(July 10, 2015 at 6:52 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 10, 2015 at 6:20 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Than when why suggest Pascal's Wager which is by definition to lie?
Oh.
I think you may have a misunderstanding of Pascal's Wager. The goal of that is to give the person who is wavering between belief and unbelief a reason to move forward with belief by acting in ways that a believer would act such as going to church, reading the bible, praying, and posting in a good Catholic forum instead of in an atheist forum. Pascal's reasoning is that by doing the things that believers do, we become stronger in that self-identification.
For example, if I am not a hockey fan, but I think that there are advantages to being a hockey fan, then I might begin to go to hockey games, watch hockey games with my friends at a sports bar, etc. The more I invest of myself into hockey, the more I actually begin to enjoy hockey.
Pascal "wagers" that the one who begins to invest herself into the life of a believer will find that she IS a believer at some point. This is a two-step process:
Stage 1: The Practical Stage
The "kickstarter stage" is the stage of practical reason where considerations of self-interest predominate. Practical reason gets you started and self-interest moves you to "wager on God". This stage is reasonable in the practical sense; namely, that it is reasonable to do what is good for you!
Stage 2: The True Faith Stage
When you choose to believe (or at least take actions that have been known to lead to belief) then you will eventually find yourself actually believing that God exists. At this latter stage, considerations of self-interest no longer predominate, but can remain operative in cases of periodic doubt.
That's great!
Since I believe there is an advantage to not being reincarnated as a rat, I am going to start behaving like a Jain
I'll read the Agamas, go to a Jain temple, posting on Jain Dharma forums, eat like Jains. Behave with all the best Jain practices.
I will take all the actions that will lead to Jain belief. Because, I really don't want to be reincarnated as a rat.
Sorry, but your further explanation of Pascal's Wager does not make it any less flawed.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
