A variation of Pascal's Wager-Question for Non Believers

[Bigdaddydvo]

This past weekend I visited the University of Notre Dame on the occasion of the Notre Dame-Navy game. One of the pregame celebrations was in memory of Father William Corby. Father Corby was a priest who was a Civil War Chaplain. He is well known among Civil War enthusiests for granting General Absolution to his unit in the Union prior to Gettysburg. The account follows:

"The Rite of Absolution

Gettysburg NMP
Another interesting monument near this location is that to Father William Corby, chaplain of the famous "Irish Brigade". On the afternoon of July 2, just prior to the brigade's advance to the Wheatfield, Father Corby stood upon a large boulder and granted general absolution to the catholic members of the brigade. It was a most stirring moment as the chaplain raised his voice above the din of battle while over 300 Union soldiers who were about to face death knelt before him. Within the hour, the brigade was in the thick of the battle. To commemorate this unique event, a statue of Father Corby was erected upon the exact boulder where he stood that afternoon, and was dedicated on October 29, 1910."

FYI, General Absolution is a tool catholic priests use to forgive the sins of people in emergency situations where their lives are in grave danger (e.g. a civil war battle). The Church requires that those who receive GA and survive the emergency situation must confess their sins to a priest at first opportunity to make the Absolution valid. If a person dies, then GA provides him/her the graces necessary to enter Heaven immediately.

This is a situation where someone has a high probability of dying. Here's my question for the non-believers: Each soldier in that formation knelt down to receive General Absolution. If in that formation, would you have knelt to accept General Absolution as well? What about a situation where death is almost certain, like an airplane about to crash?

It seems to me that even for a committed atheist, this is entirely a "spiritual freeroll" with no downside and only a very large upside. I'm curious about the rationale for those who wouldn't take it.

[Lestat]

Irrationality is it's own downside.

If you were about to die and someone told you to click your heels 3 times and you will receive total consciousness, would you do it having nothing else to lose?

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
Irrationality is it's own downside.

If you were about to die and someone told you to click your heels 3 times and you will receive total consciousness, would you do it having nothing else to lose?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not aware of ANYONE that believes this. The proposition you cited would be dismissed by every rational person. This stands in contrast to one billion Catholics who believe in Absolution, all of whom are rational (minus those with psychological disorders that are statistically expected within a one billion sample size).

[chezlaw]

it has the same downside as Pascals wager. God may prefer that you stick with being rational.

chez

Bigdaddydvo,

I don't mean to offend, but isn't religion just something you were told about? The fact that a billion people believe in it doesn't prove anything. The rationalization of the religion comes after the assumption of its truth. So, in a very basic sense, religion can be likened to "someone telling you to click your heel three times." Well, religion is actually the expansion from that revelation, and in the expansion there can be rationality. I can't argue that, just look at Aquinas: he was extremely rational. But it all starts from one assumption and grows from there. That isn't debatable, either. The truth of the assumption is debatable, but I won't get into that here.

EvF

[Lestat]

Your question was posed to non-believers. A non-believer sees no rational reason to believe in God. You basically asked:

Why not perform an irrational act if you have nothing left to lose? I just turned the question around.

As to whether or not the 1 billion people you cite are thinking rationally when it comes to religion; Well, you already have my opinion.

[imported_luckyme]

As long as the chance of death isn't 100% then there is a big downside. Even with the chance of death at 100%, for an atheist you have to live within your moral boundaries while you are alive. Death was always coming, the fact that it's been upgraded to a ClassVI is just a date change not a reason to forsake the meaning you have given to your life and the lives of those that matter to you.

It takes a lot of confidence in your answer to become an atheist, in north america even little kids become xistians so that's the default 'easy' road. Not having to give up rationality essentially means there is nothing that can challenge your deduction, so it's on much firmer ground than a 'leap-of-faith' that gets 'tested' with real-life actions. Real life confirms an atheistic view it doesn't challenge it.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that even for a committed atheist, this is entirely a "spiritual freeroll" with no downside and only a very large upside. I'm curious about the rationale for those who wouldn't take it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would definitely not kneel down and probably would have tried to make a very loud objection to this behaviour. A sort of last stand! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I find the concept of god totally immoral. I think that would he/she/it exists, the only possible (and heroic) position for a human would be to reject it with all it's might even at the risk of eternal damnation, and even if it is possibly due to a misunderstanding of the mystery of it being a loving god whilst displaying the cruelty obviously apparent in the world. Not to do so seems to be akin to people living in a tyrannical regime (Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, Mugabe, etc..), shrugging they shoulders when they see an injustice or an act of cruelty, thinking, hey the tyrant is mightier than me and I could get in trouble here, or, the tyrant must know better.

I think to object to theism is to open the possibility of compassion and empathy based on an understanding and observation of the human condition. To accept god is to side with injustice, cruelty and to condone it, whatever the cause.

So I'll go for the heroic action. I feel somehow redeemed by this and it seems to give meaning to my life in a meaningless world. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[David Sklansky]

Just to clarify, your question is to atheists, correct? Certainly you can see why your argument falls apart for Jews or Muslims.

