1

Joseph Koonrajaksebonde

Philosophy of Religion

Topic 1

Pascals Wager

In this paper I will be talking about Blaise Pascal and why he believes we should

wager our odds on the belief in God existence, for the chance of obtaining eternal

salvation, or better put why we should pretend to believe in God to risk our very souls.

We will examine the model of why the wager for the belief of God is good, as well as

why it is bad. And talk about how Pascal encourages peoples beliefs, since there isnt

rationality behind the existence of God. Additionally, I include my perspective on why

Pascal has a convincing argument, as well as why the argument does not prove viable for

me and others.

Pascals argument is not so much about if God is real, its more so if his existence

in life is practical.1 Its an argument that is primarily about gambling whether God exists

or he doesnt. He breaks it down into a two by two matrix, wagering whether God exists

or does not exist, either you believe or you do not believe.2 Pascal gives two options:

Option A1: If you believe in God and God exists you get eternal salvation.

Option A2: You believe in God, God does not exist, nothing happens.

Option B1: You do not believe in God, God exists, you get eternal damnation.

1
Philosophy of Religion Fifth Edition Peterson, Michael
2
http://www.iep.utm.edu/pasc-wag/
 2

Option B2: You do not believe in God, God doesnt exist, nothing happens.3

What Pascal points out in this model is that whether you believe that God exists

or not, your chances of reaching eternal salvation/ heaven are high and it becomes a

logical belief that you have. Playing these odds and having high stakes with a likely

chance to win big makes you think why not? The chances sound to good to pass up.

The strategy therefore is to always choose God because of the chances. Pascal has

basically made two assumptions: 1) The probability of Gods existence is half. 2)

Wagering for God brings infinite reward/ eternal salvation if God exists.4

Furthermore, Pascal works to direct a persons thoughts towards the hope of, what

if? When we think of something we really want, as humans, we usually will find our

ways to obtain what ever it may be, at all costs (if it means that much), regardless of the

odds at times because its simply what we want and we have the need and yearn to have

it. Another way to look at it is, if I had a disease that had a 100% chance to kill me, and

there was a medicine that gave a 50/50 chance to save my life. Would I still take it? Of

course, because that chance is all I need, because if I dont, Im going to die anyways.

What Pascal wants us to do is to believe in God just incase, like a backup plan. Now, if

we choose to make negative decisions and actions, it is not God sending us to eternal hell,

we are sending ourselves to hell because of our choices.

Pascal seems to think that those who believe in God will have better lives, that

believing has good benefits such as security that the world is ordered and meaningful.

That God is looking out for you, and that death isnt the end because if you go to heaven

3
http://www.iep.utm.edu/pasc-wag/
4
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#ObjePascWage
 3

you will live on.5 However, in following these creeds, rules and laws if things turned out

incorrect and there is no internal salvation or you are to obtain nothing, you would miss

out on things you may want to do such as; partying, not having to pray every day, not

having to go to church, missing class, playing games, etc. And instead of doing some

things you may like, you have to do things that our self-interest may not consider

enjoyable. Whether that is going to church every Sunday, spending time with only

those who believe in the same beliefs, praying every day or going to a class you dislike.

We have to will ourselves to do these things, and program our mind set to be almost on

autopilot so we can get to this eternal salvation we call heaven.

Furthermore, an issue that arises within Pascals argument that I see while

gambling for eternal salvation is, does choosing ones faith make them personally happy

within themselves? The reason I bring this up is because I grew up in a Buddhist

household, while I did not understand the teachings, nor did I want to learn them while

growing up. I gave the religion a chance, to try and learn for my parents because of what

they did for me growing up. But as I grew older and they pushed the faith on me harder

and harder, I began to reject the teachings and felt unhappy. It simply did not make sense

to me on why certain things were the way that they are. From reading scriptures, to all the

rules and the suffering that had to be obtained or accumulated. It just did not satisfy my

self-interest, and doing so, I felt a negative feeling towards the teachings.

Similarly, Pascals argument to convince people to bet on the belief in God,

seems like people have to fake their self interests, so they have this chance but I you cant

always fake it until you make it because a persons interest is still their own. Their faith

and soul is still theirs and to gamble isnt ideal because the chances are irrational.
5
Crash course philosophy #15
 4

Likewise, with Pascals argument he puts this in the perspective of a mono-

theistic view of Christians. Meaning, that this religion in itself is right and all the rest are

wrong. And now youre risking all the other beliefs and what may come from the good/

bad of those religious beliefs. It isnt just the model from above that God exists, God

doesnt exist, belief and disbelief anymore. It becomes thousands of different models

based on all the different religions. The wager isnt simple anymore and you now may be

wagering on the wrong God. Also, every religion also has their own laws, creeds and

rules. Not all of them can just follow Pascals 2x2 matrix model, because of all the other

religions, more models would be needed in order to adhere to the laws of other religions.

Even then, other deitys or Gods may punish people for the beliefs for taking a gamble

on eternal salvation, because the interest of the person was selfish and not genuine.

The way I see it, is that Pascals argument is flawed but it does give a great

chance, when it comes to odds of happiness. But this isnt viable because personally I

dont know the odds exactly and my faith is different compared to every other person in

every way possible I believe. With his argument also, due to the flaws, it basically goes

from a fun way of gambling on the slot machines, to picking only one number at the

roulette table.6 If we really want to take a real gamble, we should just get baptized in

every temple and church. That way our odds our better to achieve eternal salvation

overall. Even then there is still a gamble because the existence of God is still unknown.

While this sounds like it works for me, it doesnt necessarily work for everyone else

because beliefs are again unique to each individual.

Additionally, I believe we come to make our decisions and choices based on our

own experiences, but we cant just choose to believe or not believe. Our experiences
6
Shannon Atkinson class discussion
 5

mold our very being, and we experience things differently than others. Why must I

gamble in order to get the chance to reach eternal salvation, why do my sins have to

reflect that I will get eternal damnation? Not going to church should be an option of my

own happiness and in doing so it should not be frowned upon because my belief isnt

whether God exists or doesnt exist. If I or anyone else is to find true happiness with the

things I witness everyday, that should be enough to allow me or others to reach eternal

happiness without having to take a risk on where I will land in one of Pascals options of

belief or disbelief. An infinite reward should be offered to everyone, why? Because then

odds arent a factor and everyone can be happy but there must be strings attached, I just

dont know what exactly yet.

Ultimately, Pascal is trying to instill that the true beliefs arent as important as

finding a practical belief. We must risk our very souls in hopes of what if, in order to

reach eternal salvation. Pascals wager is reason that cannot determine the existence of

God. It is our faith.7 His models explain why the premises of believing in the existence of

God gives hope to people. But it is a gamble that is not fit for all religions, and personally

does not fit with my experience and beliefs. However, Pascal does wager odds that are in

favor of individuals who choose to follow his belief and accept it. He basically tells us

that how and why we choose to believe in God doesnt matter, because God doesnt care

how he attracts our beliefs, as long as hes able to obtain our beliefs, thats all that

matters. Basically, Pascal tells us to brainwash ourselves into believing and eventually, in

due time well grow and become true believers and not even know that we brainwashed

ourselves into the wager weve made to obtain the possibility of eternal salvation.

7
Class notes Shannon Atkinson