Pascal’s Wager — Agnostic Variation

Does God like your betting strategy?

Blaise Pascal — copy of the painting by François II Quesnel, which was made for Gérard Edelinck en 1691, source Wikipedia.

Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them. — Matthew 7:17–20, KJV

Recently, at a funeral, I was subjected again to “belief in God, heck, it’s just a common sense insurance policy for success in the afterlife”. (Heck, btw, is where you go if you don’t believe in Gosh.)

It’s pretty much my least favorite argument against agnosticism!

The OG version is called Pascal’s wager. Pascal argues that we should believe in God to hedge our bets.

From Wikipedia:

The wager uses the following logic (excerpts from Pensées, part III, §233):

• “God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.”
• “A Game is being played … where heads or tails will turn up.”
• “You must wager; it is not optional.”
• “Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.”
• “Wager, then, without hesitation, that He is. … There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.”
• “But some cannot believe. They should then ‘at least learn your inability to believe…’ and ‘Endeavour then to convince’ themselves.”

Apparently, God is easily fooled by facile belief.

I have a variant with its own scriptural touchstone

I’ll start with an appeal to the Canon. In this case, Heller’s Catch-22.

Lt Scheisskopf’s wife from George Clooney’s 2019 miniseries version. PR Photo — source IMDB

The book’s protagonist, Yossarian, is in bed with Lieutenant Scheisskopf’s wife. They are arguing about who is the better atheist and what, if anything, there is to be thankful for.

The argument degenerates with Scheisskopf’s wife arguing for the positive and Yossarian countering:

“Be thankful you’re healthy.” “Be bitter you’re not going to stay that way.”

“Be glad you’re even alive.” “Be furious you’re going to die.”

“Things could be much worse,” she cried. “They could be one hell of a lot better,” he answered heatedly.

Yossarian launches into a rant.

“ Good God, how much reverence can you have for a Supreme Being who finds it necessary to include such phenomena as phlegm and tooth decay in His divine system of creation? What in the world was running through that warped, evil, scatological mind of His when He robbed old people of the power to control their bowel movements? Why in the world did He ever create pain?…Oh, He was really being charitable to us when He gave us pain! Why couldn’t He have used a doorbell instead to notify us, or one of His celestial choirs?”

Yossarian goes on to argue that if God existed, he’d have to be considered an incompetent bumpkin, and that we should use the Last Judgement to grab him by the neck and get even.

At that, Lieutenant Scheisskopf’s wife cracks and starts screaming and attempting to beat Yosarian about the head and shoulders:

“What the hell are you getting so upset about?” he asked her bewilderedly in a tone of contrite amusement. “I thought you didn’t believe in God.”

“I don’t,” she sobbed, bursting violently into tears. “But the God I don’t believe in is a good God, a just God, a merciful God. He’s not the mean and stupid God you make Him out to be.”

Yossarian laughed and turned her arms loose. “Let’s have a little more religious freedom between us,” he proposed obligingly. “You don’t believe in the God you want to, and I won’t believe in the God I want to.”

My variant —

The God I don’t believe in is the same as Lieutenant Scheisskopf’s wife’s — a good, just, merciful God. A God that would see into people’s hearts and judge them by how they lived. A God that wouldn’t write someone out that had never heard of Jesus and wouldn’t be particularly bothered if those that had heard of him didn’t toady. A God that understands doubt and good intentions.

My wager:

• God doesn’t need toadying.
• Either I’m living a life that gets me in, or I’m not.
• Doubt is irrelevant.

And if I’m wrong and it’s Yossarian’s God. Well, we get our shot at the Last Judgement.

Thanks for reading. I love feedback. Comments, claps, etc. It helps me decide what to do next. Find all my projects at altabor.org.

This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.