Pascal's position seems to be essentially this:
By faith, one can
know God's existence. But why should anyone
have faith or believe that God exists?
To answer the question, consider the possibilities:
| Pascal's Wager | You believe God exists | You don't believe God exists |
| God Exists | Eternal happiness, fellowship, hope=GAIN | Lose eternal happiness, lose fellowship of others, lose hope = LOSE |
| God does not Exist | Happiness in this life, fellowship, hope = GAIN | No fellowship, no hope = LOSE |
Some Critical Points for Pascal's Wager:
1. Does belief in God guarantee eternal
happiness?
2. Does disbelief guarantee that there
is no afterlife?
3. Is it the case that people who do
not believe in the existence of God have no hope?
4. IF THERE IS NO GOD, then isn't it
possible that you have WASTED the ONLY life you have?
5. Does Pascal's position seem to indicate
that it makes no difference "which God" one believes in? Or is "any
old god" a good enough bet?
6. Would God reward a believer who believes
based on the wager?
7. Some would say that if they base
their lives on belief in the existence of a God and there is not one, then
their lives have been a lie; others say that if they base their lives on
DISBELIEF in the existence of God and there is one, then their lives have
been based on a lie, anyway. Which is the better case?
8. Pascal grants that there are no fool-proof
proofs for God's existence. Doesn't this mean that a person who believes
in the absence of good reasons has shirked his "epistemic obligations"?
Is this more important than moral obligations? Are epistemic and
moral obligations of equal importance?
9. Some religions require martyrdom
of a least some believers. Are you willing on the basis of a BET
to martyr yourself? Even if you are not required to make exceptionally
great sacrifices, what if your religion requires you always to be ready
to do so? Wouldn't this put a bit of a damper on THIS life?