Indiana Jones & Pascal's Wager: Crash Course Philosophy #15
video description
Date: 2022-04-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Noah
I so wanna write a comment saying my thoughts on this video as a Christain since I have a got of thoughts about this, but I'm afraid I won't be as elegant as I am in my mind, haha
I think though, that I would find myself inbetween those two belief systems presented in the video. I do believe in God based on faith alone, but I also value and understand the practical side of religious beliefs.
Basically, what I mean is that while do believe that there is only one true God, my God, I understand that there are billions of people here on this earth, many of them going through their own spiritual walks in different ways that may be better for them. I will spread the knowledge about my God as is the general practice in my religion in the hope that others come to Him, but I 100% respect those who do not come to Him or even go to other religious beliefs, and their life choices
In the end, if there is a God who dwells in a spiritual realm that works in amazing ways far beyond our understanding, then when it eventually comes time to veiw our lives under that holy lense, it's not going to be as simple as, -That lifestyle is wrong! - and, -That lifestyle is right! - There's going to be nuance beyond what we can comprehend while on this earthly plane. That's why I try as hard as I can to abstain from any judgement of anyone who disagrees from me
reply
I so wanna write a comment saying my thoughts on this video as a Christain since I have a got of thoughts about this, but I'm afraid I won't be as elegant as I am in my mind, haha
I think though, that I would find myself inbetween those two belief systems presented in the video. I do believe in God based on faith alone, but I also value and understand the practical side of religious beliefs.
Basically, what I mean is that while do believe that there is only one true God, my God, I understand that there are billions of people here on this earth, many of them going through their own spiritual walks in different ways that may be better for them. I will spread the knowledge about my God as is the general practice in my religion in the hope that others come to Him, but I 100% respect those who do not come to Him or even go to other religious beliefs, and their life choices
In the end, if there is a God who dwells in a spiritual realm that works in amazing ways far beyond our understanding, then when it eventually comes time to veiw our lives under that holy lense, it's not going to be as simple as, -That lifestyle is wrong! - and, -That lifestyle is right! - There's going to be nuance beyond what we can comprehend while on this earthly plane. That's why I try as hard as I can to abstain from any judgement of anyone who disagrees from me
reply
Raj0477
I'm an atheist. Having said that, here's what I think (my opinion, yours might differ, -Pascal-s wager- is a classic example of a choice under uncertainty. The uncertainty is whether God exists. Belief or non-belief in God is the choice to be made. Pascal argues that the reward for belief in God if God actually does exist is infinite, while the cost of believing in God if God actually does not exist is low. Therefore, the expected value of belief exceeds that of non-belief, so Pascal contends that it is prudent to believe in God. People tend to forget the rationale with pascals argument and his viewpoint, he arguing simply based on the theory of -Expected Value- (that is something has +ve expected value if the benefits outweigh the costs, which indeed do as per his argument, he clearly didn't want any non believers to believe or had any religious disbeliefs whatsoever. Drawing conclusions without knowing the person's rationales and assumptions is a fatal mistake.
reply
I'm an atheist. Having said that, here's what I think (my opinion, yours might differ, -Pascal-s wager- is a classic example of a choice under uncertainty. The uncertainty is whether God exists. Belief or non-belief in God is the choice to be made. Pascal argues that the reward for belief in God if God actually does exist is infinite, while the cost of believing in God if God actually does not exist is low. Therefore, the expected value of belief exceeds that of non-belief, so Pascal contends that it is prudent to believe in God. People tend to forget the rationale with pascals argument and his viewpoint, he arguing simply based on the theory of -Expected Value- (that is something has +ve expected value if the benefits outweigh the costs, which indeed do as per his argument, he clearly didn't want any non believers to believe or had any religious disbeliefs whatsoever. Drawing conclusions without knowing the person's rationales and assumptions is a fatal mistake.
reply
drfoxcourt
Pascal thought he was being pragmatic, but failed to realize two important flaws: 1-What if you believe in the wrong god? With all the sectarian options, Pascal chose only the Catholic god (no small wonder as France was intensely catholic at the time. 2-Belief in any god does come at a price. Another mathematician, Pierre LaPlace when asked why his model of the Universe hadn't included God said, -I had no need of that hypothesis. - From this we can realize that if we have the choice of making up a solution with no evidence of its truth, we should leave that part out lest it interfere with the facts for which we DO have evidence. Pascal, it turns out, wasn't pragmatic, except in that his culture might well have killed him as a heretic for a failure to believe in the catholic god. Not very pragmatic of french culture to kill off an otherwise brilliant mind.
reply
Pascal thought he was being pragmatic, but failed to realize two important flaws: 1-What if you believe in the wrong god? With all the sectarian options, Pascal chose only the Catholic god (no small wonder as France was intensely catholic at the time. 2-Belief in any god does come at a price. Another mathematician, Pierre LaPlace when asked why his model of the Universe hadn't included God said, -I had no need of that hypothesis. - From this we can realize that if we have the choice of making up a solution with no evidence of its truth, we should leave that part out lest it interfere with the facts for which we DO have evidence. Pascal, it turns out, wasn't pragmatic, except in that his culture might well have killed him as a heretic for a failure to believe in the catholic god. Not very pragmatic of french culture to kill off an otherwise brilliant mind.
reply
Mushfiqur
The series was good.
