I was going to incorporate this into a response towards another religion based topic when I realised that it was not directly adressing the matter at hand. That and the fact that I've had this discussion mulling over in my head for a while now means that there's something worth discussing here.

Some of you may remember Pascal from school, specifically, "Pascal's Triangle". Well, he also had another contribution to mathematics that was named "Pascal's Wager", and its importance lay within the discovering of the most beneficial outcome from the source of two variables. Of course, this rather simple table has proved its importance, that much is certain, however, the thing that has been on my mind is the example to describe the table's purpose; the wager upon the existence of god.

On one side of the table is god's existence, yes or no. Simple enough. On the other side of the table is man's belief in god, again yes or no. The wager goes on to argue that belief in god is the most beneficial strategy. Explained further.

If you believe in god and he does exist, you go to heaven. If you believe in god and he does not exist, there's no consequence. If you don't believe in god and he does exist, you're at a loss (hell, barred from heaven, whatever). And if you don't believe in god and he doesn't exist, again, there's no consequence. So, according to this wager, it's best to believe in god.

My beef with this is that it assumes that god gives a shit whether or not we believe in him or not. I'm agnostic, so I don't think god's existence, yes or no, should interfere or affect my life as it is now, and whatever happens (or fails to happen) afterwards is of no importance to me now. Why dwell on your future if it's all predetermined fate? Why waste all the drivel when you can live your life with some control ( or least with the illusion of control).

If it turned out, hypothetically, that god did exist, I'd rather he not concerned himself with whether or not I went to church and therefore am a good person, but rather whether or not my moral decisions in my day to day life reflects kindly upon myself.

I don't believe in god, and I do not in any way feel at a disadvantage, especially at the discretion of some silly little graph.

Pascal's wager fails when one considers the vast multitude of religions. The statistics become sufficiently close that it is a matter of choice.

At 8/2/09 02:09 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I don't believe in god, and I do not in any way feel at a disadvantage, especially at the discretion of some silly little graph.

That's why I'm a gnostic, why would "god" who is supposed to be all loving and forgiving let people suffer for all eternity for being confused, even holding them in "hell" after they want forgiveness?

I have a Much different interpretation of the Bible, and I also don't believe the "God" of the old testament

I'm much more spiritual them the normal person, I believe earth is only a testing realm, and our ultimate goal is to eliminate "self" and "enter heaven", achieve logos. I could go on and on :P

I believe that there is a god, but we are just all wrong about it.

I prefer the "wait and see method"

Technically, I'm jewish, but also a bit agnostic, if that makes sense

At 8/2/09 02:18 AM, Apocalvps wrote: Pascal's wager fails when one considers the vast multitude of religions. The statistics become sufficiently close that it is a matter of choice.

^^ That, exactly.
Pascal was trying to apply Occam's razor in a situation where all factors were not equal. Ergo, the razor fails.

At 8/2/09 02:24 AM, KrevZabijak wrote:

At 8/2/09 02:18 AM, Apocalvps wrote: Pascal's wager fails when one considers the vast multitude of religions. The statistics become sufficiently close that it is a matter of choice.

^^ That, exactly.
Pascal was trying to apply Occam's razor in a situation where all factors were not equal. Ergo, the razor fails.

No, all that Pascal was saying was that believing in God was more advantageous than not. He wasn't talking about a perticular religion, just God. His wager only works if God only cares that you don't believe in any religion. If you believe in one particular religion, yea you ahve a lot more chances to be screwed, but the point was that if you believe in God, and he only cares that you believe in him, you're at an advantage over non believers. And if he doesn't care that you're a non believer, than you end up with the same result because you live your life as good as you can.

See illustration

At 8/2/09 02:09 AM, WritersBlock wrote: ...My beef with this is that it assumes that god gives a shit whether or not we believe in him...

The best arguments are always the simplest ones, and this is one of my favorite, not necessarily because of my religious beliefs but because of the logic behind it. Pascal's Wager only makes sense if you make a lot of assumptions, namely that Heaven and Hell automatically exist and that God automatically gives a shit that we believe in him.

Last year, I read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, and this was one of the many arguments he made in that book. As much as I hate that fucker for being so needlessly inflammatory, it was a very interesting book, and I recommend it regardless of your religious beliefs. Although it's pretty safe to assume that any highly religious reader will absolutely hate it right from the start, it still gives you something to think about.

Christopher Hitchens had a really good explanation of why it's more dangerous to believe in God than to not, but I don't remember it, and I hardly find it necessary for myself.

At 8/2/09 02:37 AM, HandsomePete wrote: Christopher Hitchens had a really good explanation of why it's more dangerous to believe in God than to not, but I don't remember it, and I hardly find it necessary for myself.

