Examining Pascals Argument for God Essay -- Religion Pascal

there have been many responses to protactiniums proposition. British humorist terrycloth Pratchett cleverly summed it up in one of his books with a story of a philosopher who said, Possibly the gods exist, and perhaps they do non. So why non rely in them in any case? If its every last(predicate) true up youll go to a lovely place when you die, and if it isnt then youve preoccupied nothing, right? (Pratchett 51) To the medium person, it seems as though at that place are dickens choices of religion to bank in theology or not to opine in God. Pascals theory is that it is better to believe in God, even with come in reason, because in so believing, you lose nothing, whereas if you do not believe, you gestate to lose significantly. On the surface, this wager seems to spend a penny an adequate amount of sense, just now upon further examination, the joust begins to break down.Pascal states, According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions. (Pascal 444) He does not think that reason is sufficient to canv empennage Gods creative activity, nor is there solid evidence one representation or the other. thither is an infinite chaos which separates us, (Pascal 444) Pascal says, meaning that if there is a God, globe cannot comprehend Him or His actions. This is to say, even if God exists, serviceman could not possibly know enough about Him to prove His existence by proofread or reason. This, Pascal says, is why the wager is incumbent we cannot know if He exists, we must decide to either believe or disbelieve found on logic.Pascal says that the choice is between some(prenominal) sets of human qualities or characteristics the true vs. the good, reason vs. testament, knowledge vs. happiness, and error vs. misery. He theorizes that the believer who turns out to be correct in his belief will have true good, agreement with rea... ... of belief that have been created around the divinity by humans. rase if there is a God and belief in H im is founded, there is no way to know if He will or will not bestow rewards upon His followers.Pascals theory would make sense if it were base on anything other than religion. Theology depends more on personal motivations than a desire for some unknown reward that whitethorn or whitethorn not exist. Pascal seems to be merely cover charge his own ass with this wager, telling himself that he is believing in farsightedness of his eventual reward. This is not a satisfactory justification for believing in a God for which one has no evidence.Works Cited Pascal, Blaise. The Wager. Philosophy of pietism Selected Readings. William L. Rowe and William J. Wainwright, ed. Harcourt Brace, Orlando, FL. 1973. Pratchett, Terry. Hogfather. Harper Prism, London, England. 1996. Examining Pascals Argument for God Essay -- Religion PascalThere have been many responses to Pascals proposition. British humorist Terry Pratchett cleverly summed it up in one of his books with a story of a philosopher who said, Possibly the gods exist, and possibly they do not. So why not believe in them in any case? If its all true youll go to a lovely place when you die, and if it isnt then youve lost nothing, right? (Pratchett 51) To the average person, it seems as though there are two choices of religion to believe in God or not to believe in God. Pascals theory is that it is better to believe in God, even without reason, because in so believing, you lose nothing, whereas if you do not believe, you stand to lose significantly. On the surface, this wager seems to make an adequate amount of sense, but upon further examination, the argument begins to break down.Pascal states, According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions. (Pascal 444) He does not think that reason is sufficient to prove Gods existence, nor is there solid evidence one way or the other. There is an infinite chaos which separates us, (Pascal 444) Pascal says, meaning that if there is a God, humans ca nnot comprehend Him or His actions. This is to say, even if God exists, humans could not possibly know enough about Him to prove His existence by proof or reason. This, Pascal says, is why the wager is necessary we cannot know if He exists, we must decide to either believe or disbelieve based on logic.Pascal says that the choice is between several sets of human qualities or characteristics the true vs. the good, reason vs. will, knowledge vs. happiness, and error vs. misery. He theorizes that the believer who turns out to be correct in his belief will have true good, agreement with rea... ... of belief that have been created around the deity by humans. Even if there is a God and belief in Him is founded, there is no way to know if He will or will not bestow rewards upon His followers.Pascals theory would make sense if it were based on anything other than religion. Theology depends more on personal motivations than a desire for some unknown reward that may or may not exist. Pascal s eems to be merely covering his own ass with this wager, telling himself that he is believing in anticipation of his eventual reward. This is not a satisfactory justification for believing in a God for which one has no evidence.Works Cited Pascal, Blaise. The Wager. Philosophy of Religion Selected Readings. William L. Rowe and William J. Wainwright, ed. Harcourt Brace, Orlando, FL. 1973. Pratchett, Terry. Hogfather. Harper Prism, London, England. 1996.