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
    An idealized version of the agent who can perform uncount... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→An agent should wager for God outright rather than continuing to pursue an indefinitely iterated mixed strategy.

    An idealized version of the agent who can perform uncountably many mixed-strategy trials would with probability 1 eventually wager for God.

    Modality & PossibilityNatural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural TheologyModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Moral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    An agent should wager for God outright rather than continuing to pursue an indef...Once one wagers for God there is no going back, so the terminal action is wageri...One should act as an idealized version of oneself would eventually act.

    Similar

    An agent should wager for God outright rather than continuing to pursu...80%If there are uncountably many times at which one implements a mixed st...79%For a mixed strategy in which the probability of wagering for God decr...76%It is rational for an atheist or agnostic who initially follows a mixe...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: pascal-wager
    View source passageHide passage
    Monton 2011 defends Pascal’s Wager against this line of objection. He argues that an atheist or agnostic has more than one opportunity to follow a mixed strategy. Returning to the first example of one, suppose that the fair coin lands tails. Monton’s thought is that your expected utility now changes; it is no longer infinite, but rather that of an atheist or agnostic who has no prospect of the infinite reward for wagering for God. You are back to where you started. But since it was rational for

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective