Comments on: Pascal’s Wager

By: Pliny-the-in-Between

Pliny-the-in-Between — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:21:31 +0000

I enjoy reading your commentary. No need to post this but you might (or not) enjoy my old take on the wager. http://waywardskeptics.blogspot.com/2008/10/rascals-ante-mutants-response-to.html

By: Parker

Parker — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:48:11 +0000

I really enjoyed this one, DD! Kinda thinking about using it on a fundie at work. Although I think I’ll change the monster to something a little more grotesque. A plague of 40 foot tall Gary Busey’s?

By: Tacroy

Tacroy — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:43:59 +0000

Swimmy: Pascal’s wager stops working really quickly when you consider all of its implications: namely, that if there is a heaven which results in infinite reward for those who believe the right thing, there is also a chance of infinite punishment if you do the wrong thing.

Children have yet to do the wrong thing. We’d better keep them from ever doing anything but the right thing. You could chain the child up in the basement so they can’t perform any sinful acts, and tear out their tongue so they can’t say any sinful things, but there’s no way to guarantee that they will never have sinful thoughts – unless you tear out their minds. It’s the only logical thing to do, if you truly believe in a Hell that is equivalent to infinite punishment.

Of course, you can get around this by believing in Heaven but not Hell – which is, for a great many people, believing in the wrong thing.

By: David D.G.

David D.G. — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:11:32 +0000

Brilliant! The scholarly stuff you write is wonderful, but sometimes what’s needed is a good dose of snark.

~David D.G.

By: Swimmy

Swimmy — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:27:26 +0000

Pascal’s Wager does actually work in terms of decision theory. The trick is that the specified expected return (everlasting life in heaven) is infinite. In this case, one could think about giant spiders as being so low probability that the expected value of an insurance policy is much less than $.01, but in the case of HEAVEN, no probability besides zero–God as an impossibility–could yield anything other than an infinite EV.

Of course, (one of) the problem(s) that you touch on here is that it’s a trick you can pull equally well with anything. “Oh, I’d better make snow angels nude, because there’s a finite probability of an infinite reward if I do so.” There are an infinite number of possible infinite-reward scenarios meaning, once again, that evidence is the only good way to make a decision regarding any of them.

By: Tacroy

Tacroy — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 05:57:58 +0000

But don’t you see? It’s not only about the protection from giant tarantulas, it’s about the sense of community you get from our weekly tarantula meetings! You just can’t get that sense of belonging anywhere else.