Four arguments against Pascal's wager: objections, rebuttal and reversal
Reducing the scope of the Pascal's wager
The Wager is reserved for people who admit a priori the following hypotheses:
For those who do not fully subscribe to it, there is nothing to save, nothing to gain, so the Pascal's wager is irrelevant.
What kind of bets should be put on the table? [HTML and PDF]
On the likelihood that a given religion is true [HTML and PDF]
What minimises loss, Christianity or atheism? [HTML and PDF]
The possibilities that cannot be excluded by evidence are so numerous and varied that a bet can only be placed on those that are solidly supported. The others must be deliberately ignored.
The probability of the existence of a personal God is too low for there to be any interest in getting involved in religion, and even lower still for a God who would have dictated guidelines to us. In Pascal's wager, the game is not worth the candle. One can, without damage, give up betting and move away from the gambling table of beliefs, because it is more useful and constructive to invest one's time and energy in the secular field.
Wisdom consists in detaching oneself from utopias, i.e. practising religious indifference.
Exploitation of the wager
The indoctrinators use the method of slippage a lot: believing in God implies - or at least we are led to believe - adhering to Catholicism, the only true faith. And, against all logic, the amalgam works: because they believe in God, many people feel morally obliged to be Christians. The state can then be committed to imprinting these "truths" in the minds of all schoolchildren.
What if, instead of betting on God, we wager on man: humanism inherited from the Age of Enlightenment, human rights, democracy and the quest for the common good?
Pascal's wager folder
|Contact | Home > Resisting religious indoctrination|