It has fairly well been demonstrated or proven that their premises are not obviously true nor can they be verified as true through empirical methods. Here's more; it is known that the Protestant denominations, particularly Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, and Jehovah's Witnesses, love to attack Catholics; after all, Protestant means protesting against Catholics.
The best things are those which are eternal. This pollutes any alleged intellectual honesty Andrew Petrou 3 years ago from Brisbane Well we are blessed with mathamaticians greater than Godel on HP Victories over neither foes nor nature are won by not taking action.
As Pascal asserts, if the only reason to believe in God is to find an eternal happiness, the disenchanted might ask, will God grant this happiness to someone who believed only for this purpose. I've been active on Facebook for a few weeks I'm a very late adopter as far as social media is concerned and I happened to run across one of your posts on "Creationism vs.
Instead, they are separable, and stressing one over the other will provide vastly different results. In any case, I now fear I've taken the discussion off on a minor tangent, and for that, I apologize. I'm very happy to welcome you to hub pages.
We know that we exist in the present; we do not know what may exist in the form of a future. He says the captain should have believed that the ship was seaworthy without evidence. As is aforementioned, we do not know the character of God in the slightest. Pascal states, whatever number I may assign to the probability that God exists given it is not zero, and is finite, this will hold true.
However I still note that Randy has continued to focus his attacks not on my sound arguments but on myself. The benefits of believing quintessentially outweigh the resulting banes from not believing.
Based on this work: I have done some research into Buddhism.
God rightfully assumed that people would neglect to obey that in which they did not have faith. And if you "hedge your bets" by "believing" falsely in the Christian God and the Norsemen had it right all along - then Odin, Thor and Freya etc.
That is probably evil--a good god would never claim to be beyond good and evil. Schlesinger responds by saying that any reasoning that gets us to believe in God, if God exists, cannot be bad.
Somebody may have pasted my hub on the fb page because I don't think I posted it there.
This newfound appreciation of the value of such a belief will lead to the creation of a better self coupled with a fifty-fifty chance of eternal bliss; one ought to be ready to embark upon the path to belief. If you stay on HubPages, you will learn to ignore the gadflys.
It follows you should be willing to pay any finite amount for the privilege of playing this game. I find such a notion to be in contradiction to God, and agree more with James, that sometimes if needed, it is okay to believe in something without evidence, and as Pascal states, in the case of God, believing without evidence, is the right way to go.
Anyone who makes a claim -- either that God exists or that God doesn't exist -- is still responsible for providing proof for that claim even if, in the latter case, it is a theoretically impossible task.
A false, evil image of God in the bible is necessary in order to test whether the reader will place morality or faith first, so this tests moral courage in the face of assertions, threats and promises of reward. While " Pascal clearly intended his argument to persuade the reader to adopt belief in Christianity Problem with Pascal's Wager: With the odds so equal, is it truly the logical choice to chance freedom in the case of God's existence, or is the choice of greater logic based on that which we know.
Unfortunately, it appears that neither he nor Theramin Trees I think they're brothers do new videos anymore. Pascal presents his argument to the audience by ranking the consequences of each situation in matching the four variables against one another: No no, I think you are right, that man created God when he named it so, like he created everything else, when he named it so.
I 'm not an expert, but the tips and tricks seem to work for me. Originally, it was a tiny offshoot of Judaism. Thanks for your praise of my article. I point out quite a few more. His argument, however, is confounding, and invites the question; can belief in God truly reinforcing Pascal's notion of belief in God as a wager.
For when examining an idea so large and confounding as the existence of God we must God's existence, or is the choice of greater logic based on that which we. Pascal's wager can be viewed in terms of this theory.
When looking at the issue of belief in God, Pascal uses the principle of the decision theory to present his argument using a two-by-two row of options/5(1).
Religion Pascal - Examining Pascal's Argument for God. A Critical Discussion of Blaise Pascal's The Wager Essay - A Critical Discussion of Blaise Pascal's The Wager In the gambling world bets are made based on odds, the probability or likelihood that something would happen. Argument 3: No God or Evil God If presented with strong evidence that a god must either be evil or not exist, a genuinely good person will not believe in such a god, or if believing, will not give assent to such a god (as by worship or other assertions of approval, since the good do not approve of evil).
Examining Pascal's Argument for God Essay - There have been many responses to Pascal’s proposition. British humorist Terry Pratchett cleverly summed it up in one of his books with a story of a philosopher who said, “Possibly the gods exist, and possibly they do not.
So why not believe in them in any case.
The Argument for the Existence of God Essay Words | 5 Pages The Argument for the Existence of God It is an undisputed fact that some people claim to have experienced God.Examining pascals argument for god essay