The Wager posits that it is a better “bet” to believe that God exists than not to believe, because the expected value of believing (which Pascal assessed as infinite) is always greater than the expected value of not believing. In Pascal’s assessment, it is inexcusable not to investigate this issue:

Variations of this argument may be found in other religious philosophies, such as Islam, Hinduism, and even Buddhism.

I quote from the great philosopher’s Book, ‘Pensées’

Let us now speak according to natural lights…Let us then examine this point, and say, “God is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up… Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? 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.

In his Wager, Pascal provides an analytical process for a person to evaluate options in regarding belief in God. As Pascal sets it out, the options are two: believe or not believe. There is no third possibility.

Therefore, we are faced with the following possibilities:

You believe in God.
If God exists, you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
If God does not exist, your loss (the investment in your mistaken belief) is finite and therefore negligible.
You do not believe in God.
If God exists, you go to hell: your loss is infinite.
If God does not exist, your gain is finite and therefore negligible.

With these possibilities, and the principles of statistics, Pascal hoped to have demonstrated that the only prudent course of action is to believe in God. It is a simple application of game theory.

As a speculator and risk-taker, the sheer advantages of making this so-called “bet” has potential upside than downside from a personal stand-point.

However you can take the point of the Atheist’s Wager, which is an atheistic response to Pascal’s Wager. While Pascal suggested that it is better to take the chance of believing in a God that might not exist rather than to risk losing infinite happiness by disbelieving in a god that does, the Atheist’s Wager suggests that:

You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in God. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him.

I believe that the human mind is an incredible force. Its human nature to think about good vs evil. All religions boil down to one thing - a common desire for good and to bring out the best in man, despite the fact that man, not God, messed it up. For some people it is inherent, for others they need to be gently reminded - which is why man goes to mosques, temples, churches and synogogues.

And if man cannot go to such institutions… of course lets not forget the Quran, Vedas, The Bible and Torah and lets include Dale Carnegie’s “How to win Friends and Influence people” just for Fun. All with underlying themes of basic human values and how to bring out the best in man, - written by man(some having a disclaimer of intervetion of the Divine). The secret here is that if one reads these books -they actually focus on how to lead a better life and improve your life in their own respective ways - some through guidelines, some through setting stories as examples etc….not actually pleasing a higher power.

Almost all religious books say “Do not use God’s name in vain”

What does that mean? I think that it can mean a number of things. It sets the foundation and discipline for not using your parents name in vain or your elders and trickles on down…. a common theme of respect. No one is perfect. I myself, far from it, but it is these “reminders” that keep us humans to improve and be better, and again some need it… others don’t.

There was once a student that did not study for a test. He went to take the exam and was the first to turn the paper in. The boy wrote “God knows all the answers to the questions on this test”
When the professor gave back the exams the next day. The boy got his paper back and on the test, the professor wrote… “God gets 100, You get a 0″…the point being a higher power does nothing for you… if you put zero effort yourself.

It is indeed the responsibility of parents to teach their children morals and values, but I have learned equally if not more from a variety of other people… teachers, uncles and aunts, grandparents, cousins, friends of all religions, work associates, priests, rabbis, even beggars and the list goes on. Thus it is short-sighted to say that one does not need a third person or place to learn the art of life. Parents are part of the equation but just one part of it.

Things… good or bad, will indeed continue to happen… just like it has since the beginning of time and hard work and kindness will be valued and respected…just like they have since the beginning of time, but just as before…a higher power does nothing for you… if you put zero effort yourself…as is with all things in life.

Very nice blog….like the gallery. Ria is getting cuter by the day!