I never heard of that argument, but I can probably guess how it goes: If you believe in any given god, then it will most likely be the wrong god (since there are countless religions), and then you're even worse off than the atheists who were smart enough not to bow down to a false deity. Is it anything like that?

At 8/2/09 02:21 AM, I-RULE-OVER-ALL wrote:

At 8/2/09 02:09 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I don't believe in god, and I do not in any way feel at a disadvantage, especially at the discretion of some silly little graph.

That's why I'm a gnostic, why would "god" who is supposed to be all loving and forgiving let people suffer for all eternity for being confused, even holding them in "hell" after they want forgiveness?

It's all in the Bible. I could quote a few passes for you if you want, but I can't stand all of these religious debates.

At 8/2/09 02:54 AM, levusbevus wrote:
It's all in the Bible. I could quote a few passes for you if you want, but I can't stand all of these religious debates.

you misheard what I said, quote all you want, but the meaning behind it is in the eyes of the beholder.

How can God expect us to believe in him if he shows no sign of his existence.

At 8/2/09 03:30 AM, PrivateJoker92 wrote: How can God expect us to believe in him if he shows no sign of his existence.

Terrible argument, any Christian knows that the signs of God are all around us. Lookie, you exist! Ergo God.

i am an athiest btw

This wager some up 50% of America. They believe in God out of some sense that when they die, they will continue to exist in an intangible world called "heaven" or "the afterlife." It's a sense of fear that does drive some people to worship any form of divine or spiritual entity that, is usually bullshit (Usually? IT'S ALL BULLSHIT).

No offense to those who believe in God

Anyway, this wager doesn't effect me in the slightest, as it involves spirituality and I reject every form of it. There is no God and there definitely is no higher or divine power at the works. I am an atheist, but that's a label and if I must be called something to define my lack of belief I'd prefer the term Godless. As it's a more archaic saying and a clever Nietzsche reference.

I have nothing but good things to say about agnostic people; but here's what annoys me about agnostics. I call the possibility of God a bit of a cop-out. I say, you either accept that there is a God or some other divine force or you reject that notion and say that none of these things exist. But jhey, that's just what I think anyway.

I'll just laugh at this wager and call it a day.

I hate religion as it does nothing but cause war.

At 8/2/09 04:02 AM, MattTheParanoidKat wrote: I have nothing but good things to say about agnostic people; but here's what annoys me about agnostics. I call the possibility of God a bit of a cop-out. I say, you either accept that there is a God or some other divine force or you reject that notion and say that none of these things exist. But jhey, that's just what I think anyway.

I'll just laugh at this wager and call it a day.

You think it's a cop out not to confine yourself to one belief despite a lack of undeniable evidence? Yes, I believe in science, and no I don't believe in the divine powers of the christian god (or any other identifiable god for that matter), but I do believe that it's possible for some other undefinable greater force to exist and fall under a loose term of the word "god". I have my beliefs, however open ended they may seem, so I think it's rather unusual for you to think that we should pursue either theism or atheism and not share the merits of either.

At 8/2/09 04:19 AM, JollySpace wrote: I hate religion as it does nothing but cause war.

Religious differences and morons who read the stories and thought they had to act them out to prove themselves.

The bible is a book of morals corrupted by a bunch of dicks looking for cash.
Not sure who started the book but someone fucked it up.

If God were real then he'd be a complete asshole

At 8/2/09 04:20 AM, WritersBlock wrote:

At 8/2/09 04:02 AM, MattTheParanoidKat wrote: I have nothing but good things to say about agnostic people; but here's what annoys me about agnostics. I call the possibility of God a bit of a cop-out. I say, you either accept that there is a God or some other divine force or you reject that notion and say that none of these things exist. But jhey, that's just what I think anyway.

I'll just laugh at this wager and call it a day.

You think it's a cop out not to confine yourself to one belief despite a lack of undeniable evidence? Yes, I believe in science, and no I don't believe in the divine powers of the christian god (or any other identifiable god for that matter), but I do believe that it's possible for some other undefinable greater force to exist and fall under a loose term of the word "god". I have my beliefs, however open ended they may seem, so I think it's rather unusual for you to think that we should pursue either theism or atheism and not share the merits of either.

I really only said that it kind of annoys me. This is what also fascinates me about this thread. This wager is all about yes or no answers. There is no opportunity to answer "maybe." Hence why I brought the notion up. Is there a God? Yes or No. I am all for you pursuing the merits of theism or atheism to your hearts content. However, those merits aren't important in this Yes or No question. That's really all I wanna hear. No maybes or I don't knows because nobody truly knows, it's all a matter of what you think, and all I want to hear is either a yes or a no. A straight answer. And judging from your post it sounds like a yes.

