The article revisits Pascal's wager, challenging its assumptions by suggesting that if God could be capricious, the decision-making process of believers would become more complex. Traditional interpretations imply a non-strategic God who rewards belief and punishes disbelief, making the choice straightforward. However, the author raises questions about why God, if she exists, would be solely dependent on believers' choices, emphasizing the nuance and strategic dimensions that could complicate divine judgment and alter the motivations of faith and belief.
If Pascal believes, She must reward him; if he disbelieves, She must punish him.
The decision to bet on the existence of God transparently demands craven loss aversion, and one wonders why a discriminating god would take a believer seriously.
Collection
[
|
...
]