Anti-conventional god exists −∞ (hell) +∞ (heaven)

The mere possibility of such a god makes the expected outcomes for each column undefined, but more importantly, equal. Gary 21:35, 11 September 2009 (CDT)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox