The Dilemma of Pascal’s Wager
Submitted by Fathom on Mon, 04/27/2009 - 07:59
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionBy Fathom
Recently, in the Muslims and Ex-Muslims section of the Faith Freedom International forums, an Islamic apostate asked the following question:
Is believing more advantageous?
Here is the rest of his statement, with my reply:
“Hi to all ex-Muslims,
I had one discussion with one of my Muslim friends as stated below to which I require your esteemed feed back.
I met one of my work colleagues after many days. Previously we used to offer salah in our office and we used to offer it together many times(It was I along with one more guy who had taken permission from our office for starting this trend and now I regret that I was the one who started it). Since I stopped going for salah after I apostated, he asked me why I am not coming for salah to which I disclosed to him that I no longer believe in Islam. He was shocked on hearing this and I had a discussion with him stating my reasons for leaving Islam. After all the discussion, in the end he said to me that even if I am 100% sure that Islam is false and there is no life after death, even then, if hypothetically I assume that after life is there than after I die what will I do? I will have no second chance and will be doomed for eternity. In the end one who has enjoyed his life lavishly and one who has toiled through out his life both come to the same point of zero as both are dead hence enjoying life or struggle does not count after death. If either of these situations turns out to be true then one who believes in Islam is in a more advantageous position than one who does not believe.
I would like to know from fellow forum ex-Muslims if they came across such a question and what was their answer or thoughts on this.”
Dear apostate,
Isn't it marvelous to be a human being? Have you ever thought that when you look upon another person that it is like looking into a mirror? I think that way many times, and the reason I think that way is because I believe that at the very core of our humanity, all people are the same.
I like to believe that almost all people on earth are born with the same mentality. As we begin to grow, we learn what is right and what is wrong in the way that we interact with each other. We learn the basics of what is right and wrong, and then from there it depends on which culture we belong to in which we learn such things as religious belief.
We all learn that it is wrong to harm those whom we care about, or to harm anyone in our social structure. The one thing that I believe that all cultures on the earth believe in is the Golden Rule; "do not do to anyone what you would not want to have done to yourself." The Golden Rule, also known as "Ethic of reciprocity," is something that is practiced all over the world by almost all of the world's cultures. Listed below are the many different variations of the Golden Rule put into practice by all the major religions and cultures on the earth.
1. Buddhism: "Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.”
2. Baha'i Faith: "Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not."
3. Christianity: "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself."
4. Confucianism: "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself."
5. Hinduism: "One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self."
6. Islam: "Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you."
7. Jainism: "Just as pain is not agreeable to you, it is so with others. Knowing this principle of equality treat each other with respect and compassion."
8. Judaism: "You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen. Love your fellow as yourself."
9. Taoism: "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss."
By now, you are probably wondering what my point actually is. Well, the point I am trying to make is that, at the core, almost everyone in the world knows and understands the value of the golden rule. Almost all religions and cultures place the Golden Rule at the core of their teachings and their laws. The Golden Rule is so important in our cultures because it is an innate truth among human beings. It is what we all have in common, and it is what our religious beliefs all teach. Regardless of whether or not Islam puts it into practice like the other religions (there is no good evidence that it does), it is still nonetheless a teaching of Islam.
The Golden Rule implies more than just the words we read on our screen. For example, by honoring the Golden Rule you would not steal, kill, lie, commit adultery, nor do anything that would harm another person in any way. In effect, by honoring the Golden Rule, you would not sin the greatest sins against humanity.
You have said that the thing that is making you afraid of leaving Islam is the possibility that if Islam is correct, then you will suffer for all of eternity. The Christians who thought about apostatizing also faced the same question known as Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's Wager is what it is; a wager. It asks us to gamble our lives on the uncertainty of the existence of God. But life should not be a gamble at all. We don't need to gamble with our lives when life has so much to offer for a certainty. Why spend our lives worshiping something that has never been proven to exist when we can better spend our lives improving ourselves and all of humanity?
