Pascal's Wager Simplified

Originally posted by Suzianne
You would love to see a potential Christian actually do this, wouldn't you?

Bog them down with inconsequential BS so they lose sight of their true goal.

There is no other God than the God of Abraham. Period.

And because man is filled with sin, the only path to God is through His Son, Jesus Christ, who was sent to take on our sin debt, and bridge t ...[text shortened]... , most of humanity will fail. So don't feel too bad, you're actually in the majority, for once.

My second thought on this.

Ok, YOU believe that there is a singular god.

However your ARGUMENTS have to be convincing to people who DON'T
ALREADY BELIEVE IN THAT GOD.

Because people who already believe don't need to be convinced to believe.

IF your arguments assume gods existence from the start then they are by
definition circular because gods existence is what you are arguing for.

Your arguments will thus ALL be logical fallacies and thus will not actually
demonstrate that you are [as you believe] correct and thus all your arguments
will be unconvincing and will all fail. [against anyone with a shred of logical
reasoning].


A by-product is that it makes you look and sound like an idiot.


You are not an idiot and thus I expect better of you.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
[b]Pascal's Wager Simplified

Options: 1) Accept God's Grace Gift of eternal life with an uncoerced decision to believe [place your confidence] in Christ for your salvation; 2) Reject the Person and Work of Christ as flimsy fiction. Risk/Reward Question: What if you're wrong?[/b]

With the greatest respect........every living thing is already eternal.

That which is eternal cannot become mortal.

Christianity is a religion of falsities.

The most wicked man on earth is already eternal because that is the nature of spirit.

We are spirit soul.

We are not theses rotting material bodies

It is impossible for us to be mortal even if we tried.

Christianity has been extorting the human race with falsities of living in hell since Christianity was invented.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Oh for crying out loud.

Is it not possible for you to actually analyse arguments logically?

It doesn't matter if a god [or many gods] exist or not.

Pascals wager is still a dumb argument.

It's not inconsequential BS that the argument works equally well [as in not at all well]
for any and all god concepts.

The point of the argument is to ...[text shortened]...



I cannot understand why or how you cannot grasp this, it's basic basic logic and reason.

Bother me not with your 'logic'. I know the truth, and the truth has indeed set me free.

Logic is merely an excuse, a tool for disbelief, for people like you to not accept the existence of the being who created every species on earth, and whom we are subjugate to. (I'm guessing this is really the part that chafes you.)

And you get to act all superior at the same time! Woohoo! A double deal!


Too bad (and I mean that, it genuinely IS too bad ) your mental masturbation is all for naught. There is no 'prize' for getting it as disastrously wrong as you are.

Pascal's Wager fails because the postulated hypothesis fails, yes. This is precisely what I said in the first place.

So you can excoriate me for any number of reasons, including that I resist the 'logic' of your 'logic' (being as it is, just an excuse), and even the reason I suspect, because I do believe in God and reject all your attempts to get me to deny my faith. None of these reasons bothers me in the least and they fail to even rise to my "Top 10 Reasons To Get Pissed Off Today", because I have far better things to do, including to live my life as a faithful servant of God.

So go ahead, start ripping. Entertain yourself some more.

Originally posted by Dasa
With the greatest respect........every living thing is already eternal.

That which is eternal cannot become mortal.

Christianity is a religion of falsities.

The most wicked man on earth is already eternal because that is the nature of spirit.

We are spirit soul.

We are not theses rotting material bodies

It is impossible for us to be mortal eve ...[text shortened]... been extorting the human race with falsities of living in hell since Christianity was invented.

Wow, good thing we can always count on you for comedic relief.

Originally posted by Penguin
Sort of like this:

http://i.imgur.com/aVSVQ.png

except they have put all the possible gods (religions/philosophies actually) along the top and the list from which you pick the one you believe in down the side.

Obviously this is still a huge simplification since it only has around 35 options, but it makes the point: you have a 1/35 chance of getting ...[text shortened]... ding to this table. The real table would go off into infinity in both directions.

--- Penguin

That's an interesting chart.
I've never heard of Catholism: is that a new religion, or just another splinter group?
Also, the chart doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the "Bad deeds" category.
Why doesn't the chart reflect Satanism as being rewarded according to that belief?

But here's the biggest flaw with the chart.
The wager wasn't directed at anything other than the question of God.
It was not intended to answer which of the all possible beliefs was the most correct one.
Charts (and arguments) like this are simply taking the wager out of context and then applying different rules in an attempt to discredit its effectiveness.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Bother me not with your 'logic'.

Then what are you doing in a thread about logic?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Bother me not with your 'logic'. I know the truth, and the truth has indeed set me free.

Logic is merely an excuse, a tool for disbelief, for people like you to not accept the existence of the being who created every species on earth, and whom we are subjugate to. (I'm guessing this is really the part that chafes you.)

And you get to act all superio ...[text shortened]... life as a faithful servant of God.

So go ahead, start ripping. Entertain yourself some more.

Well done.

You are a pretty perfect case study on how irrational faith based thinking
harms people and why it is bad.

Logic is merely an excuse, a tool for disbelief, for people like you to not
accept the existence of the being who created every species on earth, and
whom we are subjugate to. (I'm guessing this is really the part that chafes you.)

No no no no no!

I believe things I have a good reason to believe.

I have never believed in gods because I have never seen any evidence that any
exist or any good arguments that justify believing in them.

I have no fear of god, or hell, any-more than fear of Voldermort.

I am not irritated by being subjugated to god [although people telling me I am
is irritating.] because I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT GOD EXISTS.

How is it you don't get this??????



