Pascal's Wager
Poll
 | 10 votes (41.66%) | ||
| | 13 votes (54.16%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4.16%) |
24 members have voted
August 16th, 2010 at 8:07:05 PM
permalink
Pascal's Wager has already been mentioned a few times in the thread on the two envelope problem. I was hoping somebody else would start this thread, but I'll be the one to break the ice.
Famous 17th century mathematician Blaise Pascal argued that it is a good bet to believe in god. Here is his argument:
If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
I think it is a very weak argument, but I'll refrain from specifics to see what others have to say first. I'll also make this a poll. The question for the poll is, "Was Pascal right? In other words, is believing in god a good way to hedge your bets on where you spend eternity?"
Okay, discuss...
Famous 17th century mathematician Blaise Pascal argued that it is a good bet to believe in god. Here is his argument:
If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
I think it is a very weak argument, but I'll refrain from specifics to see what others have to say first. I'll also make this a poll. The question for the poll is, "Was Pascal right? In other words, is believing in god a good way to hedge your bets on where you spend eternity?"
Okay, discuss...
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 16th, 2010 at 8:55:56 PM
permalink
Wow. One sentence forces references to TWO sets of Ten Commandments! LOL!Quote: WizardIn other words, is believing in god a good way to hedge your bets on where you spend eternity?
Assuming god exists, if you're a believer, shouldn't you devote your life to god? And if you don't, aren't you more likely to suffer god's wrath than a non-believer that basically behaves himself?
Assuming god doesn't exist, you're gonna feel pretty stupid when you wake up as worm food, and there's no final reward. (Yeah, I know...)
Personally, I lead my life based upon a line from the song "And when I die." The line is "Swear there ain't no heaven, but I pray there ain't no hell."
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
August 16th, 2010 at 9:26:12 PM
permalink
It's such a logically ridiculous argument that I'm sure Pascal (who was no dummy) meant it tongue-in-cheek.
For one thing, it's not actually possible to "choose" to believe in anything, from God to Obama to the honesty of Late Night Celebrity Wrestling. You either do or you don't--"belief", by definition, is not the result of any rational thought process.
Another objection is that an omniscient God who examined you after death to see if you belonged in Heaven, Purgatory, Hell, or Port Arthur, Texas (in descending order), would certainly see through your little charade. Especially since he can force you to answer truthfully "WHY DIDST THOU BELIEVE IN ME?": "Because I...uh...was hedging my bets." CLANK. The gates of Heaven slam shut. No halo for YOU, buddy--you faker.
Another analysis, which I myself have used, is that "believing in God" actually carries a cost, which is all the time I would spend in professing that belief, going to church, praying, etc., and following all those silly rules, like not hitting my noisy neighbor over the head with a shovel. This perhaps small but real fraction of my life has to be compared against the infinitesimally small likelihood that Christianity is essentially correct, that there IS a life after death, and furthermore, that there is in fact a hell, and that none of those things were inventions of a parasitic priest-class: an ingenious way to cadge a living by playing on peoples' fears. I consider the probability of that to be far less than 1/the number of atoms in the universe, and thus, I think that even the huge penalty if I am incorrect (eternity in Port Arthur) is still a vanishingly small risk. In other words, believing in God is -EV.
For one thing, it's not actually possible to "choose" to believe in anything, from God to Obama to the honesty of Late Night Celebrity Wrestling. You either do or you don't--"belief", by definition, is not the result of any rational thought process.
Another objection is that an omniscient God who examined you after death to see if you belonged in Heaven, Purgatory, Hell, or Port Arthur, Texas (in descending order), would certainly see through your little charade. Especially since he can force you to answer truthfully "WHY DIDST THOU BELIEVE IN ME?": "Because I...uh...was hedging my bets." CLANK. The gates of Heaven slam shut. No halo for YOU, buddy--you faker.
Another analysis, which I myself have used, is that "believing in God" actually carries a cost, which is all the time I would spend in professing that belief, going to church, praying, etc., and following all those silly rules, like not hitting my noisy neighbor over the head with a shovel. This perhaps small but real fraction of my life has to be compared against the infinitesimally small likelihood that Christianity is essentially correct, that there IS a life after death, and furthermore, that there is in fact a hell, and that none of those things were inventions of a parasitic priest-class: an ingenious way to cadge a living by playing on peoples' fears. I consider the probability of that to be far less than 1/the number of atoms in the universe, and thus, I think that even the huge penalty if I am incorrect (eternity in Port Arthur) is still a vanishingly small risk. In other words, believing in God is -EV.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 16th, 2010 at 9:41:21 PM
permalink
If it's a non-biblical god, he/she might punish you for not picking the right god.
If you're an atheist in a foxhole, who decides to not become an atheist, you still might pick the wrong god, because of the background god you're familiar with (Hindu, Greek myth god, etc.,)
The Devil, Satan, Beelzebub (back to Christianity) reportedly has been known to like a good wager (if I believe popular fiction). If you're going to wager a soul (based on my Twilight Zone watching) there's always a terrible catch. SATAN generally knows a good bet. He might also be a casino cheater.
If you're an atheist in a foxhole, who decides to not become an atheist, you still might pick the wrong god, because of the background god you're familiar with (Hindu, Greek myth god, etc.,)
The Devil, Satan, Beelzebub (back to Christianity) reportedly has been known to like a good wager (if I believe popular fiction). If you're going to wager a soul (based on my Twilight Zone watching) there's always a terrible catch. SATAN generally knows a good bet. He might also be a casino cheater.
