Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Pascal's Wager: How do you know?

Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 7:06:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Not a counter argument against this, but a similar proposal:What if the Bible was a concoction made by the devil, assuming you are a theist?
I miss the old members.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 7:17:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

Uh, why exactly must religious faith necessarily exclude reasoning and logic? Only way you can do that is if you use some contrived definition of faith that has nothing to do with how any of the religions use the term "faith".
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 7:28:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 7:17:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

Uh, why exactly must religious faith necessarily exclude reasoning and logic? Only way you can do that is if you use some contrived definition of faith that has nothing to do with how any of the religions use the term "faith".

"Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith."
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 8:24:27 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Because God is all loving and an all loving God would not cast people out of his presence simply because they are stupid
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 8:27:27 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 7:28:04 AM, Yvette wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:17:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

Uh, why exactly must religious faith necessarily exclude reasoning and logic? Only way you can do that is if you use some contrived definition of faith that has nothing to do with how any of the religions use the term "faith".

"Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith."

I'm talking about religious faith as well, not bare theism or deism.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 8:29:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

What a moronic statement.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 8:29:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
My main concern with this is: Which god should I believe in? What if the god I start believing in isn't the real one true god?

Pascal is full of fail.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Valtarov
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 10:00:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 8:29:32 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
My main concern with this is: Which god should I believe in? What if the god I start believing in isn't the real one true god?

Pascal is full of fail.
Only if God cares about whatever silly notions run around your head and not your ethical choices. At least under Christianity, orthopraxy is a thousand times more important than orthodoxy.

Replace "go to church/believe in God" with "act as absolute morality would have you act, as it is dictated under the guiding threads common to most religions.", you have a salvageable argument.
"We are half-hearted creatures,
fooling about with drink and sex and
ambition when infinite joy is offered us,
like an ignorant child who wants to go on
making mud pies in a slum because he
cannot imagine what is meant by the offer
of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily
pleased."—C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:19:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 8:27:27 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:28:04 AM, Yvette wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:17:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

Uh, why exactly must religious faith necessarily exclude reasoning and logic? Only way you can do that is if you use some contrived definition of faith that has nothing to do with how any of the religions use the term "faith".

"Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith."

I'm talking about religious faith as well, not bare theism or deism.

If it's got reasoning behind it, it's not pure faith, so it isn't included.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:22:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 8:24:27 AM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
Because God is all loving and an all loving God would not cast people out of his presence simply because they are stupid

A lot of Christians believe god sends non-believers to hell. I'm asking how you know it's not the other way around. Though I should amend: not belief exactly, but faith without reasoning/evidence. Though this is all theoretical so it makes little difference.

And what evidence do you have that if there is a god, it is loving? It could very well be a malicious god (and the prevalence of pointless, unrelenting and forced suffering in the world makes that a good possibility).
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:23:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 8:29:17 AM, innomen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 6:42:49 AM, Yvette wrote:
I know this is the typical response to Pascal's Wager, but I'm not asking as a counter-argument, I'm just curious. Maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of, maybe there is. But religious types: how do you know that a god rewards faith and not reasoning/logic? How do you know religion isn't a test and those who are weak-willed enough and not logical enough to fall for it are punished or not saved? I'm not saying non-religious types are strong-willed, but you yourselves have admitted that religion gives you comfort. If religion is the opiate of the masses, what reasoning do you have to support the idea that a god or even a devil isn't offering you comfort drugs to keep you off the path of righteousness?

Just curious to hear what the answers are. I'm not talking about pure theism/deism where it's got reasoning behind it and not pure faith. I'm talking about religious faith.

What a moronic statement.

I see you avoided answering the post's question and made a random, unsupported statement attacking one line instead.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:24:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:00:41 AM, Valtarov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 8:29:32 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
My main concern with this is: Which god should I believe in? What if the god I start believing in isn't the real one true god?