I'm not asking you to change your beliefs, I'm just asking that you for two seconds
understand [but not agree with] the fact that we atheists have a different perspective
than you do. And that from this perspective there is absolutely no reason to privilege
one god concept over another.


I genuinely have no reason to think that Allah is more or less likely than the bible god,
or Thor, or the FSM, or any other possible god concept.

I am an atheist, so I have no beliefs in gods. I am surrounded by other atheists who
also have no beliefs in gods. And we are [metaphorically] surrounded by people on all sides
who believe in all kinds of things based on faith with no supporting evidence.

Why should we privilege any of them over any others?


This forum is mostly populated by variations on a theme of Christianity [although we sit back
and see that you can't all agree on what you believe] so discussions tend to be around the
bible god because that's what you believe. But atheism is the lack of belief in any and all gods.



Imagine you are in a market, and the sellers at the stalls are all selling different religions.
You are all yelling at the tops of your voices that you have the one true answer to life the
universe and everything... the key to salvation.

As I walk through the market, why should I 'buy' your product over anyone else's?


It's not good enough to say that yours is the only one that actually works because that's what
all the other sellers say too.



Logic and reason are tools that allow you to determine what arguments stand up, and what evidence
actually says, without relying on what people say being the truth.


If your arguments don't stand up to logic then they just don't stand up.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The wager wasn't directed at anything other than the question of God.

Which is an obvious flaw in the Wager.

It was not intended to answer which of the all possible beliefs was the most correct one.
Charts (and arguments) like this are simply taking the wager out of context and then applying different rules in an attempt to discredit its effectiveness.
Charts and arguments like these simply see if the wager applies to other contexts, and if supporters of the wager cannot explain why it doesn't apply in those contexts, and / or why they refuse to apply it in those contexts, then it demonstrates that they don't actually think the wager itself is valid - but like the conclusion.
So far, we have you and grampy in this situation.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That's an interesting chart.
I've never heard of Catholism: is that a new religion, or just another splinter group?
Also, the chart doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the "Bad deeds" category.
Why doesn't the chart reflect Satanism as being rewarded according to that belief?

But here's the biggest flaw with the chart.
The wager wasn't directed at ...[text shortened]... r out of context and then applying different rules in an attempt to discredit its effectiveness.

But here's the biggest flaw with the chart.
The wager wasn't directed at anything other than the question of God.
It was not intended to answer which of the all possible beliefs was the most correct one.

Which is why it fails.

It's a false dichotomy.

'Believe in bible-god' or 'don't believe in bible-god' are not the only options.
Thus by only considering these two possibilities the argument presents a false dichotomy
and thus the argument is based on a formal logical fallacy and thus is invalid.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Bother me not with your 'logic'.

Lovely quote.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Then what are you doing in a thread about logic?

Pascal's Wager is not logical, so how is this thread about logic, again?

Originally posted by googlefudge

But here's the biggest flaw with the chart.
The wager wasn't directed at anything other than the question of God.
It was not intended to answer which of the all possible beliefs was the most correct one.

Which is why it fails.

It's a false dichotomy.

'Believe in bible-god' or 'don't believe in bible-god' are not the only options ...[text shortened]... alse dichotomy
and thus the argument is based on a formal logical fallacy and thus is invalid.

I don't think it's a false dichotomy in this sense:
• the theist says God exists
• the atheist rejects the existence of God

Some of the "beliefs" out there have literally nothing to do with that question.
The rest of the beliefs are variations of one of those two.

Pascal's Wager does not say which of the various beliefs about God is the correct one.
What it does argue is that between the two questions, one has more to lose by aligning one's self with the latter than with the former.

If all of the former beliefs were thought of collectively as the lottery, buying a ticket would be tantamount to faith, albeit not in an identical or wholly consistent manner.
By purposely not buying a ticket, a person is rejecting the possible winnings.
You might not win with the purchase, but you definitely won't win without one.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Pascal's Wager is not logical, so how is this thread about logic, again?

I contend that it is logical.
As slim as the chances of a lottery are, there is a logic to purchasing one.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well done.

You are a pretty perfect case study on how irrational faith based thinking
harms people and why it is bad.

[quote]Logic is merely an excuse, a tool for disbelief, for people like you to not
accept the existence of the being who created every species on earth, and
whom we are subjugate to. (I'm guessing this is really the part that ...[text shortened]... y being the truth.


If your arguments don't stand up to logic then they just don't stand up.

How is it that you don't get this??????

How is it that I also don't get that this thread, indeed, this entire forum is about you and what you do not believe?? Because that must be why you mention this every other post you make.

I'll say it again, in case you missed it the first couple of thousand times.

I am probably the one theist in this forum to acknowledge the atheist position. I know for a FACT that I AM the only theist to call the atheist position VALID. (It's just wrong, possibly due to a lack of information.) I am also the only theist to call for a modicum of respect from BOTH sides of the issue to both sides of the issue, meaning that I think both theist and atheist alike must AT THE VERY LEAST show some measure of respect for the others' position.

But this wasn't good enough for you, was it?

You were the ONLY person in this forum to shout me down over this, stating that my theist position was not WORTHY of respect and that you had NO 'mandate' to show me ANY respect at all.

Can you NOT take one freaking millisecond to understand that this is why I have shifted all of my most disrespectful posts to YOU? I am afraid that I cannot respect a person who cannot see that a mutual respect position is obviously best for all concerned. YOU are the one refusing to bend even one millimeter towards accepting my THEIST viewpoint as just as valid as your atheistic one. YOU are the one accepting NO QUARTER.

So please understand if I politely tell you to shove your atheistic bull%#$& up your *%%.