Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
scatmandingo
· 4 years ago
· FIRST
He makes a big assumption here about the garlic distribution in my home.
13
guest_
· 4 years ago
I like @scatmandingo ‘s reply. Since they covered that already- I’ll cover how ignorant that premise is. People DO do things like use garlic or other charms for all types of spirits etc. this is a HUGE thing especially in eastern homes and even architecture. The US fighter program skips F13 and buildings or other things commonly skip 13th floor or 13 in a sequence. People carry rabbits foots and knock wood. Preppers stock supplies and build bunkers in case of zombies or aliens etc. When it comes to “god” the whole “Pasquale’s wager” doesn’t work though because if there is an all knowing god- you can’t trick an all knowing being by playing pretend. You believe or you don’t.
1
purplepumpkin
· 4 years ago
I absolutely love your take on Pascal's wager. Reading some of his arrogant and pompeous writing has left me dumbfounded in the past and you make a simple but efficient point.
1
guest_
· 4 years ago
Thank you purplepumpkin. Also- lol. Pascal can be a bit much at times. For some reason my phone autocorrected the name the first time and I didn’t notice until like an hour later. But by then I just left it for posterity.
1
Show All
funkmasterrex
· 4 years ago
But like, the fact that an all-knowing god can't be lied to is half of Pascal's Wager, it's what makes it such a dumbass wager in the first place... because at that point, you're trying to lie to an all-knowing god after the fact. This isn't wagering against a nuclear apocalypse or a zombie plague; if there IS an all-knowing god, there's no possible escape in the first place so lying is just stupid; as you said, either you believe or disbelieve in that all-knowing god. If you are someone who claims to believe in that all-knowing god, you wouldn't hedge your bet in the first place... which is the other half; attempting to hedge your bet proves you don't have faith/belief/whatever you want to call it.
1
·
Edited 4 years ago
guest_
· 4 years ago
Ah. Yes. That is a good point. The existence of a wager implies that one believes one outcome more likely than the other. For example a person who says “meh. It’s just a dollar- I’ll play the lottery...” doesn’t likely believe they will win- whereas a person who spends as much as possible playing the lottery believes they will win and make up the losses: thus of the question was wether one believed they would win the lottery- their wager would answer, and in a case where winning requires belief you will win, such as religion- the conclusion is foregone.
funkmasterrex
· 4 years ago
I see what you are saying. But anytime someone comes in with a "just in case" argument, they've lost Pascal's Wager. Those are the people I'm talking about, like the person in the OG meme. Simply implying the "just in case" means the thought has crossed their mind, and even if it's .000000001% of doubt, they are now hedging their bets. The belief that disproves Pascal's Wager might be mentally impossible.
·
Edited 4 years ago
funkmasterrex
· 4 years ago
One's brain might be able to put that doubt into dormancy, bury it in the subconscious, and create defense mechanisms to keep it inaccessible, but it's still there.
guest_
· 4 years ago
I would tend to agree.
pripyatplatypus
· 4 years ago
That is called Pascal's Wager, and is a massive logical fallacy.
2
scatmandingo
· 4 years ago
I’m not sure it qualifies as a fallacy. It was more of a thought experiment and was some of the earliest game theory.
2
guest_
· 4 years ago
You’re not wrong- but I think it’s contextual. When one holds the thought experiment to be true, or just takes it at face value it becomes fallacy. Perhaps not the actual wager- but the sentiment.
