Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need t...

From: AutismUK@aol.com
Date: Mon Dec 11 2000 - 02:45:33 EST

  • Next message: AutismUK@aol.com: "Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need t..."

    In a message dated 10/12/00 22:03:40 GMT Standard Time, sejones@iinet.net.au
    writes:

    << I would now remind Chris of the consequences of our respective wagers.
     If he is right and Christianity is false, then he and I will both die and
    never
     wake up. Then neither he nor I would have lost anything. Chris is presumably
     happy with his life as an atheist and I am very happy with my life as a
     Christian.
     
     But if Chris is wrong, and Christianity is true, then both Chris and I will
    die
     and wake up. But then for Chris, there will be everlasting self-inflicted
     torment as he contemplates *eternity* with what might have been. OTOH
     for me there will be everlasting happiness.
     
     In this classic version of Pascal's wager between an atheist and a
    Christian,
     I can't lose anything, but I can gain everything. Chris OTOH cannot gain
     anything, but he can lose everything.
    >>

    Unfortunately this is wrong, because whilst technically correct
    "post death" it does not allow for the gains/losses whilst still
    alive.

    A follower of Islam would write exactly what you write "I cannot
    conceive of Islam not being true. I am 99% certain" (this makes
    me think you are not actually thinking about it much, just
    reinforcing your own belief, something your booklist supports)
    and the argument is just as good.

    What Pascal's Wager really means is. "I am right. You are wrong.
    If you don't believe as I do I think my God will beat you up".



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 11 2000 - 02:45:51 EST