But let's suppose for a moment that there is some small chance that Islam is correct, and that despite the lack of evidence to support the existence of God, the God actually exists. The problem then is a matter of what is "probable." As human beings, we tend to accept the reality of things based upon factual evidence. Some human beings accept their "beliefs" as reality, when in fact there is no evidence to support their beliefs as actually being truthful. Religious statements in old books do not verify the existence of God for any certainty, for at best the only thing those statements prove for a certainty is that some human at some point in time wrote those words into that old book.
What this means is that the existence of God is not probable for the simple reason that no actual direct evidence has been presented to prove God's existence. This is not your fault, nor the fault of anyone else. If this God actually existed, then it is His fault that no evidence has been presented. Therefore, since there is no evidence to support the existence of God, then why should you gamble the only life you have on worshiping something that has never been proven to exist?
Why not go with what you know for certain, with no need to gamble? You know for a certainty that one day you will die. This is the one common thing among all humanity that we are certain of. We all will die one day. Therefore, why should you gamble your life on things that you are not certain about, such as worshiping a God? Why should you deny yourself the good things in this life that are certain to exist just because you are afraid of something that has never been proven to exist?
The evidence demonstrates that you have one life to live. And if you live your life according to the Golden Rule- and then when you die you discover that Islam was actually the truth- don’t you think that you could stand before God and say, "I have lived my life according to what was true, certain, and just. It is not my fault that you did not provide reasonable evidence that you existed. You made me this way, therefore will you now blame me for the way I was made by you?"
If God is a reasonable God, then what kind of argument could he give to you? If you spent your life loving the whole human race under the banner of the Golden Rule, and it is God's fault that he failed to convince you that he existed, then don't you think that if such a God was actually reasonable and "Merciful" that he would forgive you? If such a God was reasonable and merciful, then it would be a contradiction of him to not forgive you because it is his fault, and not yours.
You have one life to live as far as we know for sure. Do not gamble it on uncertainty of the existence of God as Pascal’s Wager asks you to do. Instead, live your life to the fullest by being kind to others, and harming no one. Do not worry about God, for if such a god exists he will judge you according to your deeds, and not according to your beliefs. After all, if God exists, then it is God's fault that you do not believe. You will be blameless.
Ali Sina made a great analogy by asking that we put ourselves in God's shoes. He said, "If you were the God of your backyard, would you destroy the ants for not worshiping you?" Do you now see how silly that would be? To God, we are like the ants, so do you really think he will destroy us for not worshiping him? Think about that.
Therefore, not believing is more advantageous because you only know for certain that you have one life to live, so why not take advantage of that by living a good life with all of humanity in your heart instead of gambling it on uncertainty? Wouldn't you rather go with what is certain, rather than make a gamble? If you knew for certain that you could simply get a million dollars as opposed to gambling for it, then isn't that so much better than buying a lottery ticket?
You have one chance to love the whole world and leave behind a legacy of an exemplary human being. Do not gamble with your one chance. Don’t play the Pascal’s Wager game at all.
It is my hope you will live your life well, with good cheer for all, and enduring happiness for yourself.
Peace.
Thanks for great article,
Thanks for great article, Fathom!
"I assume that after life is
"I assume that after life is there than after I die what will I do? I will have no second chance and will be doomed for eternity."
----
So for saving yourself you will kill or support to kill the non-muslims as prescribed by the koran?
This is what I would define as spiritually unevolved species.
[[ Sorry for spamming ]] Is
[[ Sorry for spamming ]]
Is it actually possible to register into forum? I tried three gmail e-mails - they weren't accepted. I tried another (not gmail) - and I received not working confirmation link. Also I can't use "resend it" function, because of "The e-mail/username information submitted could not be found". I send an e-mail to forum administration but haven't got any answer yet.