By the way, Although I am theist but I find pascal's weager have a fallacy.
In case of God existing, Pascal only took account of the given God in religions. But the case can be far spooky.
What if God exists but he is not so good? Perhaps he is lying maniac who would do exactly the opposite in afterlife of what He said would do. Since we truly have no clue of God's nature, that is possible. There are of course tons of other possibilities. In the end, the possibility seem to clear nothing.
I believe in religion because I find enough reason to believe it. But Pascal's wager on its own certainly is not logical
reply
The series was good.
By the way, Although I am theist but I find pascal's weager have a fallacy.
In case of God existing, Pascal only took account of the given God in religions. But the case can be far spooky.
What if God exists but he is not so good? Perhaps he is lying maniac who would do exactly the opposite in afterlife of what He said would do. Since we truly have no clue of God's nature, that is possible. There are of course tons of other possibilities. In the end, the possibility seem to clear nothing.
I believe in religion because I find enough reason to believe it. But Pascal's wager on its own certainly is not logical
reply
chronosx7
I like the Russell's teapot thought experiment for it leads into a topic I don't usually hear about: Why is the existence of god important at all? across cultures and lines of thought I'd say belief in god is about as trascendental as liking vegetables or having a favorite color or artist. entirely subjective and actually pretty inconsequential (like the notion of a teapot floating somewhere in outer space. until someone decides to take it too seriously and/or force it onto others
reply
I like the Russell's teapot thought experiment for it leads into a topic I don't usually hear about: Why is the existence of god important at all? across cultures and lines of thought I'd say belief in god is about as trascendental as liking vegetables or having a favorite color or artist. entirely subjective and actually pretty inconsequential (like the notion of a teapot floating somewhere in outer space. until someone decides to take it too seriously and/or force it onto others
reply
WWZenaDo
I find Pascal's focus on increasing the numbers of followers over doing the much more difficult work of changing their internal emotional climates to make them better -Christians- to be crass and cynical. In effect Pascal just wanted more followers for his particular version of a monotheistic god, not to produce truly effective and personally beneficial changes in the follower's thought processes. Following ritual by rote is hardly likely to change anyone in a positive way.
reply
I find Pascal's focus on increasing the numbers of followers over doing the much more difficult work of changing their internal emotional climates to make them better -Christians- to be crass and cynical. In effect Pascal just wanted more followers for his particular version of a monotheistic god, not to produce truly effective and personally beneficial changes in the follower's thought processes. Following ritual by rote is hardly likely to change anyone in a positive way.
reply
drfoxcourt
and as for Kirkegard, this vid says, -We have to forego reason to get to truth. - How can you reason with someone who has abandoned reason? How can you come to truth if you don't base that truth in reality. -I believe because it is absurd. - is an abandonment of the one method that is reliable, scientific skepticism. Falsefiability and repeatable experiment as requisite to actual objective truth.
reply
and as for Kirkegard, this vid says, -We have to forego reason to get to truth. - How can you reason with someone who has abandoned reason? How can you come to truth if you don't base that truth in reality. -I believe because it is absurd. - is an abandonment of the one method that is reliable, scientific skepticism. Falsefiability and repeatable experiment as requisite to actual objective truth.
reply
Pokerface
Pascal's Wager is ridiculous. It 1) assumes there's only one god, 2) assumes that god will punish disbelief with eternal torment, and 3) because it appeals to self interest, it puts the emphasis on the cruelty of the god you're attempting to please. Using that logic, we should believe in the cruelest god imaginable, since that's the one you stand to suffer the most from by disbelieving in it.
reply
Pascal's Wager is ridiculous. It 1) assumes there's only one god, 2) assumes that god will punish disbelief with eternal torment, and 3) because it appeals to self interest, it puts the emphasis on the cruelty of the god you're attempting to please. Using that logic, we should believe in the cruelest god imaginable, since that's the one you stand to suffer the most from by disbelieving in it.
reply
Andrew
This video is actually wrong about Pascal's wager. It doesn't depend on belief not costing anything. The actual argument is that the cost of belief is finite and the consequences of belief or disbelief are infinite (i. e. heaven and hell. Any finite cost is outweighed by an infinite benefit no matter how small the odds of gaining that benefit.
reply
This video is actually wrong about Pascal's wager. It doesn't depend on belief not costing anything. The actual argument is that the cost of belief is finite and the consequences of belief or disbelief are infinite (i. e. heaven and hell. Any finite cost is outweighed by an infinite benefit no matter how small the odds of gaining that benefit.
reply
Gabriel
I would punch Pascal's rotted corpse into paste for the idiocy he inflicted on the world. Every fifth-rate, drunken, slack-jawed hillbilly hick preacher can make his congregation of Wal-Mart wildebeests grunt agreeably and give him money they don't have with Pascal's gaffle. Bloody goddamn conman. I hope there is a Hell so he can burn in it.
reply
I would punch Pascal's rotted corpse into paste for the idiocy he inflicted on the world. Every fifth-rate, drunken, slack-jawed hillbilly hick preacher can make his congregation of Wal-Mart wildebeests grunt agreeably and give him money they don't have with Pascal's gaffle. Bloody goddamn conman. I hope there is a Hell so he can burn in it.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