Because this is a good thread, and as much as I truly think that religion and politics should not be talked about on the BBS (or any forum for that matter). This has sparked an interest in me to post. So, you care to clarify my friend?

If God is so great he will let you believe what you want to believe
I don`t believe but if he`s there somebody tell him his world is fucking up

At 8/2/09 02:48 AM, subpar wrote:

At 8/2/09 02:37 AM, HandsomePete wrote: Christopher Hitchens had a really good explanation of why it's more dangerous to believe in God than to not, but I don't remember it, and I hardly find it necessary for myself.

I never heard of that argument, but I can probably guess how it goes: If you believe in any given god, then it will most likely be the wrong god (since there are countless religions), and then you're even worse off than the atheists who were smart enough not to bow down to a false deity. Is it anything like that?

Nah, it was something about going to church and submitting to a god, and following rules that didn't do you any good... or something like that...

At 8/2/09 04:53 AM, MattTheParanoidKat wrote: I really only said that it kind of annoys me. This is what also fascinates me about this thread. This wager is all about yes or no answers. There is no opportunity to answer "maybe." Hence why I brought the notion up. Is there a God? Yes or No. I am all for you pursuing the merits of theism or atheism to your hearts content. However, those merits aren't important in this Yes or No question. That's really all I wanna hear. No maybes or I don't knows because nobody truly knows, it's all a matter of what you think, and all I want to hear is either a yes or a no. A straight answer. And judging from your post it sounds like a yes.

Because this is a good thread, and as much as I truly think that religion and politics should not be talked about on the BBS (or any forum for that matter). This has sparked an interest in me to post. So, you care to clarify my friend?

Ahh, my good friend, I see what you are getting at. If I were to look at the question posed in its original context, I would say that no, I do not believe in god, in the sense that I don't devote my spirituality to the christian god, or any god, for that matter. However, in the larger concept of acknowledging that a form of deity could exist, then yes, I do believe it possible. But if you look at the consequences of the wager, a belief in god, partnered with the god's actual existence will result in a place in heaven. My interpretation of this is that you need some level of devotion to the god and its religion for you to earn your place in heaven, however ridiculous I think this to be.

In the context of the wager, no, I don't believe in god.

That's assuming of course that there is no loss in believing in the existence of god. If you do believe in him, and there-fore worship him, it would mean you would follow a set of guidelines to please him so you may go to heaven. So, if you had to give up a set of behaviours for a god that turns out to not exist, you've just wasted satisfaction and pleasure to praise something that is non-existent.

What's another big problem with the pascal's wager assumption is we're assuming we know which God is real, if he/she/it is real. Is it the Muslim god? The Egyptian one? The Jewish/Christian god? Is the Jewish/Christian god, which way does he want us to acknowledge and worship him by? Would he want us to denounce Jesus and acknowledge that he was not God's son. If we then go down the Christian route, do we worship by the catholic or protestant path?

I think the best summery of the second problem can be displayed by an Emo Phillips joke:
I was walking across a bridge one day and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said,

"Stop! Don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
"Well, there is so much to live for."
"Like what?"
"Well, are you religious?"
He said yes.
I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
"Christian."
"Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
"Protestant."
"Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
"Baptist."
"Wow, me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
"Baptist Church of God."
"Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
"Reformed Baptist Church of God."
"Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915."
I said, "Die, heretic," and pushed him off.

At 8/2/09 02:09 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I don't believe in god, and I do not in any way feel at a disadvantage, especially at the discretion of some silly little graph.

Actually Pascal's wager doesn't say anything about how you should lead your life or whether God even cares. It just a simple example of Game Theory. If you only had two choices and two circumstances (Believe in God or not; God exist or doesn't); it doesn't get into the whole debate as you are making it out to be. It could be any two choices of doing something or not and being faced with an unknown; almost like the Prisoner's Dilemma Game.

What Pascal is saying, since we don't know if God exist it's more beneficial to believe in God because the risk in not believing in Him is too high i.e. you burn if you're wrong compared to nothing happens if there isn't a God.

Sure you can add in "What if God is merciful and you're a good person?" or even do the opposite "why waste your life doing all these things for God if he doesn't exist?" and do the risk-benefit on those questions, but just for this Game it's all irrelevant. It's just a simple coin-flip really; does God exist and what are the benefits and risk to it. That's all.

At 8/2/09 10:23 AM, reverend wrote:

At 8/2/09 02:09 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I don't believe in god, and I do not in any way feel at a disadvantage, especially at the discretion of some silly little graph.