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
Just to clarify, your question is to atheists, correct? Certainly you can see why your argument falls apart for Jews or Muslims.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this question is geared towards Atheists.

I presume you'd think it would fall apart because a Jew/Muslim would face potential retribution from their God if the following two conditions are met:

A) Jew/Muslim accepts Absolution and thus implicitly rejects their own faith.

B) Jew/Muslim faces negative retribution from their God if they die and it turns out that one of the two are correct.

Could we safely allow Jews or Muslims to answer the question if we, as a stipulation to the question, guarantee no negative consequences for accepting Absolution? (Assume an understanding God who can empathize with choices made under the most stressful of circumstances).

[nothumb]

Let me ask you something. If a god-hating, baby-killing atheist can get into heaven for ten seconds of self-interested, passive participation, earning the same reward that a believer does for a lifetime of faith and good works, doesn't that kind of sour the product the Church is peddling?

I ask this not to be a smartass but because from a young age this is the source of my skepticism. If all one has to do to earn favor with God is repent, in a self-interested and desperate manner, facing mortal terror and dismemberment, what motivation is there to do good? And how do we reconcile this obvious loophole with an all-knowing, all-powerful God?

NT

[David Sklansky]

"Let me ask you something. If a god-hating, baby-killing atheist can get into heaven for ten seconds of self-interested, passive participation, earning the same reward that a believer does for a lifetime of faith and good works, doesn't that kind of sour the product the Church is peddling?"

No. Here's the real reason why:

Christians are more than happy to accept the fact that very bad people can be saved through belief and extremely good people can be doomed through non belief because 98% of them are less than extremely good. If they are merely pretty good, it,behooves them to hope that God considers everyone, including the extremely good, unworthy of saving except though his grace.

In other words a pretty good person, knowing that there are a few extremely good people out there that he can't compete with, is better off saying that even the extremely good person is not perfect and not satisfying to God. And if he substitutes faith as the important criteria for God, he becomes equal with the extremely good person. The fact that he no longer has an advantage over the not good person in this scheme is a tradeoff well worth it.

[Scotch78]

[ QUOTE ]
all of whom are rational

[/ QUOTE ]

Good luck proving this. Oh, crap, your argument fails if you can't.

Scott

[nothumb]

This is pretty much what I was trying to get at David. Discussing rational choice theory with a religious person is sort of like discussing sex with a nun. They can guess at what it might be like, but they haven't got any practice, so it just feels unnatural and speculative.


NT

I would not kneel and would probably shout obscenities at the speaker. Your question is lame. Why don't you, when faced with mortal danger, not cry out "Jesus, Alah, Buddha, Save Me!"?

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my question for the non-believers: Each soldier in that formation knelt down to receive General Absolution. If in that formation, would you have knelt to accept General Absolution as well? What about a situation where death is almost certain, like an airplane about to crash?

It seems to me that even for a committed atheist, this is entirely a "spiritual freeroll" with no downside and only a very large upside. I'm curious about the rationale for those who wouldn't take it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an atheist, and I wouldn't take it. The reasons, briefly, are as follows:

1. I'm an atheist as a natural consequence of being rational (at least in that respect), which I consider to be a virtue. I would want to spend the last moments of my life acting consistent with those values.

2. If the personal "god" of Christianity exists as interpreted by most Christians, he is profoundly evil. Thus, the only thing I'd have to say to him would be: "Thanks for putting me and countless others in this position, you evil rat bastard."

3. If "god" is actually good, he will more likely reward me if I remain rational, i.e. reason #1.

Hence, my best "wager" would be not to accept absolution. Any "god" who would punish me for this can't be trusted anyway.

Now bigdaddydvo,

You have had a few worthy answers (and probably unexpected), are you going to sit there, or are you going to make an answer/comment? Maybe you will continue with a satisfied smuggness that knows he is right because he is on the side of might!

Looking forward to some meaningful comments from you.

[Trantor]

[ QUOTE ]
This past weekend I visited the University of Notre Dame on the occasion of the Notre Dame-Navy game. One of the pregame celebrations was in memory of Father William Corby. Father Corby was a priest who was a Civil War Chaplain. He is well known among Civil War enthusiests for granting General Absolution to his unit in the Union prior to Gettysburg. The account follows:

"The Rite of Absolution

Gettysburg NMP
Another interesting monument near this location is that to Father William Corby, chaplain of the famous "Irish Brigade". On the afternoon of July 2, just prior to the brigade's advance to the Wheatfield, Father Corby stood upon a large boulder and granted general absolution to the catholic members of the brigade. It was a most stirring moment as the chaplain raised his voice above the din of battle while over 300 Union soldiers who were about to face death knelt before him. Within the hour, the brigade was in the thick of the battle. To commemorate this unique event, a statue of Father Corby was erected upon the exact boulder where he stood that afternoon, and was dedicated on October 29, 1910."

FYI, General Absolution is a tool catholic priests use to forgive the sins of people in emergency situations where their lives are in grave danger (e.g. a civil war battle). The Church requires that those who receive GA and survive the emergency situation must confess their sins to a priest at first opportunity to make the Absolution valid. If a person dies, then GA provides him/her the graces necessary to enter Heaven immediately.

