Pascal's Wager Argument Analysis

Pascal’s Wager is an argument in philosophy made by seventeenth century French philosopher Blaise Pascal. His argument assumes that individuals wager their lives on the existence or non-existence of God. His argument is based on the Christian conception of God and thus, believes that the most rational and beneficial choice is to believe in God. Pascal’s Wager in the simplest form is, “If you win, you win all; if you lose, you lose nothing" (Pascal). Pascal says that if God exists and one wagers that God exists, he will "win all," so he has an infinite gain, which is defined as eternal life and happiness from God in heaven. If he wagers that God does not exist, he will have an infinite loss meaning he will be subjected to damnation. On the

From Pascal’s perspective, the only right choice to make is “wager then, without hesitation, that He does exist” (Pascal). Although Pascal argues that believing in God is the most reasonable decision, there are objections against his argument. The “different practices” objection and the “utility of salvation cannot be infinite” objection will be analyzed according to Pascal’s Wager.

Utter repetition of religious acts does not give an individual rational justification to believe in God. Pascal starts by mentioning that God's existence or nonexistence cannot be determined with reason; it cannot be proven, but a individual must “convince [himself], not by piling up proofs of God, but by subduing [his] passions” to believe in God (Pascal). Thus, Pascal’s usage of the term “believe” is not distinctly defined in his wager. Pascal argues that by acting like a believer, an individual will soon simply become a believer. To believe in God and gain salvation according to Christians, an individual must faithfully and thoughtfully follow the Ten Commandments, which govern that individuals

This assumption cannot be made since the definition of infinity is unknown and the utility of an outcome varies for every agent. The utility of an outcome is choosing the outcome that has the best overall results. Pascal believes that believing in God’s existence is so great that this outcome receives infinite reward. According to the dominance principle, the outcome when one believes in God and He exists has the greatest utility. This is based on Pascal’s utility of the outcome. Every agent values the utility of an outcome differently. Although Pascal may believe the utility of believing in God and He exists is infinite, another agent may give the outcome a different utility. Pascal also does not know the meaning and feeling of an infinite reward since humans can only experience the finite. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “an infinite reward could only be finitely appreciated by a human being” (Hájek). Even in his wager, Pascal says, “Since we know it is false to say that number is finite, it must be true that there is infinity in number. But we do not know what it is. We cannot say that it is even, or that it is odd” (Pascal). Pascal states that people do not know the definition of infinity, but he uses infinity in his reward even though he does not know the true utility of it. Pascal’s view on the existence of God is from a Catholic conception of God. Thus, an infinite reward according to the