Actually Pascal's wager doesn't say anything about how you should lead your life or whether God even cares. It just a simple example of Game Theory. If you only had two choices and two circumstances (Believe in God or not; God exist or doesn't); it doesn't get into the whole debate as you are making it out to be. It could be any two choices of doing something or not and being faced with an unknown; almost like the Prisoner's Dilemma Game.

What Pascal is saying, since we don't know if God exist it's more beneficial to believe in God because the risk in not believing in Him is too high i.e. you burn if you're wrong compared to nothing happens if there isn't a God.

Sure you can add in "What if God is merciful and you're a good person?" or even do the opposite "why waste your life doing all these things for God if he doesn't exist?" and do the risk-benefit on those questions, but just for this Game it's all irrelevant. It's just a simple coin-flip really; does God exist and what are the benefits and risk to it. That's all.

As you may have noticed, I understood the theories being applied here, and that those do have their benefits, however, I did not want to discuss the theories, I specifically wanted to discuss the example he used to fit with the system. For that game, it may be irrelevant, but for this discussion it is not. I created the thread, ergo I have chosen what to discuss. Simple enough.

how ever you are posting your philosophy on a flash games and movie website forum

Well obviously, whether or not believing in God is IN ITSELF at worse a harmless thing and at best equal to salvation is a matter of personal opinion...and belief.

Let me put it this way: a crapload of the less pleasant atheists of this world, besides believing that there is no God to begin with (obviously), are also convinced that religion itself is a cancer on humanity.

They believe that people's faith in religion is somehow harmful to the rest of the human race. That, if people were to be as illuminated and reasonable as them and cease to believe in God, that we'd all somehow make groundbreaking progress in each and every imaginable way and evolve into a better species.

Now, I'm not going to get into how the belief that "love everyone, forgive everyone, and try to live your life as peacefully and righteously as possible" is supposedly a BAD thing for such people, for example, but...you can't objectively assume that EVERYONE agrees with the fact that religion is harmless, even if it is wrong or technically useless.

At 8/2/09 10:48 AM, n0sv3ratu wrote: how ever you are posting your philosophy on a flash games and movie website forum

And audio and art, don't forget the audio and art. If we deconstruct the forum aspect of this site, then you'll see that this is the "general" section. For the "general" topics, which includes philosophical muses. I've actually been quite impressed with the level of discussion in this topic... perhaps a god does exist.

At 8/2/09 10:51 AM, LinkSilvermane wrote: Well obviously, whether or not believing in God is IN ITSELF at worse a harmless thing and at best equal to salvation is a matter of personal opinion...and belief.

Let me put it this way: a crapload of the less pleasant atheists of this world, besides believing that there is no God to begin with (obviously), are also convinced that religion itself is a cancer on humanity.

They believe that people's faith in religion is somehow harmful to the rest of the human race. That, if people were to be as illuminated and reasonable as them and cease to believe in God, that we'd all somehow make groundbreaking progress in each and every imaginable way and evolve into a better species.

Now, I'm not going to get into how the belief that "love everyone, forgive everyone, and try to live your life as peacefully and righteously as possible" is supposedly a BAD thing for such people, for example, but...you can't objectively assume that EVERYONE agrees with the fact that religion is harmless, even if it is wrong or technically useless.

I like certain aspects of religions. I like that people can have an optimistic outlook on their lives, regardless if they call it faith or whatever. I don't claim to do what I do or believe in what I do to "better the world" or to partake in god's master plan, and I don't feel that others should inflict their beliefs of theism or atheism onto others. The whole "I've seen the light and now he wants me to convert as many others as I can" along with the "god doesn't exist let me ram my beliefs of godlessness down your stupid throats" just don't make sense to me. Elements of theism and atheism make sense, but as a whole, I don't think one religion or atheist belief can solely ring true, as its ultimately coming to a conclusion that which has shown to be inconclusive.

So yeah, I pretty much agree with what you are saying there.

At 8/2/09 10:53 AM, mushroomn wrote: I DON'T FUCKING CARE ABOUT ANY OF THIS shit! PLEASE STOP MAKING THESE THREADS

Stop posting.

At 8/2/09 10:52 AM, WritersBlock wrote:

At 8/2/09 10:48 AM, n0sv3ratu wrote: how ever you are posting your philosophy on a flash games and movie website forum

And audio and art, don't forget the audio and art. If we deconstruct the forum aspect of this site, then you'll see that this is the "general" section. For the "general" topics, which includes philosophical muses. I've actually been quite impressed with the level of discussion in this topic... perhaps a god does exist.

this is going to erupt into some huge kind of moral debate and im going to just point and laugh at all the people who think there points will be heard on the newgrounds forum. if you post a topic about the subject of god existing or not nobody will listen to you

For the love of god
SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!