Sanitized for Your Protection
August 16th, 2010 at 9:46:03 PM
permalink
<<<But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all)>>>
How are the two connected? If I'm born on a desert island and die there, where do I find these rules? Obviously there are no rules, how could there be. The universe isn't a moral place, morality is a human invention.
How are the two connected? If I'm born on a desert island and die there, where do I find these rules? Obviously there are no rules, how could there be. The universe isn't a moral place, morality is a human invention.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 16th, 2010 at 9:50:57 PM
permalink
Doesn't matter what you believe, it matters how you act. God looks at your heart and liver, and the blood on your hands.
Pascal was illustrating that good decision-making is making decisions that further your best interests.
The Wizard embodies this with, "it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether you made the right bets." ["had good bets."]
Pascal was illustrating that good decision-making is making decisions that further your best interests.
The Wizard embodies this with, "it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether you made the right bets." ["had good bets."]
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:58:47 PM
permalink
Quote: rxwineIf it's a non-biblical god, he/she might punish you for not picking the right god.
If you're an atheist in a foxhole, who decides to not become an atheist, you still might pick the wrong god, because of the background god you're familiar with (Hindu, Greek myth god, etc.,)
The Devil, Satan, Beelzebub (back to Christianity) reportedly has been known to like a good wager (if I believe popular fiction). If you're going to wager a soul (based on my Twilight Zone watching) there's always a terrible catch. SATAN generally knows a good bet. He might also be a casino cheater.
Re picking the wrong god: every culture screams (with spittle flying) that there is only one true god/God/belief system, and that all the rest are wrong, so your foxhole dude would probably not even think of any other god(s)--he would just choose the plat du jour. So Odin could hardly get angry at Shemp Stooge if he picked the Judeo-Christian God to believe in--he wouldn't have had much choice. (Of course, if Shemp for some reason picked Odin, and he wound up before God, then too bad--ZAP.)
Re Satan being a casino cheater: Naah. Satan owns and operates Harrah's. (Hey, wait a minute...)
I have often wondered why the Devil wouldn't let you wager somebody ELSE's soul. "Honey, I've got some bad news..."
If what you say is true, Satan is missing out on a juicy revenue stream. Satanspicks.com---"100% accurate ABSOLUTE LOCKS for NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL WINNERS. Damn me to hell if you don't win!"
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 16th, 2010 at 11:03:52 PM
permalink
Did we expect faith on this website?
Why doesn't the Wizard run the odds of all the OT prophecies that Jesus The Messiah fullfilled? You know where he was born to how he died and all the stuff like that.
Look selfishness doesn't work. Without God, man becomes his own god and he didn't create this place. I'm not an apologist but I just read a great one, Ravi Zacharias. His latest book, "Has Christianity Failed You?", will answer most questions you have about the faith. Wizard I would be most happy to mail you a copy!
If you truly seek you will find. I guess the trouble is that the real reason for lack of faith is just plain old rebellian, things you want to do, people you want to do, something you want to have, you know selfishness. So you don't need God telling you what to do. I mean it's pretty simple, just look up. That heaven didn't just get there by accident.
It's late, I'm gonna keep it civil, you please do too and remember you are up against some seriously intelligent scientists, theologists, cosmologists, geneticists and biologists to name a few. The arguments listed above are pretty pitiful, you will have to do better than that!!
Why doesn't the Wizard run the odds of all the OT prophecies that Jesus The Messiah fullfilled? You know where he was born to how he died and all the stuff like that.
Look selfishness doesn't work. Without God, man becomes his own god and he didn't create this place. I'm not an apologist but I just read a great one, Ravi Zacharias. His latest book, "Has Christianity Failed You?", will answer most questions you have about the faith. Wizard I would be most happy to mail you a copy!
If you truly seek you will find. I guess the trouble is that the real reason for lack of faith is just plain old rebellian, things you want to do, people you want to do, something you want to have, you know selfishness. So you don't need God telling you what to do. I mean it's pretty simple, just look up. That heaven didn't just get there by accident.
It's late, I'm gonna keep it civil, you please do too and remember you are up against some seriously intelligent scientists, theologists, cosmologists, geneticists and biologists to name a few. The arguments listed above are pretty pitiful, you will have to do better than that!!
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
August 16th, 2010 at 11:14:36 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoIf you truly seek you will find. /q]
I look for a horny, naked supermodel under my bed every single night, and all I ever find is dust bunnies. So I'd say you're wrong.The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 16th, 2010 at 11:19:25 PM
permalink
Quote: PaigowdanDoesn't matter what you believe, it matters how you act. God looks at your heart and liver, and the blood on your hands.
Pascal was illustrating that good decision-making is making decisions that further your best interests.
The Wizard embodies this with, "it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether you made the right bets." ["had good bets."]
1. My doctor does that with an MRI. And the blood on my hands is from the pot roast I just defrosted.
2. Pascal was yanking our chain. And whether we took Pascal's wager or not, we would never know AT THAT TIME whether it did indeed "further our best interests", so it would at best be an uninformed decision.
3. Actually, it's whether you win or lose. Making the right bets increases the likelihood of that, but when the buffalo chips are counted, the only thing that matters is results. The man facing the firing squad can wail, "But all my decisions were +EV!!", but it won't do him any good.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 16th, 2010 at 11:55:51 PM
permalink
For a start there is no eternity. God is a finite being. He rests. He suffers from fatigue. Genesis 2:2.
Also, if souls exist then there are approximately 100 billion on the go at the moment. What do these Gods from the middle east want with so many? How many is enough? If they are conducting some sort of experiment it can't be going too well.
