Pascal's Wager Argument - Essay Example

According to Ryan (1994), this line of reasoning has roots in the writings of Plato, Arnobius, and Lactantius. Pascal's wager, in a nutshell, is: if you believe in God and he does not exist, you share the same fate as those who do not believe in God - death. However, if He does exist, you stand to gain salvation, while the unbeliever still faces a static destiny - death. So the believer, technically, has nothing to lose and all to gain, while the unbeliever whether right or not about his or her wager will only face death in the end. Therefore it is only logical to wager on the choice that makes the most sense - belief in God.

It, in a sense, is a philosophical win-win situation. Pascal maintains that we are incapable of knowing whether God exists or not, yet we must "wager" one way or the other. Reason cannot settle which way we should incline, but a consideration of the relevant outcomes supposedly can. Pascal's line of reasoning is intriguing. He states that aside from arguing extensively whether God exists or not, one might rather look at the benefits of believing over not believing. Putting it into a conversational tone, one might say that most people argue with this line, "God exists because.

" Pascal puts a spin on this logic by asking the question, "It is better to believe in God because," Pascal argues that our reason may not be enough to argue God into existence or non-existence. And yet we are required to make a decision regarding Him. Should you choose to believe, or should you choose to not believe One may come to conclude that the wager shies away from trying to prove God through proof and logic and focus rather on the rationality of choosing to believe instead? Pascal echoes a few strains of agnosticism but makes the wager for God anyway.

This is in contrast to the beliefs of some agnostics who maintain that since knowledge about God is incomprehensible and inherently unknowable, they are irrelevant to life ("Agnosticism"). He believes that our reason may not be enough to logically deduce whether or not God exists but we must make a choice according to what we know, and the probability of gain from choosing from either choice. Pascal also concludes that if God did not exist, the believer would still have been able to live a satisfying life owing to the purported joys of the Christian life.