This is a situation where someone has a high probability of dying. Here's my question for the non-believers: Each soldier in that formation knelt down to receive General Absolution. If in that formation, would you have knelt to accept General Absolution as well? What about a situation where death is almost certain, like an airplane about to crash?

It seems to me that even for a committed atheist, this is entirely a "spiritual freeroll" with no downside and only a very large upside. I'm curious about the rationale for those who wouldn't take it.

[/ QUOTE ]

An operation to remove my appendix about 5 years ago (age 45 and so an atheist of some 4 decades) has a finite chance of death and odds which do not alter the premis of your question even though obviously far from near-certain death. It never even crossed my mind to say a prayer or make any vows before going under.

[bocablkr]

There is an expression that there are no atheists in a foxhole. That is FALSE. Atheists do not change their mind as they face death.

I was in a bad accident as a teenager and was drifting in an out of consciousness. I thought I was dying. Never, not even for a nanosecond, did I think about god or anything like that. I think theist find this hard to believe.

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
Now bigdaddydvo,

You have had a few worthy answers (and probably unexpected), are you going to sit there, or are you going to make an answer/comment? Maybe you will continue with a satisfied smuggness that knows he is right because he is on the side of might!

Looking forward to some meaningful comments from you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. This is the response I deemed most insightful:

[ QUOTE ]
I'm an atheist, and I wouldn't take it. The reasons, briefly, are as follows:

1. I'm an atheist as a natural consequence of being rational (at least in that respect), which I consider to be a virtue. I would want to spend the last moments of my life acting consistent with those values.

2. If the personal "god" of Christianity exists as interpreted by most Christians, he is profoundly evil. Thus, the only thing I'd have to say to him would be: "Thanks for putting me and countless others in this position, you evil rat bastard."

3. If "god" is actually good, he will more likely reward me if I remain rational, i.e. reason #1.

Hence, my best "wager" would be not to accept absolution. Any "god" who would punish me for this can't be trusted anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

Point #1: This is probably the best response I've seen. Remaining true to your beliefs is, in its own way, a virtue. Outside of this, I fail to see a positive consequence for steadfastly maintaining atheism to death.

Point #2: This is certainly a preposterous statement. Your thoughts seem to be: "Dear God. You do not exist. But if you exist in the Christian sense, you are evil." Since all Christian thought and theory fall are derived from the principle teaching of "Love God with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul; and Love your neighbor as yourself." This is truly the antithesis of evil. Nonetheless, I'm curious about what inspires these feelings in you, and would be happy to address any grievances you feel towards the Christian God.

Point #3: Though there is marginal benefit to the virtue I acknowledge in #1, I cannot see how God would value your perceived rationality over belief.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]

Point #1: This is probably the best response I've seen. Remaining true to your beliefs is, in its own way, a virtue. Outside of this, I fail to see a positive consequence for steadfastly maintaining atheism to death.


[/ QUOTE ]

Since "god" does not exist, there is no consequence "outside" of betraying my fundamental values. That is sufficient reason. And in any case, any attempt to "hedge my bets" will be viewed negatively by a just, rational "god."

[ QUOTE ]

Point #2: This is certainly a preposterous statement. Your thoughts seem to be: "Dear God. You do not exist. But if you exist in the Christian sense, you are evil." Since all Christian thought and theory fall are derived from the principle teaching of "Love God with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul; and Love your neighbor as yourself." This is truly the antithesis of evil. Nonetheless, I'm curious about what inspires these feelings in you, and would be happy to address any grievances you feel towards the Christian God.


[/ QUOTE ]

I have no grievance towards a meaningless concept. I was merely pointing out that to the extent that the Christian "god" is described by (some versions of) Christianity, he/she/it is, by my definition, evil -- regardless or whether Christianity supposedly also teaches to love thy neighbor and whatnot.

I don't mean this to degrade into yet another thread about how the Christian "god" is evil. I suppose if you really want, I can start (yet another) thread that lists all these reasons, as there are many.

[ QUOTE ]

Point #3: Though there is marginal benefit to the virtue I acknowledge in #1, I cannot see how God would value your perceived rationality over belief.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. If "god" is good (and therefore rational), he will value rational men. (But not necessarily punish irrational men either, as he presumably knowingly created them that way as well.)

2. If "god" values belief over rationality, he is, by definition, irrational and evil.

[Lestat]

<font color="blue">Point #2: This is certainly a preposterous statement. Your thoughts seem to be: "Dear God. You do not exist. But if you exist in the Christian sense, you are evil." Since all Christian thought and theory fall are derived from the principle teaching of "Love God with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul; and Love your neighbor as yourself." This is truly the antithesis of evil. Nonetheless, I'm curious about what inspires these feelings in you, and would be happy to address any grievances you feel towards the Christian God. </font>

If the Christian God did exist, I can certainly see how one might consider Him evil. He holds humans under threat of damnation unless they show worship based strictly on heresay and for which there is not a single shred of observable evidence for.

It's like a trap. Why would a just God trick his beloved creations like that? Just come clean. Here I am. This is what I want of you. Why demand an irrational belief?