Pascal is full of fail.
Only if God cares about whatever silly notions run around your head and not your ethical choices. At least under Christianity, orthopraxy is a thousand times more important than orthodoxy.

Replace "go to church/believe in God" with "act as absolute morality would have you act, as it is dictated under the guiding threads common to most religions.", you have a salvageable argument.

Different religions have different objectives for morality. So, no, you can't do that. What you believe to be moral may not be moral under certain religions (and hell, what you believe to be moral may not be moral under what would turn out to be the "true" god's religion).

And what if Hinduism was the correct religion, and not protestant Christianity? What if Jehovah's Witnesses had it right and it doesn't really matter if you believe or not - there's a set number going in?

Heck, what if Mormons are right?

Choosing a god is very much like choosing a set of ethical principles. You have no idea which one is true, and which one you will get punished for if you are going to take this wager.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:25:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:22:21 PM, Yvette wrote:

And what evidence do you have that if there is a god, it is loving? It could very well be a malicious god (and the prevalence of pointless, unrelenting and forced suffering in the world makes that a good possibility).

This too :)
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:28:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
A question to Christians: How come you don't accept Zeus to avoid damnation in Hades? How come you dont worship Wotan to reap the benefits of Valhalla?

I seriously don't understand why Christians think their God is more likely than others.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:31:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:00:41 AM, Valtarov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 8:29:32 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
My main concern with this is: Which god should I believe in? What if the god I start believing in isn't the real one true god?

Pascal is full of fail.
Only if God cares about whatever silly notions run around your head and not your ethical choices. At least under Christianity, orthopraxy is a thousand times more important than orthodoxy.

Replace "go to church/believe in God" with "act as absolute morality would have you act, as it is dictated under the guiding threads common to most religions.", you have a salvageable argument.

That is reasonable, however many religions and the people in them do care about orthodoxy. Including Christians, if perhaps not Christianity itself (which I won't dispute). I'm not sure whether it's part of Biblical teaching that non-believers go to hell, however it's a prevalent belief, and one inherent in Pascal's Wager, which was the entire point of the post.

If you don't think non-believers go to hell, that's fine and not being challenged here.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:35:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:31:40 PM, Yvette wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:00:41 AM, Valtarov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 8:29:32 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
My main concern with this is: Which god should I believe in? What if the god I start believing in isn't the real one true god?

Pascal is full of fail.
Only if God cares about whatever silly notions run around your head and not your ethical choices. At least under Christianity, orthopraxy is a thousand times more important than orthodoxy.

Replace "go to church/believe in God" with "act as absolute morality would have you act, as it is dictated under the guiding threads common to most religions.", you have a salvageable argument.

That is reasonable, however many religions and the people in them do care about orthodoxy. Including Christians, if perhaps not Christianity itself (which I won't dispute). I'm not sure whether it's part of Biblical teaching that non-believers go to hell, however it's a prevalent belief, and one inherent in Pascal's Wager, which was the entire point of the post.

If you don't think non-believers go to hell, that's fine and not being challenged here.

A lot of gods wish for their subjects to worship them in order to get to heaven. Using Pascal's Wager and choosing just one would be playing Russian Roulette with your "soul" - if you believe in silly things like that, Valtarov ;)
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:36:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:28:18 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A question to Christians: How come you don't accept Zeus to avoid damnation in Hades? How come you dont worship Wotan to reap the benefits of Valhalla?

I seriously don't understand why Christians think their God is more likely than others.

lol I see we are on the same page here, Geo :p
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:28:18 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A question to Christians: How come you don't accept Zeus to avoid damnation in Hades? How come you dont worship Wotan to reap the benefits of Valhalla?

I seriously don't understand why Christians think their God is more likely than others.

I seriously don't get why it's so perplexing to atheists. Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt? Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

Question why do are you a Buddhist now? How is it more likely than all the other philosophies to be correct? I can ask this about any substantive position...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:59:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:19:05 PM, Yvette wrote:

If it's got reasoning behind it, it's not pure faith, so it isn't included.

