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 You should wager for God.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pascal assumes a binary choice, but infinitely many mutually exclusive gods with incompatible demands can each be assigned infinite expected utility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When multiple options each yield infinite expected utility, dominance reasoning collapses and cannot single out wagering for the Christian God specifically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A decision procedure that cannot discriminate among options fails as practical guidance, rendering the wager's conclusion unwarranted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Genuine belief is not a voluntary act one can adopt on the basis of prudential self-interest, as Kant and Bernard Williams both argue.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If authentic theistic belief cannot be directly willed, then the wager's practical conclusion—'wager for God'—prescribes an action that is psychologically impossible for the sincere inquirer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A valid practical argument cannot oblige an agent to perform an action that is constitutively unavailable to them as a rational, sincere agent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The worst outcome associated with wagering for God (gain in earthly life) is strictly better than the best outcome associated with wagering against God (earthly life).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When one option's worst outcome is better than another option's best outcome, the former option strictly dominates the latter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

      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.