Also, if souls exist then there are approximately 100 billion on the go at the moment. What do these Gods from the middle east want with so many? How many is enough? If they are conducting some sort of experiment it can't be going too well.
You can't trust a dog to mind your food.
August 17th, 2010 at 12:11:07 AM
permalink
I mean it's pretty simple, just look up. That heaven didn't just get there by accident.>>>
Actually, if the Big Bang theory is correct, it did get there by accident.
Actually, if the Big Bang theory is correct, it did get there by accident.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 17th, 2010 at 2:01:51 AM
permalink
Perhaps gods and devils are merely different facets of the same entity... with taxation between, either way one goes (back and forth eg, from church to bar)?
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 17th, 2010 at 6:37:16 AM
permalink
Quote: mkl654321
Another objection is that an omniscient God who examined you after death to see if you belonged in Heaven, Purgatory, Hell, or Port Arthur, Texas (in descending order), would certainly see through your little charade. Especially since he can force you to answer truthfully "WHY DIDST THOU BELIEVE IN ME?": "Because I...uh...was hedging my bets." CLANK. The gates of Heaven slam shut. No halo for YOU, buddy--you faker.
Good point. I agree with you. However, to play the devil's advocate (ahem), if god can see right through such false faith, then why are there so many "Jesus or Hell" signs and billboards? There is one right here in Vegas on the southbound I-15. There will be a lot of disappointed people on judgment day if fear of hell is what motivated their perceived faith, and god doesn't award any points for at least going through the motions.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 17th, 2010 at 7:03:06 AM
permalink
Quote: mkl654321Re picking the wrong god: every culture screams (with spittle flying) that there is only one true god/God/belief system, and that all the rest are wrong, so your foxhole dude would probably not even think of any other god(s)--he would just choose the plat du jour.
Doesn't the Exodus explicitly admit the existence of other gods? As I recall Pharo's priests could duplicate some of Moses' miracles, like turning a stick into a snake. The first commandment admonishes not to have other gods before God (doesn't say anythign about having other gods after God, hmm....)
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
August 17th, 2010 at 7:04:34 AM
permalink
Pascal's Wager starts by assuming that a Christian god exists, then postulates a specific set of benefits associated with that belief, then argues that the risk of losing those benefits is greater than the benefits from not believing. As mkl654321 so deftly puts it, this is -EV. It is a classic con; If you do these things, you will reap great rewards! "Let me introduce myself; I am Ngudamo Selesse, and my father was the Director of Economic Development here in Sierra Leone; due to the machinations of his underlings, he has been disgraced and has died in prison. I have chosen you for your trustworthiness on the recommendation of a mutual acquaintance...." But the initial set of conditions have no evidence, other than the story as presented by the one who postulates it. I'm sure there is a mathematical or logical way to say it. It is entirely contained within itself.
You could construct the exact same argument that it is all a ruse, to get you to believe so that the god can torture and tease you in the afterlife: "I will reward non-believers with eternal life, for their common sense. I will torture believers for their foolishness in trusting me." Then the benefit would be in non-belief, for the same reasons. It makes just as much sense as the other argument; there is no evidence for either. Flying Spaghetti Monster. Whatever. I could have made up anything. there is no reason to postulate a god with human motivations. God could be a freak.
That being said, I don't have any interest in converting believers to non-belief. If you are confident in your faith, follow it. Be good at it, do it well.
You could construct the exact same argument that it is all a ruse, to get you to believe so that the god can torture and tease you in the afterlife: "I will reward non-believers with eternal life, for their common sense. I will torture believers for their foolishness in trusting me." Then the benefit would be in non-belief, for the same reasons. It makes just as much sense as the other argument; there is no evidence for either. Flying Spaghetti Monster. Whatever. I could have made up anything. there is no reason to postulate a god with human motivations. God could be a freak.
That being said, I don't have any interest in converting believers to non-belief. If you are confident in your faith, follow it. Be good at it, do it well.
A falling knife has no handle.
August 17th, 2010 at 7:54:22 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaThat being said, I don't have any interest in converting believers to non-belief. If you are confident in your faith, follow it. Be good at it, do it well.
Why not? If you could wake them up, wouldn't it be a good thing?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 17th, 2010 at 7:57:40 AM
permalink
If I try to speculate from the results that I observe on Earth (leaving all current religions out of it), I'd have to say if there is a God who is overseeing things and occasionally intervening, then I'd say he appears to be very capricious.
Perhaps he just enjoys a good storyline. (I say "he", but it's just for convenience)
Perhaps he just enjoys a good storyline. (I say "he", but it's just for convenience)
Sanitized for Your Protection
August 17th, 2010 at 8:05:48 AM
permalink
Quote: rxwinePerhaps he just enjoys a good storyline. (I say "he", but it's just for convenience)
Or perhaps he does play Dice with the Universe?
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
August 17th, 2010 at 8:15:33 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardWhy not? If you could wake them up, wouldn't it be a good thing?
Nope. If someone has found happiness, why would it be good for me to take it from them? The truth is that they found happiness. It has nothing to do with what is real, or evidence, or anything. I would be subtracting from the total happiness of the world. I won't do that. The better choice is to go with the flow, and make my own way through the world with confidence. My satisfaction does not depend on someone else agreeing with me.
I live this. My wife attends church several times a week. We sent our daughter to parochial schools, and she is now at a Catholic university. The proper way to show respect and love for those you truly care about is to allow them their own decisions on these things. They thought just as long and hard about it as I did, and came up with a different answer. For me to argue with them would be insulting to them. If they want to question their answers on their own, great; but that's how it will have to be.