Please, help someone! :(
"Therefore, why should you
"Therefore, why should you gamble your life on things that you are not certain about, such as worshiping a God?"
What do you call gambling? I am a christian and I am not gambling in trusting Jesus. Jesus said anyone who trusts him he will not be dissappointed in this life and the life after death. He vindicated this by personally raising from the dead. And now you call worshiping God is gambling. What exactly do atheists want as a proof of God? What should God do to prove his existance? All those world religions are deeply grounded on something. They did not start out of nowhere. To reject the claims of those religious books, with that lame excuse of "they all advocate golden rule" is the biggest ignorance in the history of humankind. Yes golden rule is a nice principle, but when it is used, especially by atheists, to reject the very essence of the bible I have a serious problem with that phrase.
Great article, Fathom. I
Great article, Fathom. I guess it is a natural question which springs to mind considering the amount of indoctrination Muslims have to undergo throughout their lives. You have responded in a honest and beautiful way. I am reminded of another similar article by Ali Sina called `Why Be Good If There Is No Afterlife? It is a must read.
2 proudchristian <> They are
2 proudchristian
<>
They are deeply rooted in faith and culture (we are social animals), not reason. They can't be proved (and have also showed themselves wrong many times). So, imho, they are surely "gambling".
Have you heard about myths, legends, fairy tales, wrong beliefs etc, proudchristian? Humans have great imagination, doesn't they?
Master Yoda, You must also
Master Yoda,
You must also give specific example of why one particular belief is a fairy tale or not. I, in particular, am talking about christian perspective. I read the bible and do not see anything which could be said of being a fairytale. Surely there are a lot of wrong beliefs out there but even these did not start out of nothing. As an example, Islam started out of Muhammad.Tell me of one faith that purely started out of a myth. And you said of basing your belief out of reason instead of faith. I base my belief in God because:
- The universe and life is awesome and orderly such that it implies there is a designer behind it.
- The bible tells me that the designer is God
- The bible also tells of one day God will visit the earth.
- And then He does so and some people of that time witness that fact.
And then some one like you comes and say your faith is not based on reason. Which type of reason are you talking about?
<> Fairies, pixies or dwarfs,
<>
Fairies, pixies or dwarfs, for example. Or Zeus. And etc. All these beliefs suffer from luck of evidence.
<>
God, at first. Then all wonders, such as virgin birth, resurrection, walking on water (frozen water doesn't count) etc. Much of theological stuff: trinity, sin and others.
<>
Human imagination doesn't count as nothing.
<>
Many African faiths.
<>
- Imho, pure physical (and mathematical) laws are enough for universe and life. Why that designer must be something more than some laws of physics and math? Some formula? Or simply Universe (Nature)?
And, if we choose that it must be theistic god, why it must be God of Bible?
- If there is such designer why to believe Bible? Any evidence for Bible?
As far as know, there are infinitely many possible, faith- (or book-) based, explanations. For example, Flying Spagetti Monster or Hindu gods.
- Again? Why to believe Bible?
- Why to believe it? (Again.)
<>
Rationality and scientific method.
Something went wrong. Let's
Something went wrong. Let's try another way.
"You must also give specific example of why one particular belief is a fairy tale or not."
Fairies, pixies or dwarfs, for example. Or Zeus. And etc. All these beliefs suffer from luck of evidence.
"I, in particular, am talking about christian perspective. I read the bible and do not see anything which could be said of being a fairytale."
God, at first. Then all wonders, such as virgin birth, resurrection, walking on water (frozen water doesn't count) etc. Much of theological stuff: trinity, sin and others.
"Surely there are a lot of wrong beliefs out there but even these did not start out of nothing. As an example, Islam started out of Muhammad."
Human imagination doesn't count as nothing.
"Tell me of one faith that purely started out of a myth."
Many African faiths.
"And you said of basing your belief out of reason instead of faith. I base my belief in God because:
- The universe and life is awesome and orderly such that it implies there is a designer behind it.
