Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Harumi · 05-08-2002, 02:00 PM

Or...at least that's what I think the other one is called...I'm not sure. It's the wager that countered Pascal's.

Can someone give me a good summary of what the two of these are? And any websites that might mention about it?

Arguments such as these have probably been discussed a lot, so I'm sure that there are probably books talking about and refuting these. If there are any books, please tell me!!! You guys are smart, and I'm not very bright, so I'd appreciate any help.

Harumi

Capt_Drakes · 05-08-2002, 02:24 PM

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/wager.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/wager.html</a>

the library here is quite good.

Harumi · 05-08-2002, 02:47 PM

Could you explain to me what Smith's Wager is then?
Does the library give links to where you can buy books on the subject?

By the way, thank you.

Harumi

RaptorRed · 05-10-2002, 05:41 AM

Smith's Wager:

Quote:

The existence of god can be proven only by reason, and our reason tells us that such a being does not exist, and that, as a consequence, belief in this being should be rejected by rational people. Now the question arises, "But we are fallible human beings. What if our reason is wrong here? What if there is a god who will punish us for non-belief, and whose existence cannot be proven by reason?" Here is where Smith's wager comes in. Wager on reason, Smith says. This should lead you to atheism. There are only four possibilities, as follows:

1) There is no god. The atheist is correct, and consequently lives a happy, fulfilling life free of mindless dogma and emotional tyranny.

2) The second possibility is the god of deism, who was said to have created the universe and then left it to run on its own. There is nothing to fear from such a god; he or she is impersonal and does not reward or punish us.

3) This third possibility is a god that is concerned with humanity. He is a fair and just god. Such a god, in his infinite goodness would never punish anyone for honest errors of reason, assuming of course that there is no moral turpitude involved. Here again we have no reason to fear such a god. In fact, if our reason is what separates us from the animals, then not to use it might be construed as the gravest of "sins." If anyone is in danger of punishment here, it is the theist, and not the atheist.

4) The last possibility concerns an unjust god. Unconcerned with justice, he will burn us whether our mistakes are honest or not. There is, after all, no greater injustice than to punish someone for an honest error of belief, and yet that is just what this fourth god, the Christian god, promises to do. He is unconcerned with issues such as honesty and intellectual integrity and, according to the Bible, will burn us eternally if we doubt his existence. No matter what kind of life we have led, this issue is central in determining where we will spend eternity. Gullibility thus becomes a virtue rather than a vice. Therefore, by definition, this fourth god is a most unprincipalled deity. Christians have always felt that they are in a better position here, but if one thinks about it, they are really in the same boat as the atheist. Why? Simply because, if this god really gets such a thrill out of creating people just to burn them, what could give him greater enjoyment than to promise the Christian eternal bliss and then turn around and burn him too? Certainly, you cannot trust the word of an unjust god when he promises you something, since he must have a sadistic streak in him to begin with.

This then is the wager: Use you reason in all areas of human endeavor, including religion. This should lead you to atheism. If there is no god, you are correct. If the Deistic god exists, you have nothing to fear. If a just god exists, there is again nothing to fear; the only one who is at risk is the believer. And if the fourth god exists, we do indeed live in a nightmarish universe, but the Christian is in no better position than the atheist, so why not live our lives as rational human beings? Why not do all we can to make this world, our only home, a better place and do all we can to make life worthwhile and enjoyable for all? In Smith's wager, there truly is nothing to lose!

05-08-2002, 02:00 PM	#1
Harumi Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 3,184	Pascal's Wager vs. Smith's Wager Or...at least that's what I think the other one is called...I'm not sure. It's the wager that countered Pascal's. Can someone give me a good summary of what the two of these are? And any websites that might mention about it? Arguments such as these have probably been discussed a lot, so I'm sure that there are probably books talking about and refuting these. If there are any books, please tell me!!! You guys are smart, and I'm not very bright, so I'd appreciate any help. Harumi

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-08-2002, 02:24 PM	#2
Capt_Drakes Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ventura, CA Posts: 1,870	<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/wager.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/wager.html</a> the library here is quite good.

05-08-2002, 02:47 PM	#3
Harumi Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 3,184	Could you explain to me what Smith's Wager is then? Does the library give links to where you can buy books on the subject? By the way, thank you. Harumi

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.