|
No, I'm not trying to troll.
While I think to call it satire is the wrong word, I was indeed referring to Pascal's wager.
Pascal's wager is an abomination of pseudo-logical thought. Anyone whose beliefs are based on this, I can only hope to be meeting quite soon in hell. If your god really is all-knowing, he will certainly be able to penetrate your selfish mentality, and realise the fakeness of your beliefs. But that is not my argument.
My point is, that Pascal's wager is ridiculously flawed.
First of all, why would a god actually care if you believed in him or not? Why would that be a factor in deciding on your eligibility for entrance into heaven?
Further more, if it were indeed a factor, why is it "logical" to make the conclusion that it will weighted positively in making your case? Surely it is just as plausible that God would dislike believers as it is that he would like them? (Both situations seem equally implausible as far as I'm concerned)
On this board, few people would use Pascal’s argument, yet I do know that quite a lot of people believe on a “yeah, but what if...” basis. This, I think, is not just downright silly but also positively grotesque.
__________________
|