dowhat1can wrote:Bmandude14 wrote:If an individual had to choose whether he continued existing or god continued existing. He’d choose himself every time. Why? Because the only reason why we believe in god is for our own personal gain, the glorious afterlife. No after life, no god. If we don’t get what we want, why should we believe in him. ...
Lets say god did exist, and he promised everybody else an afterlife(if there good and all) but not you. But you have the choice to say whether or not he exists. But if he exists you don't when you do and he does not. Now, I'm sure we’d find the altruists come out and many of them would sacrifice their entire ETERNITY for the sake of others. But I'm confident most people would care too much about existing for REST OF TIME that they’d make god not exist and choose themselves over everyone.
Pascal's Wager fails for the same reason this argument would fail for most sincere Christian believers -- namely, persons who believe in God only to be assured of an afterlife would be believing for the wrong reason and consequently would lose that which they seek to gain.
So what is assumed in the passage quoted above might be true for the unreflective church-goer, but would not be true for someone like Kierkegaard who defines faith as subjective truth which is ...S. Kierkegaard wrote:... an objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness is the truth, the highest truth attainable for the individual.
... and this faith would be irrelevant to the well-being of the individual who has it as was illustrated in S.K.'s Fear and Trembling.
Pascal's Wager does not fail. Only the gross misrepresentations of it by his enemies fail, as red herrings. The wager, in game theory is that the choice to believe over the choice to disbelieve, when you do the cost benefit analysis, makes believing the more profitable choice. But, the choice to believe requires that the one so choosing submit their affections to the will and power of God. God requires one to love Him totally, and, being God, is well able to make one love Him, with all their heart, mind, etc. He only does this work, however, for those who so choose to have it done to them, and ask aright. That is the point. Is it a good idea to ask God to do this work, or not? If God is, and heaven and Hell are also a part of this universe, then you have more to gain than lose by making this choice. If God is not, nor does Heaven and Hell exist, the choice costs a small amount, but there are gains as well. Put the whole together with the magnitude of the costs and benefits, and the probabilities of all the options, and the net result favors believing. And, then, insofar as it might be necessary, one must go on to authorize God to do the necessary transformations in one's heart that validate the choice to believe. Pascal was quite clear that choosing to become a believer had to be met with an experience with God Himself, doing this transformation. He himself waited for this experience, God came to him and worked, and he then loved God.
But free will trumps game theory, as proven by the hordes who look at their choices, and either decide not to play, taking the default gamble (House wins all!), or choose the bet that they "like," going subjective to affirm that it is their life, by God, and they can be stupid if they want to be! Pascal's Wager is only for the responsible and thoughtful, who view all subjectivity, including their own, with suspicion.