What? Why not?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 1:19:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 12:28:18 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A question to Christians: How come you don't accept Zeus to avoid damnation in Hades? How come you dont worship Wotan to reap the benefits of Valhalla?

I seriously don't understand why Christians think their God is more likely than others.

I seriously don't get why it's so perplexing to atheists. Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt?

Because they were raised to believe it, with a few exceptions, you being one of them.

(Not a genetic fallacy.)

Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

This can only be said of apologetics, whom i take my hat off to.

Question why do are you a Buddhist now?

The Buddhas philosophy and teachings resonated as true for me. This may be true for other believers as well, but the difference is that I didn't have to accept any extraordinary claims and take things on faith.

Ultimately, my reason for being Buddhist is the same reason a person becomes a Randian Objectivist.

How is it more likely than all the other philosophies to be correct?

Buddha refused to make metaphysical claims and frowned at metaphysical speculation.

Basically, its more likely because it can be observed to be true and withstand the test of reason.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 1:37:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 8:24:27 AM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
Because God is all loving and an all loving God would not cast people out of his presence simply because they are stupid

But, id also say that God would also not cast people out simply because they refused to believe in him based on the utter lack of evidence and utter poor arguments to support his existance. Nor would he treat beliefs and actions as if they were equal, and the man who refused to believe in God, and the serial rapist as if theyve commited equal wrongs.

However, whats more, is that id easily say that God is all loving and an all loving god would not accept Rapists and Murderers just because they accepted a 2000 year old man and were saved. That isnt justice. None of this is. So yeah, your argument clearly fails.
ravenwaen
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 1:40:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt? Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

Often it is the other way around. They believe the arguments for it BECAUSE it is their worldview. When children are raised in a particular faith, that is a determined -- not a "chosen" -- worldview.
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 2:20:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 1:40:18 PM, ravenwaen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt? Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

Often it is the other way around. They believe the arguments for it BECAUSE it is their worldview. When children are raised in a particular faith, that is a determined -- not a "chosen" -- worldview.

This. Precisely.

I don't know why you think so highly of your fellow theists, pooka, but when you raise a child from birth to believe a certain thing--did you see my "creationist propaganda thread"?--it's generally not evidence but pure belief. That's why kids believe in Santa Claus, not because they've weighed all the possibilities.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 4:43:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 2:20:05 PM, Yvette wrote:
At 7/7/2010 1:40:18 PM, ravenwaen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt? Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

Often it is the other way around. They believe the arguments for it BECAUSE it is their worldview. When children are raised in a particular faith, that is a determined -- not a "chosen" -- worldview.

This. Precisely.

I don't know why you think so highly of your fellow theists, pooka, but when you raise a child from birth to believe a certain thing--did you see my "creationist propaganda thread"?--it's generally not evidence but pure belief. That's why kids believe in Santa Claus, not because they've weighed all the possibilities.

Only because you seem to think that most of my fellow theists are unthinking, uncritical, unreflective sheep. ;)
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 9:08:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 4:43:27 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/7/2010 2:20:05 PM, Yvette wrote:
At 7/7/2010 1:40:18 PM, ravenwaen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 12:58:09 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why does anyone choose any worldview to adopt? Because they beleive the arguments and evidence support it.

Often it is the other way around. They believe the arguments for it BECAUSE it is their worldview. When children are raised in a particular faith, that is a determined -- not a "chosen" -- worldview.

This. Precisely.

I don't know why you think so highly of your fellow theists, pooka, but when you raise a child from birth to believe a certain thing--did you see my "creationist propaganda thread"?--it's generally not evidence but pure belief. That's why kids believe in Santa Claus, not because they've weighed all the possibilities.

Only because you seem to think that most of my fellow theists are unthinking, uncritical, unreflective sheep. ;)
In which she would be mostly true. But I'm not saying she does. But if she did, she would be mostly true.
I miss the old members.