EPTPascal's Wager: The worst odds in the universe - Page 2
| Blogs > HardlyNever |
|
GERMasta
Germany212 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6590 Posts
On February 19 2013 09:48 Sauwelios wrote: I have no idea how you got to infinite gods. I really don't. so are you asking if Pascals wager can be used for other religions then? If so I can understand where the confusion is coming from. Because Blaise Pascal made it centered on Christianity. There is no point discussing how it applies in the case of an infinite amount of God's when that's not what he was relating anything he was talking about to. That is why it's a 50/50 chance. He wasn't talking about all the Egyptian God's or the Greeks, or Romans. He wasn't even giving consideration to there being more than a single God. He was talking about the Catholic church and why an Atheist was better off to believe in God because of this rather simple minded way of looking at things. It's good to look deeply into things but when something is said to be simple, and to be taken as a very simple concept, sometimes you start to grasp at things that are unrelated. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On February 19 2013 09:48 Sauwelios wrote: I have no idea how you got to infinite gods. I really don't. You seem to be arguing that the "God" choice is a catch-all term for any sort of belief in any number of "higher powers (one or more)." Correct me if I'm wrong. Edit: The christian God is part of the category of all gods in general; either the christian God exists or he does not. But that doesn't mean all possible gods in general do not exist if we deny the christian God's existence. Is what I'm referring to, specifically. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
GERMasta
Germany212 Posts
| ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On February 19 2013 10:02 sam!zdat wrote: It's not a 50/50 chance for Pascal. The chances are irrelevant. Even if the chance is 1/inf., you still make the wager, because you have everything to lose if you're wrong, and everything to gain if you're right. That gets us back to : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager#Argument_from_inconsistent_revelations And really what my OP was about. Why would you chose one specific choice, the Christian god (the flood making, virgin raping one, that says there are no other gods, so we can be clear on definitions), when you could just say I'll take them all, but not that one in particular. Aren't those much better odds? My original point was that Pascal had it all wrong to begin with. It isn't a 50/50 shot at all. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
LockeTazeline
2390 Posts
Assume that if God (singular, plural, whatever) exists, then He wants to be known on some degree. (Reason: If He doesn't want to be known, you won't know Him; if He doesn't care, it's an exercise in futility) Thus, if God does exist, then the truth of who He is likely resides in one of the major religions. If you apply Pascal's Wager to this, you get basically the same think except with 6 (or however many) choices instead of 2 in which case choosing one of the God beliefs is still a better "wager" than non-belief. (with a reasonable chance at choosing correctly) Personally, I don't think Pascal's Wager should be used to "choose" a religion. Investigating, rather, would be more practical imo. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43517 Posts
| ||
|
Epishade
United States2267 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43517 Posts
On February 19 2013 11:32 Epishade wrote: ^That video could not have summed up Pascal's Wager any better imo. Thanks for posting it. Sure  Those seem to be the classic, stereotypical arguments that the layman presents for PW, already refuted neatly. I'm a fan of Matt Dillahunty (that speaker) in general; he seems to be rather coherent and knows how to dismantle arguments quite readily. | ||
|
PassionFruit
294 Posts
I haven't seen a good counter to this argument as of date even with all the crap on wiki and youtube or what not. But...fuck logic and belief. I'll live my life and if I end up burning in hell eternally, then I"ll burn in hell eternally. It is what it is. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43517 Posts
On February 19 2013 11:47 PassionFruit wrote: Pascal's Wager is actually legit on a mathematical level. If you take hell to be negative infinity, then it is in your benefit to believe in something so long as the possibility of that belief has a finite probability of being true. All the counters to alternative gods or a false dichotomy or etc... doesn't do anything because the possibility that the belief is true is still finite. It's a basic EV analysis where the gains are infinite and the losses are finite. Unless you're a pure atheist where belief in god is exactly 0%, you take the wager. I haven't seen a good counter to this argument as of date even with all the crap on wiki and youtube or what not. But...fuck logic and belief. I'll live my life and if I end up burning in hell eternally, then I"ll burn in hell eternally. It is what it is. You're misconstruing belief in something with probability that it actually exists. The video I just posted covers that... if a deity existed, surely he wouldn't fall for your "Well I'll just cover my ass with a belief" argument, not to mention the fact that belief isn't even subject to the will. In other words, if I'm skeptical of a belief because it lacks evidence, I can't just *choose* to truly believe in it. I can pretend to believe in it, but I won't actually be a believer, because I know it's full of crap. The video also refutes how PW fails on several other levels. It's really not sound, even if you consider the probability of a deity existing to be any non-zero chance. | ||
|
PassionFruit
294 Posts
