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
    It is impossible to rationally require belief in mutually... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Pascal's Wager proves too much and is therefore not a sound argument for believing in the Catholic God specifically.

    It is impossible to rationally require belief in mutually incompatible hypotheses.

    Natural 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 Theology

    Related

    If reason cannot decide between theism and non-theism, then by parallel reasonin...Pascal's Wager assumes reason cannot decide between theistic and non-theistic hy...Pascal's Wager can be replicated to argue that rationality requires believing in...Pascal's Wager proves too much and is therefore not a sound argument for believi...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Pascal's Wager can be replicated to argue that rationality requires be...89%If reason cannot decide between theism and non-theism, then by paralle...77%Christian faith is incompatible with reason and philosophy75%Pascal's Wager assumes reason cannot decide between theistic and non-t...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: pascal-wager
    View source passageHide passage
    5. The table should have more columns: the many Gods objection. If Pascal is really right that reason can decide nothing here, then it would seem that various other theistic hypotheses are also live options. Pascal presumably had in mind the Catholic conception of God—let us suppose that this is the God who either ‘exists’ or ‘does not exist’. By excluded middle, this is a partition. The objection, then, is that the partition is not sufficiently fine-grained, and the ‘(Catholic) God does not exi

    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