An Interesting Discussion on Pascal's Wager

[PureX]

Again, a *very* different way of using the word than I am accustomed to. I would not say i was acting on faith when I was, in fact, acting on hope.

The hope and the action combined are called faith.

 

[Polymath257]

Exactly. And that hope is the difference between faith and belief.

Again, I can *hope* for something but not have *faith* that it will happen. At least, that is the way I use the words.

 

[Polymath257]

The hope and the action combined are called faith.

Very strange. That is not how I use the words at all.

Online dictionary:

Faith (noun)​

1. (a) allegiance to duty or a person: loyalty
(b) fidelity to one's promises

2. (a) belief and trust in and loyalty to God
(b) firm belief in something for which there is no proof

3. something that is believed especially with strong conviction

NONE of those mention action or hope.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Sounds like you're choosing attitudes or courses of actions, not beliefs.

Choosing to live as if something is true is not the same thing as actually believing that it's true.

Yeah, I chose - 21 years ago now - to live as if the universe was under the sway of a benign and loving infinite power. Not just the God of Einstein and Spinoza, though mine is similar to that God concept; but also a God who is personal, who cares about us humans.

And that choice has paid off for me, a thousandfold. It’s a miracle I didn’t finish dead or in prison a long time ago - believe me or not, as you see fit.

Some things have to be seen to be believed. Others have to be believed, before they can be seen.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Again, I can *hope* for something but not have *faith* that it will happen. At least, that is the way I use the words.

I don’t have faith in outcomes; I have faith that whatever the outcome, good or bad, I will be given the support and guidance I need to respond in the best possible way.

 

[PureX]

Very strange. That is not how I use the words at all.

It's how the Bible defines faith, and so should be how most theists mean it. Unfortunately, organized religion has perverted it into meaning unquestioned belief and blind action so as to enforce it's control.

Again, I can *hope* for something but not have *faith* that it will happen. At least, that is the way I use the words.

Faith is both hope and action. It's hope turned to action. This shouldn't be difficult to grasp as we all engage in faith if this type often.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

What if *no* religion seems even remotely likely?

None of them seem likely to me, so I don't have an answer. What I took from the video is the idea that if belief (which is likely not something we can consciously control) does not matter and actions (which we can control) do matter, then it potentially could make sense to pick the religion you think is most likely to be true and perform its actions. I'm not even advocating for this view, it's just a different way of viewing Pascal's Wager that makes it more interesting. Since I was a child, I've never even understood the term "belief" or its definition, or how anyone could even verify or demonstrate what they believe. Action is something that's objectively measurable and much easier to define from the perspective of applying decision theory as Pascal's wager does. If beliefs can't be decided (which I suspect they can't), then Pascal's Wager doesn't make sense in any belief-based view.

 

[PureX]

Very strange. That is not how I use the words at all.

Online dictionary:

Faith (noun)​

1. (a) allegiance to duty or a person: loyalty
(b) fidelity to one's promises

2. (a) belief and trust in and loyalty to God
(b) firm belief in something for which there is no proof

3. something that is believed especially with strong conviction

NONE of those mention action or hope.

Those are very poor definitions. And dictionaries are not a source of logic, reason, nor truth. For this dictionary to neglect the famous biblical definition shows that itis a very poor source of information.

 

[Koldo]

Yeah, I chose - 21 years ago now - to live as if the universe was under the sway of a benign and loving infinite power. Not just the God of Einstein and Spinoza, though mine is similar to that God concept; but also a God who is personal, who cares about us humans.

And that choice has paid off for me, a thousandfold. It’s a miracle I didn’t finish dead or in prison a long time ago - believe me or not, as you see fit.

Some things have to be seen to be believed. Others have to be believed, before they can be seen.

Choosing to live as if something is true doesn't require believing that something is true.

 

[McBell]

Those are very poor definitions. And dictionaries are not a source of logic, reason, nor truth. For this dictionary to neglect the famous biblical definition shows that itis a very poor source of information.

What is it you claim is the "famous Biblical definition" of faith?

The one i hear most often is:

Hebrews 11:1-3​

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.​

For by it the elders obtained a good report.​

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.​

​

Perhaps you have a "famous Biblical" definition that includes 'action'?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Right. And in Blaise Pascal's case, the specific religion he had in mind was presumably Catholic Christianity as it existed in 17th Century France.



And in those cases where Christianity isn't about much more than "accepting Jesus into your heart," the objection to Pascal's Wager becomes more about objecting to the idea that we can deliberately choose what we will believe.

... but the original form of the Wager did assume that practicing a religion would come with a cost in time, tithes, etc.

I certainly object to any version of Pascal's Wager that is based on belief. I agree it's unlikely we can choose our beliefs, in fact, I don't think it's possible to actually define what a "belief" is or know what anyone's beliefs are, including our own. The reason I thought Dr. Jackson's perspective on the wager was interesting was because it was action-based and not belief based. To use an analogy, we know that the odds of winning the lottery jackpot are less than 1 in 100,000,000. But let's say that the punishment for not playing the lottery at least once per week was life in prison, and it only cost $1 a week to play. Would you play? I definitely would.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yeah, I chose - 21 years ago now - to live as if the universe was under the sway of a benign and loving infinite power. Not just the God of Einstein and Spinoza, though mine is similar to that God concept; but also a God who is personal, who cares about us humans.

And that choice has paid off for me, a thousandfold. It’s a miracle I didn’t finish dead or in prison a long time ago - believe me or not, as you see fit.