A falling knife has no handle.
August 17th, 2010 at 8:33:54 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardGood point. I agree with you. However, to play the devil's advocate (ahem), if god can see right through such false faith, then why are there so many "Jesus or Hell" signs and billboards? There is one right here in Vegas on the southbound I-15. There will be a lot of disappointed people on judgment day if fear of hell is what motivated their perceived faith, and god doesn't award any points for at least going through the motions.
Worship of a god, and a system of retribution otherwise are the two main components of any religion; which after all, is itself only a branch of philosophy. There will always be more to life than "religion and politics"... for they really seeking more.
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 17th, 2010 at 8:37:38 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaI would be subtracting from the total happiness of the world. I won't do that. The better choice is to go with the flow, and make my own way through the world with confidence. My satisfaction does not depend on someone else agreeing with me.
True friendship, etc, is strengthen but not diluted in greater numbers. The more real friends, the more of it to go around.
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 17th, 2010 at 8:40:52 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaNope. If someone has found happiness, why would it be good for me to take it from them? The truth is that they found happiness. It has nothing to do with what is real, or evidence, or anything. I would be subtracting from the total happiness of the world...
Maybe they would be even happier if they were not hooked on the opiate of the masses. Maybe challenging their faith is the right thing to do for the same reason freeing the human race was a noble cause (or was it?) in the Matrix. About the world being a better place argument, consider the institution they are supporting when they put money in the offering tray -- one that is infested with pedophile priests and turned a blind eye to the holocaust. Perhaps choking them off at their point of support would be a good thing for the world.
In all practicality, you have to weigh that against keeping harmony in the family. I'm in a similar situation, by the way. I don't press my views on my wife, but if she suggests I go to church for a change, I push back just as hard, if hot harder.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 17th, 2010 at 8:59:36 AM
permalink
Narrowing the argument towards the catholic church and the pedofile problem has nothing to do with people's faith. Although it probably DOES have something to do with the priest's faith, particularly that they take it to the point of celibacy - a step that some of them have difficulty with.
Does any other religion have that type of problem with their leaders? Does any other religion expect celibacy of their leaders?
Any suggestion that a non-believer should try to get a believer to stop seeing a light that isn't there, would be no different than a bible-thumber trying to get a non-believer to see the imaginary light. That's how wars start, and who wants that?
Personally, I love the idea of letting people make their own choice, but I'd prefer that it be an informed choice.
For what it's worth, I feel the country started going down-hill when they eliminated school prayer.
Does any other religion have that type of problem with their leaders? Does any other religion expect celibacy of their leaders?
Any suggestion that a non-believer should try to get a believer to stop seeing a light that isn't there, would be no different than a bible-thumber trying to get a non-believer to see the imaginary light. That's how wars start, and who wants that?
Personally, I love the idea of letting people make their own choice, but I'd prefer that it be an informed choice.
For what it's worth, I feel the country started going down-hill when they eliminated school prayer.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
August 17th, 2010 at 9:02:24 AM
permalink
This simple video does a good job of debunking Pascal's reasoning on the wager.
August 17th, 2010 at 9:16:54 AM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear
Any suggestion that a non-believer should try to get a believer to stop seeing a light that isn't there, would be no different than a bible-thumber trying to get a non-believer to see the imaginary light. That's how wars start, and who wants that?
I can agree with that. However, I have no problem with a healthy debate on religion, regardless of which side instigates the conversation. I don't begrudge anybody who knocks on my door and politely invites me to their church and answers my questions. Sometimes I'll talk to them for over an hour, if I've got nothing better to do (which is often the case). The bible itself instructs its members to (I'm paraphrasing) tell the people of the world the good news. So if anything, I think bible-based believers who are not out there knocking on doors, or some equivalent, are hypocrites. I think there would be fewer wars if there were more of a free exchange about religion, as opposed to it being such a taboo topic.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 17th, 2010 at 9:18:37 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardMaybe they would be even happier if they were not hooked on the opiate of the masses. Maybe challenging their faith is the right thing to do for the same reason freeing the human race was a noble cause (or was it?) in the Matrix. About the world being a better place argument, consider the institution they are supporting when they put money in the offering tray -- one that is infested with pedophile priests and turned a blind eye to the holocaust. Perhaps choking them off at their point of support would be a good thing for the world.
In all practicality, you have to weigh that against keeping harmony in the family. I'm in a similar situation, by the way. I don't press my views on my wife, but if she suggests I go to church for a change, I push back just as hard, if hot harder.
From our point of view, yes; but from their point of view, it just comes down to me saying that I'm right and they're wrong. If it worked, I might try it. But it doesn't. There's the thought game, which we're playing now, and the real world game. In the real world, you do what works, not what should work on paper.
And that is what I think is the really interesting thing, how the paper explanation is different from what really happens. That's why I constantly go back to the "why" of gambling, beyond the numbers that rule the fall of the dice and the cards. What interests me the most is that it is a human activity, a human recreation. Why do we game this way? Why can people understand that there is no evidence for Christianity, yet still be Christians? How can someone know that they will lose in the long run, yet still wager in casinos? Because it satisfies them to do that, is the only answer. It makes them feel good.
And of course, that raises more questions. The more you know, the less you know.
A falling knife has no handle.
August 17th, 2010 at 9:33:28 AM
permalink
If you believe in god and you're wrong, at least you're wrong with billions of other people. This who idea mixes science and religion, which mix together like water and oil.
August 17th, 2010 at 9:37:45 AM
permalink
Quote: TriplellIf you believe in god and you're wrong, at least you're wrong with billions of other people.
