How to Discount Pascal's Wager

Step-by-Step Guide

1. 1

   Step 1: State Pascal's Wager.

   If God exists (G) and you believe in him (B), then the reward is heaven (+Infinity).
   
   If God exist (G) and you don't believe in him (~B), then the reward is eternal damnation (-Infinity).
   
   If God does not exist (~G) and you don't believe in him (~B), then you gain nothing (+0).
   
   If God does not exist( ~G) and you do believe in him (B), then you lose nothing.
   
   In order to evaluate Pascal's Wager, we calculate the marginal outcome for each case over which you have control (B or ~B) by summing over all the cases where you do not have control (G or ~G).
   
   Notice that, if Pascal's Wager is correct, the reward for believing in God is infinitely good and the reward for not believing in him is infinitely bad. , For example, you might consider your time praying or in church wasted or your faith might require dietary restrictions, such that you might never be able to eat pork, beef, or shellfish.
   
   Consider a more severe example, Jehovah's Witnesses' faith requires that they not receive blood transfusions.
   
   If B & ~G and you require a life-saving blood transfusion, then, by not accepting such a transfusion, you have made a large sacrifice indeed.
   
   These sacrifices, however, are small relative to the infinite magnitudes associated with G, so we can denote them with an arbitrary constant, say,
   1.
   
   Notice that this does not change our outcome., Let us denote this as event W.
   
   Understandably, this God would be upset that you have been worshipping the wrong God.
   
   However, he still disapproves of non-believers.
   
   This is the first example of the false dilemma.
   
   That is, Pascal has not considered all possible cases beyond his control.
   
   This alone is enough to discount Pascal's Wager, but we will continue in order to show that we assign any arbitrary value for the outcome., The Flying Spaghetti Monster hates believers because he has left no evidence of his existence and considers them foolish for believing in things without evidence.
   
   We will denote this as event FSM.
   
   Now, our analysis has completely failed because, no matter what we believe, the expected results are infinitely bad., In this case, the reward is the same for the wagerer in either B or ~B.
   
   We denote this as case L.
   
   In this case, it is better to be a non-believer than a believer., In this case, which we denote H, it is infinitely better to be a non-believer than a believer., The choices here are arbitrary, and Pascal's Wager can be used to suggest any outcome desired.
   
   It is, therefore, not an acceptable method for determining whether one should believe in God in the absence of evidence.
   
   See the warnings section for information about how our analysis is incorrect.
2. 2

   Step 2: Consider that if B & ~G (you believe in God and he does not exist)

3. 3

   Step 3: you actually do lose something.

4. 4

   Step 4: Consider the possibility that God exists

5. 5

   Step 5: but you have chosen the incorrect God.

6. 6

   Step 6: Consider the possibility that God exists

7. 7

   Step 7: but God is the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

8. 8

   Step 8: Consider the possibility that God truly is all-loving and that our wagerer has led a good life.

9. 9

   Step 9: Finally

10. 10

    Step 10: consider the case of a similar God to that described by event L

11. 11

    Step 11: except that this God despises those that accept Pascal's Wager

12. 12

    Step 12: considering it demeaning to him.

13. 13

    Step 13: Realize that one can add infinitely many possible categories of God.

Detailed Guide

About the Author