>Pascal's point was that we *are* all wagering that we are right, against
>*all* other religions and philosophies, whether we realise it or not:
>
> "Yes, but you must wager. There is no choice, you are already
> committed. Which will you choose then? ... You would have to
> play (since you must necessarily play) ..." (Pascal B., "Pensees,"
> Penguin, 1966, p.123)
Chris
If one is already committed, then there is no room for choice. The choice,
if any, has already been made. Thus, saying ,"Which will you choose then?"
becomes rather silly, because it assumes that one is *not* committed.
Pascal should make up his mind.
Further, though it's true that in a very narrow sense we may all be said to
be "betting" that we are right, this is really only meaningful if "live"
alternatives are in fact available. Christianity is too full of nonsense to
be a meaningful alternative to many of us. In such a case. Besides, a God
who would have us try to brainwash ourselves into believing in him would be
too stupid to blow his own nose without help.
Thus, in another sense, no wager at all is involved, or, indeed, even
possible. We believe what we believe, for whatever reasons we believe it,
whether they are good or bad. We cannot *believe* on the basis of a betting
situation. If I thought there was a significant chance that the Christian
God existed, and that the rewards of *betting* on him were sufficient,
etc., and *if* there was some way to bet on him, I might do so. But that
would not change the cognitive basis of my belief, and it would not enable
me to *believe* in him. The best I could do would be to try to hypnotize
myself into believing in him, or something of that sort. But, until I
succeeded, I would not be believing in him. I might be either *pretending*
to believe in him or simply worrying that he might exist and I might lose
out because I was not lucky enough to be *stupid* enough to fail to see the
flaws in the arguments for his existence, etc., but I would not be actually
believing in him until the hypnosis or brainwashing actually took
sufficient effect.
But, then, what kind of slimy, malignant, deranged, mindless God would ever
make such demands of people, anyway? Such a God is not even logically
possible, so how could I even be slightly concerned that such a God might
exist and that I'd be losing out for *failing* to brainwash myself into
believing in him?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 03 2000 - 19:17:35 EST