- The bible tells me that the designer is God
- The bible also tells of one day God will visit the earth.
- And then He does so and some people of that time witness that fact."
- Imho, pure physical (and mathematical) laws are enough for universe and life. Why that designer must be something more than some laws of physics and math? Some formula? Or simply Universe (Nature)?
And, if we choose that it must be theistic god, why it must be God of Bible?
- If there is such designer why to believe Bible? Any evidence for Bible?
As far as know, there are infinitely many possible, faith- (or book-) based, explanations. For example, Flying Spagetti Monster or Hindu gods.
- Again? Why to believe Bible?
- Why to believe it? (Again.)
"And then some one like you comes and say your faith is not based on reason. Which type of reason are you talking about?"
Rationality and scientific method.
Thanks for all your responses
Thanks for all your responses everyone, much appreciated.
Dear proudchristian,
I can respect Christianity despite regarding it as just another religion.With that said, however, the point of my article still applies to Christianity like it does to Islam.
There really is no direct evidence to confirm the existence of any God, including "The Father." What you have is a belief, and I can respect that, but a belief does not justify evidence in any way at all.
Personally, I am a very big fan of the religious philosophy taught by Jesus, despite not subscribing to it as a belief. Many of the things he taught can be applied to how I live my life, while other things he taught require me to accept a religious belief.
Regardless, however, whether it's Islam, Christianity, or any other religions, the burden of proof to confirm the extraordinary claims of each of these faiths is laid upon those who make such positive claims.
Unfortunately for Christians, they cannot provide evidence for the existence of God any more than the Muslims can. Therefore, my statements regarding Pascal's Wager also applies to Christians, and any other faith that makes such extraordinary claims.
The scenario is precisely teh same.
"Fairies, pixies or dwarfs,
"Fairies, pixies or dwarfs, for example. Or Zeus. And etc. All these beliefs suffer from luck of evidence."
Yes they suffer. Christianity does not suffer because early christians had strong evidence to back up their faith. They thrived or suffered on what they thought was true in their minds. Some people rejected their evidence and some accepted. That is also the situation today.
"God, at first. Then all wonders, such as virgin birth, resurrection, walking on water (frozen water doesn’t count) etc. Much of theological stuff: trinity, sin and others."
Now if you want to see God or measure Him or touch Him, as an evidence then you have a really serious problem. About virgin birth and resurrection, there are people who reported about it. Since there are no reports which negate the reports of these historians, so I choose to believe them. If you believe in Jesus it will be so easy for you to believe in trinity or sin or resurrection.
African faiths are in the same category as a belief in Zeus. It is more of a tribal thing thriving on ignorance. When education shines into these people these faiths become useless.
"Imho, pure physical (and mathematical) laws are enough for universe and life. Why that designer must be something more than some laws of physics and math? Some formula? Or simply Universe (Nature)?"
Everyone could have thought that way. But there are differing opinions that there is some designer who perfected these laws.
"And, if we choose that it must be theistic god, why it must be God of Bible?"
Jesus. His ressurection proved that ah possibly this man could be telling the truth about God!
"Rationality and scientific method."
Good for you.
Thanks Fathom. Very good
Thanks Fathom. Very good article.
To
To proudchristian
"Christianity does not suffer because early christians had strong evidence to back up their faith."
They had strong faith, not evidence.
"Now if you want to see God or measure Him or touch Him, as an evidence then you have a really serious problem."
No evidence? Sorry!
"About virgin birth and resurrection, there are people who reported about it. Since there are no reports which negate the reports of these historians, so I choose to believe them."
Why to believe without any evidence for and strong evidence against?
"If you believe in Jesus it will be so easy for you to believe in trinity or sin or resurrection."
Not really. I can believe in Jesus as only historical person, for example.
"African faiths are in the same category as a belief in Zeus. It is more of a tribal thing thriving on ignorance. When education shines into these people these faiths become useless."
