Download Game Pascal Wager

To which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager? . . . Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.

Now, what harm will befall you in taking this side? You will be faithful, humble, grateful, generous, a sincere friend, truthful. Certainly you will not have those poisonous pleasures, glory and luxury; but will you not have others? I will tell you that you will thereby gain in this life, and that, at each step you take on this road, you will see so great certainty of gain, so much nothingness in what you risk, that you will at last recognize that you have wagered for something certain and infinite, for which you have given nothing.

Download 🔥 https://tinurll.com/2y4ISx 🔥

But Pascal, along with modern defenders of the Wager such as Kreeft, would counter that the point of the wager is to provide someone the encouragement they need to know God exists and then cultivate a relationship with him.

Also, we can again make the wager about a commitment to God, rather than about belief. Since evidentialism applies to belief and not action, you could then take the wager without violating evidentialism.

Large language models utilizing transformer neural networks and other deep learning architectures demonstrated unprecedented results in many tasks previously accessible only to human intelligence. In this article, we collaborate with ChatGPT, an AI model developed by OpenAI to speculate on the applications of Rapamycin, in the context of Pascal's Wager philosophical argument commonly utilized to justify the belief in god. In response to the query "Write an exhaustive research perspective on why taking Rapamycin may be more beneficial than not taking Rapamycin from the perspective of Pascal's wager" ChatGPT provided the pros and cons for the use of Rapamycin considering the preclinical evidence of potential life extension in animals. This article demonstrates the potential of ChatGPT to produce complex philosophical arguments and should not be used for any off-label use of Rapamycin.

Imagine you are playing a game for two prizes. You wager blue chips to win blue prizes and red chips to win red prizes. The blue chips are your mind, your reason, and the blue prize is the truth about God's existence. The red chips are your will, your desires, and the red prize is heavenly happiness. Everyone wants both prizes, truth and happiness. Now suppose there is no way of calculating how to play the blue chips. Suppose your reason cannot win you the truth. In that case, you can still calculate how to play the red chips. Believe in God not because your reason can prove with certainty that it is true that God exists but because your will seeks happiness, and God is your only chance of attaining happiness eternally.

Pascal says, "Either God is, or he is not. But to which view shall we be inclined? Reason cannot decide this question. [Remember that Pascal's Wager is an argument for sceptics.] Infinite chaos separates us. At the far end of this infinite distance [death] a coin is being spun that will come down heads [God] or tails [no God]. How will you wager?"

The most powerful part of Pascal's argument comes next. It is not his refutation of atheism as a foolish wager (that comes last) but his refutation of agnosticism as impossible. Agnosticism, not-knowing, maintaining a sceptical, uncommitted attitude, seems to be the most reasonable option. The agnostic says, "The right thing is not to wager at all." Pascal replies, "But you must wager. There is no choice. You are already committed [embarked]." We are not outside observers of life, but participants. We are like ships that need to get home, sailing past a port that has signs on it proclaiming that it is our true home and our true happiness. The ships are our own lives and the signs on the port say "God". The agnostic says he will neither put in at that port (believe) nor turn away from it (disbelieve) but stay anchored a reasonable distance away until the weather clears and he can see better whether this is the true port or a fake (for there are a lot of fakes around). Why is this attitude unreasonable, even impossible? Because we are moving. The ship of life is moving along the waters of time, and there comes a point of no return, when our fuel runs out, when it is too late. The Wager works because of the fact of death.

Once it is decided that we must wager; once it is decided that there are only two options, theism and atheism, not three, theism, atheism, and agnosticism; then the rest of the argument is simple. Atheism is a terrible bet. It gives you no chance of winning the red prize. Pascal states the argument this way:

You have two things to lose: the true and the good; and two things to stake: your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to avoid: error and wretchedness. Since you must necessarily choose, your reason is no more affronted by choosing one rather than the other. That is one point cleared up. But your happiness? Let us weigh up the gain and the loss involved in calling heads that God exists. Let us assess the two cases: if you win, you win everything: if you lose, you lose nothing. Do not hesitate then: wager that he does exist.