"The truth is not a popularity contest" (I'd be grateful for attribution)
Quote:This who idea mixes science and religion, which mix together like water and oil.
"Science isn't the opposite of religion. Reason is the opposite of faith." Nareed
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
August 17th, 2010 at 10:31:59 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardGood point. I agree with you. However, to play the devil's advocate (ahem), if god can see right through such false faith, then why are there so many "Jesus or Hell" signs and billboards? There is one right here in Vegas on the southbound I-15. There will be a lot of disappointed people on judgment day if fear of hell is what motivated their perceived faith, and god doesn't award any points for at least going through the motions.
Sure. But religious institutions are first and foremost SECULAR--in other words, their true function and purpose is to exert authority and control. Those institutions do that wonderfully well in backward, medieval societies such as Saudi Arabia or Kansas. But in more modern societies, the nominal "control" has been handed over to secular authorities, and the primary focus of organized religion has shifted over toward acquiring wealth.
So to answer your basic point, the fear of hell keeps people in line. It makes them bow to religiously justified secular authority, or it makes them put five bucks in the collection plate. No real difference, if you think about it.
I would also hasten to add that if religious fakery makes people BEHAVE, then it's not a bad thing--after all, there are always at least SOME people for whom the threat of punishment is the only thing that makes them behave. However, the element of coercion always gets abused when any institution (religious or otherwise) gets into power and stays there. Muslim authorities, for instance, tell everyone what to do in minute detail, including what to eat, how to dress, when to go to bed, when to get up, etc. etc. etc. (all under the guise of "preventing sin").
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 10:38:46 AM
permalink
Quote: NareedDoesn't the Exodus explicitly admit the existence of other gods? As I recall Pharo's priests could duplicate some of Moses' miracles, like turning a stick into a snake. The first commandment admonishes not to have other gods before God (doesn't say anythign about having other gods after God, hmm....)
No. It admits that people BELIEVE in other gods. It never admits that those gods could exist. Logically, believing in those other gods could only be a sin if they did not, in fact, exist; otherwise, such thoughts would be similar to believing in the moon, or turtles (which do exist).
Interestingly enough, that reason for believing in God only is never articulated, i.e., don't believe in the other guys because they aren't real. God just booms: DON'T DO IT. I suspect that is because if people applied the same test to HIM, as in, don't believe in it because it doesn't exist...
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 10:45:24 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaYou could construct the exact same argument that it is all a ruse, to get you to believe so that the god can torture and tease you in the afterlife: "I will reward non-believers with eternal life, for their common sense. I will torture believers for their foolishness in trusting me."
I think there's far more evidence for any God being capricious and malevolent than being just and benevolent. The Greeks realized this when constructing their gods' personas. Christian authorities have always tried to deflect the question, somewhat lamely, of why evil triumphs and good fails. They say that we, as ignorant mortals, cannot possibly divine God's plan, so we just have to smile, bend over, and take it. When that planeload of African refugee children slams into a mountainside, killing all aboard, we have to trust that it's all for some higher purpose. However, that dog don't hunt. We are told to obey a moral code--yet the one telling us to obey it doesn't bother to observe the same code. One set of rules for us and another for the boss. Hmmm. Sounds like several of my past jobs.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 10:51:42 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardMaybe they would be even happier if they were not hooked on the opiate of the masses. Maybe challenging their faith is the right thing to do for the same reason freeing the human race was a noble cause (or was it?) in the Matrix. About the world being a better place argument, consider the institution they are supporting when they put money in the offering tray -- one that is infested with pedophile priests and turned a blind eye to the holocaust. Perhaps choking them off at their point of support would be a good thing for the world.
In all practicality, you have to weigh that against keeping harmony in the family. I'm in a similar situation, by the way. I don't press my views on my wife, but if she suggests I go to church for a change, I push back just as hard, if hot harder.
I think irrationality has to be hunted down and destroyed with as much vigor and ruthlessness as the Inquisition used to hunt down and destroy "heretics". If we don't do that, we're all screwed. The cost of bad decisions has simply become too great.
Therefore, if anyone I was close to appeared to believe in God, I would feel forced to point out to them the logical fallacies in that belief, if only because I thought that person was wasting their time (and, in the case of most religions, subjecting themselves to torrents of unnecessary guilt). Of course, the likelihood of my getting close to such a person in the first place would be small, because a person's mind is what I find most attractive/interesting, but...
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 10:55:50 AM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear
For what it's worth, I feel the country started going down-hill when they eliminated school prayer.
No. What they did is eliminate COMPULSORY school prayer. A huge distinction. Students can still pray IF THEY WANT TO.
If the country started to go downhill as the result of eliminating a COMPULSION to profess a belief (as opposed to the the right to profess whatever belief you wish, or to simply remain silent), why, then, I hope I'll see you at the bottom of that hill.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 10:57:40 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI can agree with that. However, I have no problem with a healthy debate on religion, regardless of which side instigates the conversation. I don't begrudge anybody who knocks on my door and politely invites me to their church and answers my questions. Sometimes I'll talk to them for over an hour, if I've got nothing better to do (which is often the case). The bible itself instructs its members to (I'm paraphrasing) tell the people of the world the good news. So if anything, I think bible-based believers who are not out there knocking on doors, or some equivalent, are hypocrites. I think there would be fewer wars if there were more of a free exchange about religion, as opposed to it being such a taboo topic.
