Pascal's Wager

1557 Words 7 Pages
Modern debates over religion, more specifically God, focus primarily on whether or not sufficient evidence exists to either prove or disprove the existence of a God. Disbelievers such as biologist Richard Hawkins tend to point to the indisputable facts of evolution and the abundance of scientific evidence which seem to contradict many aspects of religion. Conversely, believers such as Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith describe the controversial aspects of science, and how the only possible solution to everything is a supreme being. However, mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal refused to make either type of argument; he believed that it was impossible to determine God’s existence for certainty through reason. Instead, he suggested that …show more content…
However each one of these is a faulty argument.
Arguments 1 and 2 only takes into consideration two choices for religion, Roman Catholicism or atheism. However, numerous other faiths exist today, and regardless of the amount of evidence which may support or refute one faith or another, let us assume each to be equally as likely as the other. Since Pascal’s Wager fails to tell us which God to believe in, we end up with “a great probability that we picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion’s version of Hell” (Bendz). With an increasing number of potential faiths or religions, the probability of believing in the right God (or even Gods) likewise becomes increasingly small. Therefore, we have an increased probability of choosing the wrong God, and as a result, we miss out on the eternal happiness from one religion and instead receive the eternal torment of another. Similarly, varying religions have different concepts of afterlife. For example, Hinduism and Buddhism believe in the rebirth and reincarnation of souls, in which the actions one engages in throughout their life simply accumulate to either good or bad karma. Therefore eternal happiness would not truly exist in these religions, but instead happiness would be finite and a result of good actions, not a