Pascal's wager offers no evidence for god's existence -- not even the shaky evidence of the appearance of design or the supposed fine-tuning of the universe or the feelings in your heart. Pascal’s wager is the name given to an argument put forward by the french philosopher and mathematician blaise pascal in the 17th century his argument for belief in god was based not on an appeal to evidence that god exists, but rather on the idea that it is in our own interests to believe in god and it is therefore rational for us to do so. For almost four centuries — scientists, atheists, historians, and philosophers have gleefully slandered a seemingly preposterous line of argument called pascal’s wager written by blaise. Pascal believes that we are forced to make a decision to either believe or not believe in god what does pascal think about people who accept the wager but can't bring himself to believe it pascal thinks that if someone accepts the wager but can't bring themself to beleive it that the issue lies with the person's passion. Explain whether you consider pascal's wager a proof of god's existence or not pascal's wager is at best a motive for believing, not a proof even so, the wager presupposes many conditions for the wager to fit a rational decision theory model.
After tackling the 'free will defence' to the problem of evil, i thought i'd take a look at one of the least imposing arguments i'm familiar with for god's existence, yet one of the most prevalent. Pascal's wager pascal concedes that a belief in god's existence cannot be supported by argument or evidence, but maintains that religious belief is rationally required nonetheless theoretical vs practical rationality the argument tacitly exploits the distinction between theoretical rationality and practical rationality. One (pascal's wager) is not an argument for god at all, but an argument for faith in god as a wager another (the ontological argument) we regard as fundamentally flawed yet we include it because it is very famous and influential, and may yet be saved by new formulations of it. Pascal’s wager vs the ontological argument pascal’s wager was a groundbreaking theory posed by the french philosopher, mathematician, and physicist blaise pascal pascal, who is said to be the father of modern probability, felt that that religion should be approached as a gamble.
Other (“minor”) arguments for the existence of god that have received serious discussion in recent times include moral arguments, arguments from religious experience, arguments from miracles, arguments from consciousness, arguments from reason, and aesthetic arguments. Pascal argues that theism is a prudent wager, even if the probability of god's 0 1994 basil blackwell, inc, 238 main street, cambridge, ma 02142, usa, and 108 cowley road, oxford ox4 ljf, uk. Refutations of pascal’s wager and the ontological argument when debating a theist about the existence of god, there are two arguments that many of them tend to rely on as last ditch efforts. “pascal’s wager” is the name given to an argument due to blaise pascal for believing, or for at least taking steps to believe, in god the name is somewhat misleading, for in a single section of his pensées , pascal apparently presents at least three such arguments, each of which might be called a ‘wager’—it is only the final of.
Modern, pragmatic arguments hold that, regardless of whether god exists, believing in god is good for us, or is the right thing to do examples include william james’s will to believe and blaise pascal’s wager. For at least three thousand years, humanity’s greatest thinkers argued for (and against) the existence of god by immediate entailment these arguments still exist, and some of them are quite compelling. Well, these are three very different things, at least to me, but i don't think these are the best arguments, with one very big exception pascal’s wager, as commonly presented today, is in my opinion not only a bad argument, but contrary to the teachings of christ. Pascal’s wager is an attempt to justify belief in god not with an appeal to evidence for his existence but rather with an appeal to self-interest it is in our interests to believe in the god of christianity, the argument suggests, and it is therefore rational for us to do so.
Pascal's wager is the product of the gain from a certain belief and the probability that it is the correct one (in pascal's reasoning 50-50, but as mentioned above the probability is much less) such as win=gainp. In simple terms, pascal asks us to consider the question of god’s existence as a wager he asks us to assume that we must place our bet it is not optional therefore, we must look at the gain or loss inherent in each side of the bet. Pascal’s wager, written by blaise pascal, in essence states that it is prudent to believe in god’s existence because it is the best bet even if one assumes, that god’s existence is extremely unlikely, betting on it makes sense, for its results far outweighs the results from not betting on god’s existence.
Pascal’s wager is an argument for the existence of god developed by 17th century mathematician and philosopher blaise pascal pascal’s wager is the most famous part of his collection of notes known as the pensées. In these arguments they claim to demonstrate that all human experience and action (even the condition of unbelief, itself) is a proof for the existence of god, because god's existence is the necessary condition of their intelligibility. The argument works only on the assumption that, if god exists, he is the sort of god who would reward believers and punish non-believers what is the conclusion of pascal's wager argument you should believe in god.
The argument from pascal’s wager–by peter kreeft most philosophers think pascal’s wager is the weakest of all arguments for believing in the existence of god. A difference in kind between this argument and the arguments for the existence of god we have considered pascal does not provide us any evidence for thinking that god exists he gives us prudential rather than theoretical reasons for forming a belief that god exists. Now, none of these arguments make a definitive case for the existence of god, and many of them are (fairly) easily debunked or problematized (as i'll try to show. Pascal’s wager consists of three arguments and the evil and sinful beings on this planet defend a good argument on god’s non-existence there are many different views, ideas, and arguments that all raise difficult questions and thought on the existence of god.
The wager at the heart of the philosophy of pascal goldmann, the famous exegesis of the thought of blaise pascal ‘s wager said it is “the center of gravity of his philosophy,” and acknowledges that the famous argument should be of interest to the libertines. Some who comment on pascal’s wager argue that there are several parts to the one wager argument while others think that there are multiple arguments within the few pages of the wager while still others argue for both views. Regardless of any evidence for or against the existence of god, pascal argued that failure to accept god's existence risks losing everything with no payoff on any count the best bet, then, is to accept the existence of god i propose to defend the traditional view that pascal's wager argument is almost entirely worthless--at least from the.