As a student of history, it seems to me that every single war fought on religious grounds (or, pretexts) was fought between believers, not between believers and nonbelievers.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
August 17th, 2010 at 11:24:51 AM
permalink
Quote: mkl654321Of course, the likelihood of my getting close to such a person in the first place would be small, because a person's mind is what I find most attractive/interesting, but...
Yeah, for me it was her ti... her heart. She has a big heart.
A falling knife has no handle.
August 17th, 2010 at 1:20:16 PM
permalink
He's wrong in his statement, because his stated consequences of believing or not believing are not accurate.
Believing isn't a guarantee of eternal bliss in an afterlife, and disbelieving does not guarantee eternal damnation if an afterlife exists. It is similar to the procreation argument against gay marriage.
Gay marriage is procreation-neutral. Allowing it does not reduce procreation and banning it does not increase procreation.
Believing isn't a guarantee of eternal bliss in an afterlife, and disbelieving does not guarantee eternal damnation if an afterlife exists. It is similar to the procreation argument against gay marriage.
Gay marriage is procreation-neutral. Allowing it does not reduce procreation and banning it does not increase procreation.
August 17th, 2010 at 4:06:13 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearFor what it's worth, I feel the country started going down-hill when they eliminated school prayer.
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 17th, 2010 at 4:47:38 PM
permalink
I think Mosca got it right. Many people believe many things, and while Pascal's wager may seem disingenuous, we will never know the real answer to this eternal question here on Earth. So without proof of God's either existence or non-existence, why should we expect to convince people of our argument? It's like trying to convince someone that "The Yankees suck." or "Obama wasn't born in this country." or "Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house." or "You didn't really talk to a dead person with that psychic." Even when there IS concrete evidence or proof to support or refute these statements, there will always be dissenters. And in areas of religion, there is rarely concrete proof. Plus sometimes I think Atheists waste more of their lives trying to convince people that God doesn't exist than people who believe in God spend with their own religion. There are also the people that legitimately enjoy worshiping. They feel it's a positive influence in their lives and helps them to be a better human being on this planet. In their eyes, even if there is no God, you are the one wasting your time watching a football game or playing Blackjack. The other side of the argument is that Religious zealots kill people in the name of their faith. True, but "religion" as a word encompasses any and all beliefs, so saying the world would be better without Religion or a belief in God would be like arguing it would be better without free will. Not really possible.
August 17th, 2010 at 6:47:32 PM
permalink
If believeing in god makes you feel good, or not believing in god makes you feel good, I don't see the difference. I see physical laws everywhere in the universe, but no moral laws anywhere unless we invent them.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 17th, 2010 at 7:44:33 PM
permalink
Quote: cclub79... we will never know the real answer to this eternal question here on Earth.
Isn't that in itself another sort of answer or conclusion? Existentialist or at the very least, contradictory... by claiming to know something while at the same time claiming nothing can be known?
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 17th, 2010 at 8:08:11 PM
permalink
For what it's worth, Pascal was right. You've got nothing to lose if God exists and everything to gain if you live your life accordingly. Now you might not indulge in certain vices, but hey some vices aren't good for you anyway (ie drugs, sex, booze). Vices can turn into excesses (addiction & disease).
But what if God does not exist. Age old question, which implies there is no after life. Guess that means we all are just some specs of dust. I refer you to the classic Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin looks up into the sky and yells, "I am not a spec of dust. I am significant!"
Pascal's Wager traces its history from several roots. Go back to the 17th century and the rise of the Age of Enlightenment. From Descartes to Newton, society is clawing at logic, reason, the scientific method. This is a time where people are questioning the status quo. The religious backdrop is significant as well. You have growing divide between the Catholic Church and the Protestants. You have the rise of the Calvinists. And here Pascal tries to struggle with reasoning whether a divine being exists.
This reminds me of one of George Carlin's skits, "You're All Diseased". Definitely youtube this if you get a chance or rent it. There is a part where George Carlin makes fun of God and starts praying to the Sun. Then his neighbor has dog that won't shut-up so he starts praying to Joe Pesci. Well good-ole Joe takes care of that.....well I won't spoil the rest for you.
Dozens of religions across the planet. Billions of believers around the world. We call God by different names, Allah, Buddha, the Sun, a higher being etc. Something about human nature has engrained us to believe if not yearn for the supernatural. It has binded us in faith and anti-faith. In our search for the meaning of our lives, it is natural to hope for more. And perhaps through millenia, this hope has taken on powers of its own. Maybe God can be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Let me state my case in a different manner. Simple belief in God does not guarantee entry into Heaven. Conversely, simple disbelief in God does not guarantee Hell. And if you are wrong in your belief, you really do gain nothing. Personally, entry into heaven or a better place is not predicated on the belief in God, but how you live your life. Or so I hope or have faith in or yearn to great my own self-fulfilling prophesy. Are you with me? Do YOU believe?
But what if God does not exist. Age old question, which implies there is no after life. Guess that means we all are just some specs of dust. I refer you to the classic Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin looks up into the sky and yells, "I am not a spec of dust. I am significant!"
Pascal's Wager traces its history from several roots. Go back to the 17th century and the rise of the Age of Enlightenment. From Descartes to Newton, society is clawing at logic, reason, the scientific method. This is a time where people are questioning the status quo. The religious backdrop is significant as well. You have growing divide between the Catholic Church and the Protestants. You have the rise of the Calvinists. And here Pascal tries to struggle with reasoning whether a divine being exists.
This reminds me of one of George Carlin's skits, "You're All Diseased". Definitely youtube this if you get a chance or rent it. There is a part where George Carlin makes fun of God and starts praying to the Sun. Then his neighbor has dog that won't shut-up so he starts praying to Joe Pesci. Well good-ole Joe takes care of that.....well I won't spoil the rest for you.