People don't choose their beliefs, so it's not clear if you're talking about choosing to live in a way that was consistent with what you felt to be true or if you're talking about pretending to believe in God despite not believing in God, hoping that the actual belief would come later ("fake it 'til you make it", basically).

Some things have to be seen to be believed. Others have to be believed, before they can be seen.

Again: I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. Are you talking about being convinced by indirect evidence before you have conclusive evidence, or are you talking about feigning belief out of the hope you will develop real belief later?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Choosing to live as if something is true doesn't require believing that something is true.

Perhaps not, initially. But subsequent experience will either confirm or invalidate the utility of our faith. In other words, we put our faith to the test, refining our beliefs as we learn through experience.

 

[Polymath257]

Those are very poor definitions. And dictionaries are not a source of logic, reason, nor truth. For this dictionary to neglect the famous biblical definition shows that itis a very poor source of information.

True. Dictionaries are a source for standard usage of words. Many words have technical definitions that are not in dictionaries. But for ordinary words used in everyday language, dictionaries provide the standard use.

 

[PureX]

What is it you claim is the "famous Biblical definition" of faith?

The one i hear most often is:

Hebrews 11:1-3​

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.​

For by it the elders obtained a good report.​

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.​

​

Perhaps you have a "famous Biblical" definition that includes 'action'?

"Faith without works is dead."

 

[PureX]

True. Dictionaries are a source for standard usage of words. Many words have technical definitions that are not in dictionaries. But for ordinary words used in everyday language, dictionaries provide the standard use.

In this instance we are using the term in a theistic context. So I think the biblical definition is significant. "Faith without works is dead" is a very well known and often used quote. So is the quote about faith being the conviction of hope.

 

[RestlessSoul]

People don't choose their beliefs, so it's not clear if you're talking about choosing to live in a way that was consistent with what you felt to be true or if you're talking about pretending to believe in God despite not believing in God, hoping that the actual belief would come later ("fake it 'til you make it", basically).



Again: I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. Are you talking about being convinced by indirect evidence before you have conclusive evidence, or are you talking about feigning belief out of the hope you will develop real belief later?

Yeah, we speak different languages, you and I. And without each of us at least being willing to communicate in good faith, we’ll never understand each other.

I’m talking about open mindedness being a prerequisite of honest investigation. Am I willing, in other words, to suspend my disbelief long enough to truly search my soul for the God consciousness within?

Seek and ye shall find, it has been said. But first we must be willing to seek honestly, without the “contempt prior to investigation” which guarantees we won’t find anything of worth.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I certainly object to any version of Pascal's Wager that is based on belief. I agree it's unlikely we can choose our beliefs, in fact, I don't think it's possible to actually define what a "belief" is or know what anyone's beliefs are, including our own.

Right. I think it's important to remember that Pascal was addressing the religion he saw around him: Catholicism as practiced in 17th Century France. It wasn't entirely about orthopraxy (as opposed to orthodoxy), but it was pretty close. He was addressing the idea that sacraments are generally effective even if the person receiving them doesn't believe in God.

The important thing in, say, confession is having a contrite heart. I'm sure the priest would say that belief in God was important, but I don't think he would say that a lack of belief would invalidate the sacrament.

Things get really distorted when we try to plunk Pascal's Wager into "sola fide" Protestantism.

The reason I thought Dr. Jackson's perspective on the wager was interesting was because it was action-based and not belief based. To use an analogy, we know that the odds of winning the lottery jackpot are less than 1 in 100,000,000. But let's say that the punishment for not playing the lottery at least once per week was life in prison, and it only cost $1 a week to play. Would you play? I definitely would.

That's the thing, though: Pascal's Wager isn't about a negligible cost like $1 a day. It also doesn't suggest that the negative consequence is a certainty.

How large would the prize need to be if:

- playing costs so much that your family has to skip some meals,

- you've heard a rumour that there are police who will put you in prison for not playing, but you can't confirm that this has actually happened to anyone, and

- you aren't sure whether the lottery is real or a scam.


That's a closer analogy to Pascal's Wager.

The core of Pascal's Wager is that as long as your participation cost is finite and the purported rewards/punishments are infinite, it doesn’t matter how likely the outcomes are or how large the cost is.

 

[Koldo]

Perhaps not, initially. But subsequent experience will either confirm or invalidate the utility of our faith. In other words, we put our faith to the test, refining our beliefs as we learn through experience.

What are you calling faith?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yeah, we speak different languages, you and I. And without each of us at least being willing to communicate in good faith, we’ll never understand each other.

You had benefit of the doubt for a long time. You used it up.

I’m talking about open mindedness being a prerequisite of honest investigation. Am I willing, in other words, to suspend my disbelief long enough to truly search my soul for the God consciousness within?

So you are talking about being in a state of disbelief. Disbelief that you try to suspend, but still disbelief.

I see a certain contradiction - and maybe chauvinism - in the idea that "open mindedness" and "honest investigation" would end up having anything to do with God.

Someone concerned with truth - or anything, really - approaching things with an open mind and no prior biases wouldn't be guided to investigate whether deities are real. An honest, unbiased investigator would have to spend many lifetimes before getting so far down the priority list that giving theism a second look is the best use of their time and energy. The only reason it gets talked about at all is because people like you push this closed-minded idea that the path to the things that matter involves your religion as opposed to, well, anything else.

Seek and ye shall find, it has been said. But first we must be willing to seek honestly, without the “contempt prior to investigation” which guarantees we won’t find anything of worth.

You presume too much. Any contempt I have for religion is a result of investigation, not anything I had prior.