The same for Christianity.
"But there are differing opinions that there is some designer who perfected these laws."
Any serious evidence for it? If you mean ID, it is failed (and it actually say nothing about God of Bible).
"His ressurection proved that ah possibly this man could be telling the truth about God!"
Any evidence for the resurrection?
ISLAM is worth for dead
ISLAM is worth for dead only.
As they don't talk or ask questions.
Hi fathom. Can you give me
Hi fathom. Can you give me the source which states that the golden rule is a teaching in Islam? re: : “Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you.”
All I could find was aHadith which states: "None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." [Number 13 of Imam "Al-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths."]
The same hadith is reported by Bukhari 1.2.12
"The Prophet said, "None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother what he likes for himself."
The only other place which vaguely corresponds to your quote was from Jeffrey Wattles but he fails to give his verifiable source ie: The Farewell Sermon al-Tabari, Vol IX, No. 1754 which incidentally does not include your above quote?
Hello peterpedant. The
Hello peterpedant.
The following is the reference you asked for.
Reference: See Al-Bukhari, Hadith 1623, 1626, 6361) Sahih of Imam Muslim also refers to this sermon in Hadith number 98. Imam al-Tirmidhi has mentioned this sermon in Hadith nos. 1628, 2046, 2085. Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has given us the longest and perhaps the most complete version of this sermon in his Masnud, Hadith no. 19774
"Is believing more
"Is believing more advantageous?"
That means what does the person gain from believing.
It is wrong to believe in something just because you believe you will gain something from it.
"After all the discussion, in the end he said to me that even if I am 100% sure that Islam is false and there is no life after death, even then, if hypothetically I assume that after life is there than after I die what will I do? I will have no second chance and will be doomed for eternity."
Nice scare tactic.
Great, thanks for that
Great, thanks for that Fathom! So technically the followers of Muhammadan Islam would be kufr for going against the Qur'an's instruction to obey Allah's messenger when they are commanded to slay and subjugate the disbelievers? Likewise could it not also be said that since the sermon occured after the Sura 9 revelations, then Muhammad himself was kufr for trying to trump the Qur'an's explicit commands to do harm to unbelievers?
Living in peace and amity;
Living in peace and amity; helping those who need help, harming none, adhering to non-vilence, vegetarianism, keeping body and soul pure at all times. These are considered real 'WORSHIP' to God, NOT THE RITUALS. And it has its rewards i.e. peace of mind to those who practise it.
FathomFFI wrote: "The
FathomFFI wrote:
"The evidence demonstrates that you have one life to live. And if you live your life according to the Golden Rule- and then when you die you discover that Islam was actually the truth- don’t you think that you could stand before God and say, “I have lived my life according to what was true, certain, and just. It is not my fault that you did not provide reasonable evidence that you existed. You made me this way, therefore will you now blame me for the way I was made by you?“
Very admirably put! What IS God doing, up to? Intervening in mankinds history, especially after the invention of the Alfabet? Because then there could appear portable holy books? Intervening with prophets, the last and best one being Muhammed, then stopping (for 1400 years)?! Giving mankind great brains. But when they use them and at least provide massive grounds for "reasonable doubt" then still staying intransigent?! Then in heaven having the temerity to blame the individual for not blindly following a faith?
What I heard from my Christian and Islamic friends is that they somehow "feel", in spiritual experiences, that God exists and the Bible, or Quran, are the truth. And I respect that very much. But; as Fathom says; it remains a gamble to me. If there is evidence for the religions, apart from spiritual experience, this (whole) evidence is hotly contested also and so unsure.
So many people are so sensitive about religions being true or not. Well, they cannot all be true at the same time, so again there is reasonable doubt whether yours is the real thing.
The other major reason to follow a religion is its usefulness, in comparison with its competor beliefsystems, ways of life. If this were the only reason, criticism on all of them would be much easier tolerated, I suppose. As we would focus on the best balance between merits and drawbacks, as we do with so many other theories, policies, products, things.