Dozens of religions across the planet. Billions of believers around the world. We call God by different names, Allah, Buddha, the Sun, a higher being etc. Something about human nature has engrained us to believe if not yearn for the supernatural. It has binded us in faith and anti-faith. In our search for the meaning of our lives, it is natural to hope for more. And perhaps through millenia, this hope has taken on powers of its own. Maybe God can be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Let me state my case in a different manner. Simple belief in God does not guarantee entry into Heaven. Conversely, simple disbelief in God does not guarantee Hell. And if you are wrong in your belief, you really do gain nothing. Personally, entry into heaven or a better place is not predicated on the belief in God, but how you live your life. Or so I hope or have faith in or yearn to great my own self-fulfilling prophesy. Are you with me? Do YOU believe?
August 17th, 2010 at 8:18:32 PM
permalink
Quote: AsswhoopermcdaddyFor what it's worth, Pascal was right. You've got nothing to lose if God exists and everything to gain if you live your life accordingly.
"You could construct the exact same argument that it is all a ruse, to get you to believe so that the god can torture and tease you in the afterlife: "I will reward non-believers with eternal life, for their common sense. I will torture believers for their foolishness in trusting me." Then the benefit would be in non-belief, for the same reasons. It makes just as much sense as the other argument; there is no evidence for either. Flying Spaghetti Monster. Whatever. I could have made up anything. there is no reason to postulate a god with human motivations. God could be a freak. " -- Mosca
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 18th, 2010 at 5:23:44 AM
permalink
Certainly no one on this forum knows whether God exists, and certainly, the prevailing promises in all of the biblical texts promise eternal bliss in one form or another for believers. So, you have to eliminate the "freak" argument. Therefore, Pascal is essentially correct in his argument. You gotta go with the positive EV on this one.
Certainly, if God exists, He (for lack of a better term) can see right through you and know if you "truly" believe or not. In my Lutheran faith, sin is all about not just deeds, but thoughts as well, meaning that everytime I think about doing something sinful, I am a sinner. Therefore, I must believe that Jesus Christ died to absolve us of our sins so that we will go to heaven, providing we truly believe of course, and my mind goes further to say that it's sin to not believe and therefore, even if we don't believe, we still go to heaven because we are all God's children and Jesus' death pretty much absolved us of everything when it comes to the afterlife. Hell is just an empty threat, and the devil is awfully lonely down there. Therefore, if my religion is correct, we're all good to go, no matter what we believe.
The Bible and other religious texts can be interpreted in so many ways and that is one of the reasons why we have hatred and wars in the world, but for me, I keep an open mind. Believe in what you want to believe. I can't make the decision for you, and who says I am right?
There is absolutely no physical evidence that heaven exists, and no evidence of an afterlife. We have a planet and universe that we can mostly explain with science, with the gap between what we know and what we don't know closing. That doesn't however preclude the existence of God.
Certainly, believing in God in order to reach eternity is only one reason you would believe in Him and certainly is a benefit. It isn't about hedging your bets. I could just as easily say, "is getting married a good way to hedge your bets on dying alone".
Certainly, if God exists, He (for lack of a better term) can see right through you and know if you "truly" believe or not. In my Lutheran faith, sin is all about not just deeds, but thoughts as well, meaning that everytime I think about doing something sinful, I am a sinner. Therefore, I must believe that Jesus Christ died to absolve us of our sins so that we will go to heaven, providing we truly believe of course, and my mind goes further to say that it's sin to not believe and therefore, even if we don't believe, we still go to heaven because we are all God's children and Jesus' death pretty much absolved us of everything when it comes to the afterlife. Hell is just an empty threat, and the devil is awfully lonely down there. Therefore, if my religion is correct, we're all good to go, no matter what we believe.
The Bible and other religious texts can be interpreted in so many ways and that is one of the reasons why we have hatred and wars in the world, but for me, I keep an open mind. Believe in what you want to believe. I can't make the decision for you, and who says I am right?
There is absolutely no physical evidence that heaven exists, and no evidence of an afterlife. We have a planet and universe that we can mostly explain with science, with the gap between what we know and what we don't know closing. That doesn't however preclude the existence of God.
Certainly, believing in God in order to reach eternity is only one reason you would believe in Him and certainly is a benefit. It isn't about hedging your bets. I could just as easily say, "is getting married a good way to hedge your bets on dying alone".
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
August 18th, 2010 at 5:36:00 AM
permalink
Quote: Wizard"Whatever. I could have made up anything. there is no reason to postulate a god with human motivations. God could be a freak. "
Pascal never suggested it was a good idea to believe in ANY god. Obviously, it depends on god's motivations and the "rules of the game". This does not refute anything about the "profitability" of believing in the particular god Pascal was talking about.
On the other hand, one could imagine a "freak god" that punishes the faith in the "non-freak" ones by sending the believers to hell. That would, of course, break the whole construct.
I think, the real problem is the definition of "nothing". Having to give up the life of sin, which is very pleasant to most of us, is hardly a "nothing". Besides, you have to pay the price now for a chance of getting rewarded sometime in the (hopefully very remote) future. This also decreases the value of the reward to most people.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
August 18th, 2010 at 6:33:47 AM
permalink
In the Old Testament, Satan only wagers once and that's in the book of Job. God bets that Satan can't make Job blame God for all the crap that he's about to give Satan the power to put Job through. So God is a gambling man Himself and a pretty sadistic one at that.Quote: rxwineThe Devil, Satan, Beelzebub (back to Christianity) reportedly has been known to like a good wager
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez
August 18th, 2010 at 6:57:16 AM
permalink
I'm confused by some apparent contradictions in your post.
