A Conversation for Pascal's Wager
No Consequence
CaffienatedMonkey- (formally SupremeEarthworm) Dreaming of Sleep Started conversation Aug 25, 2004
Maybe I'm reading the first chart wrong, which probably is the case considering as though my math skills are nil, but wouldn't it be better if you chose to wager against God. This is of course under the assumption that "no news is good news". Basically the chances are skewwed towards that happening. If you believe there is a 50% chance of going to Heaven. If you don't believe a 50% chance of going to Hell. Basically meaning, there is a whole a 50% chance of "No consequence" whatsoever. While there is only a 25% of Heaven and Hell respectively. So why risk it? Why risk being wrong or right? When you have a chance of nothing happening at all... A half being more than a quarter, it would be in one's favor to wager against God.
No Consequence
Martin Harper Posted Aug 27, 2004
The wager is predicated on the idea that you cannot do nothing at all. That is: either you believe in and put your trust and faith in God, or you do not. To do nothing, in this view, is to wager against God.
No Consequence
CaffienatedMonkey- (formally SupremeEarthworm) Dreaming of Sleep Posted Feb 13, 2005
And I'm saying that can't be BAD thing if nothing happens... 
No Consequence
Martin Harper Posted Feb 13, 2005
Well sure, if you do nothing, and nothing happens, then that can't be BAD.
On the other hand, if you do nothing, and you are damned to an eternity of hellfire and torment, then that might be a BAD thing.
You the jury...
Key: Complain about this post
No Consequence
More Conversations for Pascal's Wager
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."