Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A reformulation of how prospects of infinite rewards are compared can resolve both the mixed-strategies objection and the many Gods objection to Pascal's Wager

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hájek's argument establishes that any mixed strategy assigning positive probability to wagering yields infinite expected utility, making dominance reasoning structurally unavailable for resolving mixed-strategy cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A reformulated comparison method that assigns lexical or hyperreal values to infinite prospects still cannot escape the result that infinitely many mixed strategies remain rationally equivalent to pure belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This equivalence is a feature of the mathematics of infinite utility aggregation itself, not a product of how prospects are compared, so no comparison-method revision can dissolve it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Any comparison method that ranks infinite reward prospects must impose an ordering on uncountably many possible theological configurations, which formal decision theory cannot uniquely determine.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a principled, non-arbitrary basis for comparing infinities across distinct theological hypotheses, a revised comparison method merely relocates rather than resolves the indeterminacy the many Gods objection exposes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The mixed-strategies objection and the many Gods objection both arise from how infinite reward prospects are compared
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A revised comparison method can accommodate rational preference among infinite goods
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.