Pascal's wager answered
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-06-2017, 12:56 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 11:19 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Pascal's Wager is bad math, because it ignores the possibility of infinite forgotten gods and ones yet to be imagined. Betting on any single one of them is effectively betting against infinity.

Which, for the uninitiated or the math-illiterate, are really shit odds.





Also, do you really think that any such god worth his salt would be ignorant as to the basis of such a mercenary bet? A fire insurance policy on death?

I said that above, in fewer words.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2017, 01:16 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
I've never understood why this is supposed to be some "gotcha" argument. All you have to do is change from their god to a god they don't believe and they just act like it's suddenly a stupid argument.

Which it is....yet for whatever reason in their delusion it makes perfect sense only when it's their god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ResidentEvilFan's post
25-06-2017, 01:56 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 10:21 AM)Norm Deplume Wrote:  In my opinion there are two major problems with Pascal's wager.

1. There is a vast field for the race. You can't back all of the runners and there is no form book to enable you to have any objective reason for favouring any one cult over all of the others.

2. You can randomly pick one, follow all of its restrictions but if you don't truly believe, you lose anyway. There are probably some gods who can be fooled. This would certainly be a better choice than one those that cannot, but then a simple lie might be just as effective which makes actual insincere worship unnecessary.

More problems would be...

3. There doesn't seem to be a finish line in this race...

4. New horses & jockeys are added at seemingly random intervals during the race

5. As the older and perhaps some of the "starting horses" (that started the original race) collapse and die on the race track their bodies are never removed and buried (as we should do) but are left to "inspire" new horse racers to complete their unending race...

A friend in the hole

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
8
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unsapien's post
25-06-2017, 02:20 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 09:37 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So I had a discussion with a Christian and they went to the end all be all. Pascal's wager. This gets old, so out of frustration i flipped it. I didn't even think about the words that were coming out of my mouth but it actually worked so let me paraphrase here.

Them: what if you're wrong?
Me: I don't think you understand my position. Even if i knew 100% you're god was real i would rather burn in hell than follow someone so evil here is how he's evil...
Them...
Me: what if your wrong?
Then: then i have lived a moral life and there is nothing after.
Me: and what about the gay guy who killed himself because your religion says being gay is evil. Not only is he not going to hell if your wrong, but he ended his life prematurely because of something your church says. His life is just over and for no reason. Is causing someone to kill them self moral?

I have zero respect for anyone who uses this argument. They are basically telling me that they are too chicken shit cowardly to think for themselves and they have given up on their mind's ability to know.

It's not true that you "lose nothing" by taking the wager. You must give up your mind. That's the ultimate price right there.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like true scotsman's post
25-06-2017, 02:40 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
Pascal's Wager: proof that mathematicians aren't always logical.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2017, 05:30 PM
Pascal's wager answered
My problem with Pascal's wager is that it seems to depend on being able to actively control what you believe. Either something makes sense or it doesn't. So far, no god claims have made sense to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Rachel's post
25-06-2017, 05:46 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 05:30 PM)Rachel Wrote:  My problem with Pascal's wager is that it seems to depend on being able to actively control what you believe. Either something makes sense or it doesn't. So far, no god claims have made sense to me.

That's exactly what he was saying. "Fake it 'til you make it."

"But at least learn your inability to believe, since reason brings you to this, and yet you cannot believe. Endeavour then to convince yourself, not by increase of proofs of God, but by the abatement of your passions. You would like to attain faith, and do not know the way; you would like to cure yourself of unbelief, and ask the remedy for it. Learn of those who have been bound like you, and who now stake all their possessions. These are people who know the way which you would follow, and who are cured of an ill of which you would be cured. Follow the way by which they began; by acting as if they believed, taking the holy water, having masses said, etc. Even this will naturally make you believe, and deaden your acuteness."

I'm telling you, he was trying to convince himself, not me. Self delusion to the point of madness always makes me twitchy.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2017, 05:55 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
What if she spent her whole life acting according to her morals? Then arrived and found out the god hated everything she did.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2017, 06:46 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 11:19 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Pascal's Wager is bad math, because it ignores the possibility of infinite forgotten gods and ones yet to be imagined. Betting on any single one of them is effectively betting against infinity.

Which, for the uninitiated or the math-illiterate, are really shit odds.





Also, do you really think that any such god worth his salt would be ignorant as to the basis of such a mercenary bet? A fire insurance policy on death?

> By promoting Pascal's Wager, the believer wants to set up an experiment in which he cannot lose. But the whole idea of an experiment is to see if your idea is worth believing in the first place. If there is no God, the believer has lost something. He has squandered his only existence. Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Gwaithmir's post
25-06-2017, 07:00 PM
RE: Pascal's wager answered
(25-06-2017 10:03 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  Pascal's Wager is simply "Hedging your bets".

The problem with that can be summed up like horses in the Kentucky Derby.

In reality only one horse wins. So for Pascal's Wager to truly work you'd have to bet on all the horses at the same time as being the winner. Nobody in reality does that.

Horse 1. "What if you are wrong and Jesus is the winner"
Horse 2. "What if you are wrong and Allah is the winner"
Horse 3. "What if you are wrong and Yahweh is the winner"
Horse 4. "What if you are wrong and Vishnu is the winner"
Horse 5. "What if you are wrong and Buddha is the winner"
Horse 6. "What if you are wrong and Apollo is the winner".

If it is about playing it safe and making a safe bet "just in case" than to be safe you'd have to bet on all those options as being the winner at the same time. That is why the argument of Pascal's Wager does not work logically.

The other aspect of that fallacy is probability. Nobody treats claims as equally true, people put weight, when it comes to religion, on their personal bias.

In objective science however, on issues of probability, science does not care about fairness nor does it treat all claims as equal or even a 50/50 split. It speaks in terms of probability and likelyhood based on objective neutral prior data.

I hear that post position #1 generally has the advantage, (less ground to cover).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: