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
    Under strict dominance, the dominating option should be c... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→You should wager for God.

    Under strict dominance, the dominating option should be chosen regardless of probability considerations.

    ConsequentialismNatural 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 TheologyConsequentialism

    Related

    The worst outcome associated with wagering for God (gain in earthly life) is str...When one option's worst outcome is better than another option's best outcome, th...You should wager for God.

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    When one option's worst outcome is better than another option's best o...78%Defect is a strictly dominant strategy in the Prisoner's Dilemma, maki...75%Original prospect theory violates this principle of stochastic dominan...73%Because Cooperate persists in this equilibrium, a strictly dominated s...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: pascal-wager
    View source passageHide passage
    This is again a decision under uncertainty (in our technical sense)—it involves no considerations of probability. Indeed, “the wager” dissolves, twice over: utilities alone definitively settle that you should wager for God, and in any case it is not really a gamble at all, since your gain is certain! (That is my understanding of “you have wagered for something certain”; it is not God's existence itself that is “certain”.) The worst outcome associated with wagering for God (gain in earthly life)

    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