A very bad reason to me to follow and love a religion is simply because your parents and your people, whom you love, follow and love it. And it seems almost immoral to me to demand from your spouse, children and compatriots to follow your faith.
Demsci wrote: What I heard
Demsci wrote:
What I heard from my Christian and Islamic friends is that they somehow “feel”, in spiritual experiences, that God exists and the Bible, or Quran, are the truth. And I respect that very much. But; as Fathom says; it remains a gamble to me. If there is evidence for the religions, apart from spiritual experience, this (whole) evidence is hotly contested also and so unsure.
You might be interested in these sources:
International Association for Near-Death Studies ( IANDS )
http://www.iands.org
Discover Magazine June 2007, Soul Search
http://www.discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/soul-search/?searchter
The Scalpel and Soul: Encounters with Surgery, The Supernatural, and the Healing Power of Hope, by Allan J. Hamilton.
Ghost Hunters: William James and the Search for Scientific Proof of Life After Death, by Deborah Blum.
Here is some info about William James
http://wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James
http://www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/james
There is A God: How the world's most notorious atheist changed his mind, by Antony Flew.
Demsci I believe sometime ago you mentioned Dr. M. Scott Peck. How big is your interest into his writings? I'm asking because he wrote a book on demonic possession called Glimpses of the Devil: A Psychiatrist Personal Accounts of Possession, Exorcism, and Redemption. If you really do respect Dr. Peck and his writings, you might want to read this book.
So many people are so sensitive about religions being true or not. Well, they cannot all be true at the same time, so again there is reasonable doubt whether yours is the real thing.
They can't all be true, either at least one is true or non of them at all.
Hallo Marie, For me you
Hallo Marie,
For me you certainly are into "deep thinking waters' as shown by your posts and now by your links that I read except for the last one that was not found.
Near Death Experiences are very interesting, I believe in them and some afterlife, God. But that is just me. The story of the Tibetan monk, I don't know about that, I doubt. Then came William James, about the relativity of Truth. Deep, but I was OK with it. But truth is still not SO relative that it does not matter what we choose to believe.
I was talking about the historical evidence of Christianity, you know Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny etc. And THIS is hotly contested by Earl Doherty, G.A. Wells, Kenneth Humphreys. This presents reasonable doubt to me. As there is reasonable doubt about Islam also. But there is no threat to Democracy from Christianity as there is, to our minds, from Islam. So I like to leave Christianity alone and focus on Islam, for now.
M. Scott Peck wrote "The road less Traveled" + sequel, which I read and was deeply impressed with. But it is still hard for me to believe in the Devil, also surrounded by reasonable doubt.
Demsci wrote: M. Scott Peck
Demsci wrote:
M. Scott Peck wrote “The road less Traveled” + sequel, which I read and was deeply impressed with. But it is still hard for me to believe in the Devil, also surrounded by reasonable doubt.
Dr. Peck wrote several books, including People of the Lie. That is a good book. It is about the examination of evil, including NPD. I have the Road Less Traveled in my personal library.
The Last one was about William James and I am surprise it did not come up. Oh well it seems you are already familiar with him.
Yeah I am into the paranormal/Supernatural as a hobby and I am involved with an online community that is all about the paranormal/Supernatural.
Great article Fath, was a fun
Great article Fath, was a fun read. I agree why spend time trying to figure out the unfigurable, spend your time doing something you love or with some one you love. Start something to make your mark in history and that will be your afterlife what you have left behind for your loved ones and mankind your afterlife is them your children there children and so on.
Thanks Wsed, and you are of
Thanks Wsed, and you are of course correct. We have so little time inside this infinitely, so why waste it on that which is unproven and unknown? We should be directing our efforts towards that which we can experience on a daily basis; an experience which all of us can share.