The wager of belief
On the axis: Existence of God · to believe
Even without proof, is it not in our interest to believe, since we would have everything to gain if God exists and little to lose otherwise? But can one decide to believe by calculation?
This problem is brought out by the thought experiment Pascal's Wager:
You cannot know whether God exists: reason, says Pascal, can neither prove nor disprove it. Yet you cannot abstain, for to live as though God did not exist is already to have bet against. So weigh the stakes. Bet on God, and if God exists you win an eternity of happiness; if not, you will have given up little, a few pleasures of a finite life. Bet against, and if God exists you lose that infinite happiness. But an infinite gain, however unlikely, outweighs any finite stake: to bet on God's existence would thus be the most reasonable choice, not because it is true, but because it pays best.
Pascal, Pensées (1670)
Can an advantage stand in for a reason to believe? And can one even decide to believe what one is not convinced of?
Your choice above is recorded in your profile. See my profile →
Anchors: Pascal
leads to: Ethics of belief