If God does not exist, it does not matter how you wager, for there is nothing to win after death and nothing to lose after death. But if God does exist, your only chance of winning eternal happiness is to believe, and your only chance of losing it is to refuse to believe. As Pascal says, "I should be much more afraid of being mistaken and then finding out that Christianity is true than of being mistaken in believing it to be true." If you believe too much, you neither win nor lose eternal happiness. But if you believe too little, you risk losing everything.

But is it worth the price? What must be given up to wager that God exists? Whatever it is, it is only finite, and it is most reasonable to wager something finite on the chance of winning an infinite prize. Perhaps you must give up autonomy or illicit pleasures, but you will gain infinite happiness in eternity, and "I tell you that you will gain even in this life "purpose, peace, hope, joy, the things that put smiles on the lips of martyrs.

If you are unable to believe, it is because of your passions since reason impels you to believe and yet you cannot do so. Concentrate then not on convincing yourself by multiplying proofs of God's existence but by diminishing your passions. You want to find faith, and you do not know the road. You want to be cured of unbelief, and you ask for the remedy: learn from those who were once bound like you and who now wager all they have. . . . They behaved just as if they did believe.

Rota considers Pascal's wager and the roles of uncertainty, evidence, and faith in making a commitment to God. By engaging with themes such as decision theory, the fine-tuning of the universe, divine hiddenness, the problem of evil, the historicity of the resurrection and the nature of miracles, he probes the many dynamics at work in embracing the Christian faith.

"As a Pascal enthusiast, I am enthusiastic about Taking Pascal's Wager. Professor Rota presents a careful and cogent understanding of the wager and places it within a robust apologetic program. Bravo!"

"The conventional wisdom is that Pascal's wager has been completely discredited: it is excessively self-interested, intellectually dishonest and stands in opposition to real faith. But Michael Rota shows that the conventional wisdom is wrong. In Taking Pascal's Wager, Rota confronts the usual objections to the wager and argues that they all miss the point. For those who say that 'more evidence' is needed before Christianity can be considered rational, Rota provides a solid response. But he also goes beyond the head and appeals to the heart. This is a book that should be read by any honest, thoughtful skeptic and that will also answer many of the questions of believers who are questioning their faith. As Rota shows, Pascal's wager can be as powerful an evangelistic tool today as it was in the seventeenth century."

"Taking Pascal's Wager is a novel combination of Pascalian wagering with natural theology and Christian evidences. Rigorous but readable, this unusual book challenges the mind while appealing to the heart. Believers and unbelievers alike will find much in this book to challenge and inspire them. Truly a gem!"

Most theistic arguments conclude that God exists. The conclusion of Pascal\u2019s wager is slightly different. The wager concludes that you should commit to God, as there is much to gain, and little to lose. If you commit to God and God exists, you gain something infinitely good: going to heaven, being united with God, and having a relationship with God. If you don\u2019t commit to God and God exists, you miss out on these infinite goods, and may even face an infinite loss\u2014going to hell and being separated from God. If God doesn\u2019t exist, then whatever you do has merely finite consequences. As long God\u2019s existence is a live possibility, it is prudent to commit to God.

While there are many objections to the wager, here, we\u2019ll focus on a specific objection that has to do with the motives associated with taking the wager. The idea is this: those that take Pascal\u2019s wager are motivated by a fear of hell or a selfish desire to get the rewards of heaven. But these are bad reasons to commit to God. Thus, taking Pascal\u2019s wager doesn\u2019t result in a genuine theistic commitment\u2014it\u2019s just a gamble. And if God isn\u2019t pleased with wagering, the wagerer might not get the benefits described above, anyway.

Here, I offer a response to this objection: taking Pascal\u2019s wager need not reflect poor or selfish motives. I\u2019ll also argue that there\u2019s a way of taking Pascal\u2019s wager that demonstrates genuine religious faith. I\u2019ll elaborate on what it means to take the wager, and discuss the nature of faith. Finally, I\u2019ll bring these two together, and show how someone might faithfully take Pascal\u2019s wager. e24fc04721