On February 19 2013 11:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: You're misconstruing belief in something with probability that it actually exists. The video I just posted covers that... if a deity existed, surely he wouldn't fall for your "Well I'll just cover my ass with a belief" argument, not to mention the fact that belief isn't even subject to the will. In other words, if I'm skeptical of a belief because it lacks evidence, I can't just *choose* to truly believe in it. I can pretend to believe in it, but I won't actually be a believer, because I know it's full of crap. The video also refutes how PW fails on several other levels. It's really not sound, even if you consider the probability of a deity existing to be any non-zero chance. Right. But how do you know whether your interpretation of belief is right or mine is right? Unless you can commune with god, no one does. So you see, unless you are 100% sure you are right and 100% sure I am wrong, Pascal's Wager holds. As long as there is still the slightest possibility that my interpretation of belief is true, then the probability is finite. It doesn't matter if it is .0000001, because compared with infinity any finite probability is essentially moot. You still take the wager. Edit 1: The problem is all with the concept of hell being negative infinity and heaven being positive infinity. You are just fucked on a mathematical level if you put that on one side of the equation while it is absent from the other. It's a problem rigged to taking the wager from the very start. Pascal was a tricky dude. Edit 2: I've seen the video, and it refutes absolutely nothing. You cannot make an appeal to philosophy when the wager is based on mathematics. Everything he says merely contributes to a reduction in the probability. But, and most important, it is never reduced to zero. You still take the wager. | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
I love the ending of that. "And by the way, to future callers, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO LIE..." XD. But I'm not even sure if Pascal's wager is really that bad. I think I could refute some of those arguments Matt makes. He says that you do lose something, in that all the time you spend praying is life lost here and now, and if there is no afterlife, then you lose out on quite a lot. But with the Christian religion, for example, all it asks is that you make an earnest prayer to God and believe in Jesus before you die, there is nothing about having to waste your entire life in a church; just five minutes at the end of your life . Of course this may not be true of all religions, in which case he has a point.Then he says, its a false dichotomy. While this is true, it doesn't change the fact that some odds are better than no odds at all (aka believing in nothing, where presumably no God would take you) like Sam was saying. I think the only counterargument is that there may be other Gods that take offence to you praying to one God, but are okay with you being an atheist because at least its not *as* offensive. With this in mind I think it would be wisest to pray to all the potential Gods and say "I don't really know who exists, so if you respect me as an atheist, understand that I have to choose one God to maximize my chances". Man this is sounding so silly but it still makes some sense .The same goes for the argument that God would not be silly enough to accept someone who, as Matt puts it, is trying to "cover their ass". I mean apparently, from what it says in the bible, as long as you do this one basic thing and accept Jesus apparently it IS okay! I mean all of religion is silly in general, why should this one silly decision be the thing that goes too far, that makes it all unacceptable to God? And even if it isn't known to be acceptable, again the point is some odds are better than no odds at all (i.e. there is still a chance God would accept it). So why not choose a random religion? Or better yet why not make a plea to all Gods, explaining what you're going to do, so that you maximize the chance that they will have pity and accept you (in case they're one of those Gods that would be angry if you believed in another God, but would be understanding if you were an atheist). Then you can choose the God that seems really popular, whether its the Christian one, or the Islamic one, or whatever, and take your chances with the Gods that wouldn't be forgiving, while hoping the Gods that are forgiving (and actually exist) will be understanding thanks to your plea. Or maybe that's actually a bad wager, and the chances of there being more unforgiving gods than there are forgiving are high? Maybe then it would be better to believe in all potential Gods like HardlyNever points out, and reduce their wrath by going the most forgivable option and believing in them all! I think it makes sense to do one of the two options before you die. You lose nothing except maybe a little mental dignity to yourself. But really, I think even a minute chance at having an eternal afterlife is worth it, just in case this universe really is that ridiculous  . I'm sorry I type so much everyone. I don't think anyone will read this lolMan passionfruit basically said everything much more clearly and concisely. I have to agree, Matt is basically just talking probabilities. You would still take a probability at having an eternal afterlife over nothing. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43517 Posts
On February 19 2013 11:58 PassionFruit wrote: Right. But how do you know whether your interpretation of belief is right or mine is right? Unless you can commune with god, no one does. So you see, unless you are 100% sure you are right and 100% sure I am wrong, Pascal's Wager holds. As long as there is still the slightest possibility that my interpretation of belief is true, then the probability is finite. It doesn't matter if it is .0000001, because compared with infinity any finite probability is essentially moot. You still take the wager. Edit: The problem is all with the concept of hell being negative infinity and heaven being positive infinity. You are just fucked on a mathematical level if you put that on one side of the equation while it is absent from the other. It's a problem rigged to taking the wager from the very start. Pascal was a tricky dude. If it wasn't the case that there were countless gods and religions and threats of hells and heavens that all contradict one another and must be mutually exclusive by definition, then Pascal's Wager would probably be okay. But it's not dichotomous between Christian God and No God. There are tons of other choices, which means that whatever arbitrary probability you choose for the existence of your specific deity is useless because you'll have to give the same number to every other god and religion, but they cancel each other out, etc. You don't need to interpret belief; you just need to recognize that multiple beliefs exist. Plus all the other reasons why PW doesn't work that are mentioned in the video (e.g. you can't just choose to believe in something that you don't believe in). | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On February 19 2013 12:10 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: If it wasn't the case that there were countless gods and religions and threats of hells and heavens that all contradict one another and must be mutually exclusive by definition, then Pascal's Wager would probably be okay. But