Essay on Theory Or Manipulation : Did Pascal Truly Have A Wager?

859 Words Mar 16th, 2016 4 Pages
Theory or Manipulation: Did Pascal Truly Have a Wager?

Few things in society can be as convincing as the promise of reward and the draw of self-preservation. Pascal’s Wager is a theory that draws on those exact human emotions, rather than on logic itself, and because of that, I myself deem it as a weak, and possibly invalid, argument. In this paper I will talk about how Pascal promises little or no loss from believing, the fault that Pascal does not address the possibility of more than just a Christian God, and the fact that choosing what to believe is deemed impossible.

Pascal’s Wager states that believing in the Christian God will earn you infinite reward; presumably heaven, however Pascal’s belief that this reward system is based on believing in the one God he himself believed in is solely an assumption and fairly bias, causing this premise to be considered invalid and untrue. He roughly makes the claim “if one does not believe in the Christian God and the Christian God does not exist then one gains little or nothing.” On the contrary, should Pascal be wrong about the distribution of infinite reward and punishment, the disbelief in said God could bring a lot to gain, perhaps even the same reward that Pascal himself has promised to those who DO believe in the Christian God. On top of that, should God not exist, and the life that you live is truly the only chance at life we are given, then following a certain religion would simply keep you from experiencing all that…

Related Documents