If we're all "good to go," how is it positive EV to believe? It would seem to me definitely negative EV. You're wasting a lot of time praying, reading religious books, going to church, and wasting money putting it in the offering tray. Think of the better things you could do with that time and money.
Let's ignore your earlier remark that we're all "good to go" for the moment. If reaching eternity is the motive to believe, wouldn't an omniscient see right through that? Wouldn't he say on judgment day, "You phony, you never really believed, you were just putting on a big show!" That doesn't seem like real belief to me. True belief should be based on some kind of evidence. As I tell the missionaries who knock on my door, "Walk across my swimming pool, and then you'll truly have my attention."
Quote: boymimboYou gotta go with the positive EV on this one.
Therefore, if my religion is correct, we're all good to go, no matter what we believe.
If we're all "good to go," how is it positive EV to believe? It would seem to me definitely negative EV. You're wasting a lot of time praying, reading religious books, going to church, and wasting money putting it in the offering tray. Think of the better things you could do with that time and money.
Quote: boymimbo
Certainly, if God exists, He (for lack of a better term) can see right through you and know if you "truly" believe or not.
Certainly, believing in God in order to reach eternity is only one reason you would believe in Him and certainly is a benefit.
Let's ignore your earlier remark that we're all "good to go" for the moment. If reaching eternity is the motive to believe, wouldn't an omniscient see right through that? Wouldn't he say on judgment day, "You phony, you never really believed, you were just putting on a big show!" That doesn't seem like real belief to me. True belief should be based on some kind of evidence. As I tell the missionaries who knock on my door, "Walk across my swimming pool, and then you'll truly have my attention."
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 18th, 2010 at 7:22:53 AM
permalink
The unstated assumption in all discussions regarding the existence of God (defined as the deity described in the Bible), is that there is some reason to believe this deity exists at all.
If you look around there are many old religions with holy books of their own. The Maya had the Popol Vuh, the Egyptians the Book of the Dead, and there are many others (more if you count collected legends and epical poems). Therefore I ask: what reason is there to believe in God that does not apply to Maya, Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Hindu, Egyptian and other deities?
That question has a simple answer. Christianity inherited the Roman Empire (both parts), but not Rome's tolerance of other cults. In time Christianity became the dominant power and cultural influence over the dominant civilization in the world. Pretty much all of Europe and much of of Europe's former colonies adopted Christianity. Much of the rest of the world adopted Islam (and Christianity did have some influence over early Islam), which arguably makes use of the same God.
All in all, then, a very large majority of the world's population believes in God. And that's why belief in the Biblical deity is seen as normal, despite the full and complete lack of any evidence.
But that just brings us back to one of my favorite sayings: "The truth is not a popularity contest."
For many, many thousands of years people believed the Sun revolved around the Earth. It was a reasonable belief, as you can see the freaking Sun move accross the sky every day. Not too long ago everyone believed the Unverse consisted of the Milky Way Galaxy and nothing else, with the Sun near the center. Why not? If you've seen the Milky Way you've seen it's very symetrical, which you'd expect it to be if you were at or near the center.
It took decades of observations and development of better instruments to reach an understanding which could be proved, not merely assumed. So we know now there are other galaxies, and that we're somewhere along the edge of the Milky Way rather than at its center.
So let's leave Pascal aside for a moment and take up Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
Since we have no evidence of God's existence, but we do know of many other books describing other kinds of similar deities, after-lives, creations, etc etc, the simple explanation is that God is a Hebrew myth, much as Ra was an Eguptian myth and Zeus a Greek myth.
If you look around there are many old religions with holy books of their own. The Maya had the Popol Vuh, the Egyptians the Book of the Dead, and there are many others (more if you count collected legends and epical poems). Therefore I ask: what reason is there to believe in God that does not apply to Maya, Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Hindu, Egyptian and other deities?
That question has a simple answer. Christianity inherited the Roman Empire (both parts), but not Rome's tolerance of other cults. In time Christianity became the dominant power and cultural influence over the dominant civilization in the world. Pretty much all of Europe and much of of Europe's former colonies adopted Christianity. Much of the rest of the world adopted Islam (and Christianity did have some influence over early Islam), which arguably makes use of the same God.
All in all, then, a very large majority of the world's population believes in God. And that's why belief in the Biblical deity is seen as normal, despite the full and complete lack of any evidence.
But that just brings us back to one of my favorite sayings: "The truth is not a popularity contest."
For many, many thousands of years people believed the Sun revolved around the Earth. It was a reasonable belief, as you can see the freaking Sun move accross the sky every day. Not too long ago everyone believed the Unverse consisted of the Milky Way Galaxy and nothing else, with the Sun near the center. Why not? If you've seen the Milky Way you've seen it's very symetrical, which you'd expect it to be if you were at or near the center.
It took decades of observations and development of better instruments to reach an understanding which could be proved, not merely assumed. So we know now there are other galaxies, and that we're somewhere along the edge of the Milky Way rather than at its center.
So let's leave Pascal aside for a moment and take up Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
Since we have no evidence of God's existence, but we do know of many other books describing other kinds of similar deities, after-lives, creations, etc etc, the simple explanation is that God is a Hebrew myth, much as Ra was an Eguptian myth and Zeus a Greek myth.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
August 18th, 2010 at 9:46:03 AM
permalink
How can the universe be explained except by God???
Effect has to have cause.
Effect has to have cause.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