it's not dichotomous between Christian God and No God. There are tons of other choices, which means that whatever arbitrary probability you choose for the existence of your specific deity is useless because you'll have to give the same number to every other god and religion, but they cancel each other out, etc. You don't need to interpret belief; you just need to recognize that multiple beliefs exist. Plus all the other reasons why PW doesn't work that are mentioned in the video. How do you *know* they "cancel" out? Why not take a wager and pray to all of them, just in case they do accept you? And if we're assuming they wouldn't accept an atheist and they really do cancel out, why wouldn't you take a chance on one of them rather than none of them? Especially the Christian one - all you have to do is pray for 5 minutes before the end of your life. Even if it looks like you're "covering your ass", its still a possibility of eternal life over nothing! (also, it seems like "covering your ass" was something that is sanctioned by Christianity. They don't say anything about having to attend church your life, just to have the belief before you die, which is why they have conversions on one's death bed) | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43517 Posts
On February 19 2013 12:14 radscorpion9 wrote: How do you *know* they "cancel" out? Why not take a wager and pray to all of them, just in case they do accept you? And if we're assuming they wouldn't accept an atheist, why wouldn't you take a chance on one of them rather than none of them? Especially the Christian one - all you have to do is pray for 5 minutes before the end of your life. Even if it looks like you're "covering your ass", its still a possibility of eternal life over nothing! I think most Christians would argue that that is not the proper way to get into Heaven... although apparently there's plenty of argument in Christianity regarding that anyway. I was raised Catholic, and my family is Catholic, and I'm fairly certain they would not promote the idea that you could reject God your entire life and then pretend to love him for two minutes and everything would be fine. After all, an omniscient deity would know what you're up to You're going to fool a god? Why not take a wager and pray to all of them, just in case they do accept you? Because most of the religions say you can't pray to others (including Christianity), and this would waste my entire life on something (or, in this case, multiple somethings) that are absurd. | ||
|
PassionFruit
294 Posts
On February 19 2013 12:10 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: If it wasn't the case that there were countless gods and religions and threats of hells and heavens that all contradict one another and must be mutually exclusive by definition, then Pascal's Wager would probably be okay. But it's not dichotomous between Christian God and No God. There are tons of other choices, which means that whatever arbitrary probability you choose for the existence of your specific deity is useless because you'll have to give the same number to every other god and religion, but they cancel each other out, etc. You don't need to interpret belief; you just need to recognize that multiple beliefs exist. Plus all the other reasons why PW doesn't work that are mentioned in the video. Nothing cancels out. The overriding assumption is that only one belief is true. Thus there is only one heaven and one hell and one right god. You either pick right or you pick wrong. So long as there are a finite number of choices, you must pick. It's simple mathematics. The only thing to focus upon is the finite nature of the probability that your choice is right or wrong. I'm not saying you should use PW to dictate your belief in god, but every single attempt I have seen to dismantle the argument fails. Because, once again, you are doomed to take the wager given the beginning parameters of the problem. I don't know how to counter the argument other than change the parameters. I don't know how that can be done, but at least I'm honest about it instead of appealing to some failing argument like a false dichotomy or multiple gods or something. I just say fuck Pascal's wager, and I'll live how I want to regardless of the very small likelihood that I'm going to burn in hell for all eternity. I'm honest about my irrationality. | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On February 19 2013 12:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I think most Christians would argue that that is not the proper way to get into Heaven... although apparently there's plenty of argument in Christianity regarding that anyway. I was raised Catholic, and my family is Catholic, and I'm fairly certain they would not promote the idea that you could reject God your entire life and then pretend to love him for two minutes and everything would be fine. After all, an omniscient deity would know what you're up to You're going to fool a god? Well sure, it seems unlikely. But there's still a *chance* isn't there? You can't just assume God won't accept you, you don't really know God's mind, if that entity exists. So why not take the chance at eternity over nothing? If it actually just takes 5 minutes? I mean the whole story of religion is ridiculous anyways. Why would he send his son to die if he has infinite power. So why all of a sudden praying just before you die is seen as ridiculous, or unacceptable by God when most of the story isn't logical? Maybe it is acceptable, and God works in truly mysterious ways Because most of the religions say you can't pray to others (including Christianity), and this would waste my entire life on something (or, in this case, multiple somethings) that are absurd. Oh I agree in this case. I just meant that you pray to all of them at the end of your life, because there is a possibility they might accept you. Or you could just gamble and choose one God (at the end). But either way its better than nothing. The only thing you lose is a little self-respect On February 19 2013 12:17 PassionFruit wrote: I just say fuck Pascal's wager, and I'll live how I want to regardless of the very small likelihood that I'm going to burn in hell for all eternity. I'm honest about my irrationality. That's not so bad . I think its highly unlikely that if God exists he is that irrational. Just make sure you pray for 5 minutes when you're 93 years old, since you lose nothing at that point. But really I think the probability of God being so irrational is so low, that if you don't pray it won't make much difference probabilistically speaking, compared to if you took Pascal's wager. | ||
| ||
