Faith Without Reasoning Rhetorical Analysis

Sometimes, belief is considered beneficial regardless of whether it holds truth or not. For example, if one enters a sports competition as a low underdog, a strong belief in team unity and ability can propel the potentially losing team to victory. This idea that meaningful beliefs overshadow those that are true is called pragmatism. Blaise Pascal, a French mathematician, physician, and religious philosopher (Biography.com Editors), took a pragmatic approach to the widely discussed topic of God’s existence. In his piece Faith Without Reasoning, Pascal gives us a scenario penned “Pascal’s Wager,” which insists that from a gambler’s standpoint, we should always side with accepting God’s existence. Although after careful consideration it essentially fails to properly carry out its purpose, it is still considered one of the greatest philosophical arguments for a belief in God. Pascal begins with this fact, “...it is certain, that either there is a God, or there is not; there can be no medium.” (Pascal 35). Next, both …show more content…
This idea of infinite reward is crucial to understanding the argument of chance because if any benefit is considered unending, then even a slight chance of possibility makes it reasonable to wager in favor. The opposite is considered for the final possibility, for if we do not believe in God, and He does in fact exist, then we will experience infinite loss with eternity in hell. Using the same logic as before, we see it is best to never take a bet that has even a remote possibility of bringing infinite torture and pain. After weighing the consequences of each possibility, it is clear that we should always say God exists. Only a fool would bet against this because the stakes are so high. Pascal sums it up nicely in this way, “If you gain, you gain every thing; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, therefore, that He is, without delay” (Pascal