Sunday
Nov022008
Pascal's Un-Wager
Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 11:00 PM
For my British Literature class, we were doing some reading by Francis Bacon. It was actually very interesting stuff to look through, but one of the quotes that caught my eye was the opening to his essay "On Superstition." It reads:
I thought this was a very interesting quote from a guy who proclaimed to not believe that there was a God. Bacon uses this quote to say that if one cannot have an accurate picture of God, then why have any picture at all. The argument is then that it is better to have no picture or idea of God than to have one that isn't accurate. As I was thinking about this, I came across the idea to look at this as Pascal's Wager for atheists or agnostics. Pascal's Wager states that one may or may not believe in God. If one does not believe in God, fine, but Pascal argues that it there is no harm in believing there is a God because you don't lose anything, you only gain salvation. If you do believe in a God and there doesn't turn out to be one, then you do not lose anything. While this is a traditional wisdom argument, it does have some major assumptions that turn into flaws, but that's not what I want to get into right now.
Bacon essentially applies this logic to the view of a God. You can have a picture of God, but it would take no extra effort to not have a belief in Him. You don't lose anything because the picture of God you create can never be accurate anyways. Therefore, the benefits are on the side of the agnostic to err on the side of caution, why believe something you cannot prove?
I think this is a very valid point that Bacon makes. Why have a picture of God at all if you can't have one that is accurate? Don't you think that over the course of the years, Christians have tried to create a picture of a god that just isn't accurate or true and that is too tainted by conservative values? It's no wonder that so many people walk away from faith or the Church today, because the God they worship is a flawed view of God. I believe if people are going to continue to be Christians, they need to start to make sure they can nail down an accurate view of who God is so that they are not misrepresenting Him to the masses.
It were better to have no opinion of God at all than such an opinion as is unworthy of Him.
I thought this was a very interesting quote from a guy who proclaimed to not believe that there was a God. Bacon uses this quote to say that if one cannot have an accurate picture of God, then why have any picture at all. The argument is then that it is better to have no picture or idea of God than to have one that isn't accurate. As I was thinking about this, I came across the idea to look at this as Pascal's Wager for atheists or agnostics. Pascal's Wager states that one may or may not believe in God. If one does not believe in God, fine, but Pascal argues that it there is no harm in believing there is a God because you don't lose anything, you only gain salvation. If you do believe in a God and there doesn't turn out to be one, then you do not lose anything. While this is a traditional wisdom argument, it does have some major assumptions that turn into flaws, but that's not what I want to get into right now.
Bacon essentially applies this logic to the view of a God. You can have a picture of God, but it would take no extra effort to not have a belief in Him. You don't lose anything because the picture of God you create can never be accurate anyways. Therefore, the benefits are on the side of the agnostic to err on the side of caution, why believe something you cannot prove?
I think this is a very valid point that Bacon makes. Why have a picture of God at all if you can't have one that is accurate? Don't you think that over the course of the years, Christians have tried to create a picture of a god that just isn't accurate or true and that is too tainted by conservative values? It's no wonder that so many people walk away from faith or the Church today, because the God they worship is a flawed view of God. I believe if people are going to continue to be Christians, they need to start to make sure they can nail down an accurate view of who God is so that they are not misrepresenting Him to the masses.
Reader Comments (1)
Sometimes I joke that Pascal's Wager doesn't work. If I believe in God and he doesn't exist, it's not that I lose nothing. I lost my only opportunity for self-serving gluttony, pursuit of success, animalism, promiscuity, autonomy, etc. that I could have indulged in because it doesn't ultimately matter. So it's either a temporary-one shot at the best life I can give myself...or it's, in light of eternity, a pursuit of a better after-life.
I proposed the idea to someone once about how dogmatic and concrete our theologies have become. While I understand the need for core principle (rather than pluralism), I offered up this thought: The moment you have set your image of God in stone, you have created an idol.
In essence, if your view of God is set in unyielding statements and ideas, you may as well have carved him out yourself. He is transcendent, and therefore, beyond our full comprehension.