(December 14, 2010 at 5:42 pm)Rayaan Wrote:(December 14, 2010 at 1:15 am)theVOID Wrote: Pascals wager is easily refuted by parallel argument
1. There could exist a trickster God
2. This trickster god values logic and reason to establish trickery, he has left no means by which anyone could logically conclude that a god exists.
3. He punishes people who come to illogical conclusions about god. All else go to heaven.
4. The only logical conclusion is that there is no epistemic justification for belief in the existence of god.
5. Therefore, those who believe in God go to hell and those who do not go to heaven.
Then a trickster God would also act against that logical argument itself since it says that he uses "logic and reason to establish trickery" (# 2). Isn't that paradoxical?
No, I can use logic and reason to determine where/when/how someone will look for clues for my existence and then reason what would need to be done in order to prevent you from finding anything of the kind. That would be the trick.
A magician does not fool the participants "illogicaly" or "irrationally" now does he? It requires precise and rational evaluation of the relationship between the trick and the person experiencing it.
.
