SCANDAL!!
the human torch was denied a bank loan.
i'm taking this right to the top!
gymige was orsm. i punished my body for all my sins :) i've been absolved for today.... no... not yet... i'm yet to give money to the salvos. THEN i'll be saved from eternal damnation in bowels of satan.
i swear... if this whole god thing is for real (as per the bible) then i dare say we'd have to be absolving ourselves of our sins every day if not every hour. i dunno. it seems so unrealistic. i've come to believe in a god, but not the god espoused by any of the major religions. i've come to think that there was once a correct form of belief, but over the millions of years that knowledge has warped in a crude form of world-wide chinese whispers.
that's what i think.
if you disagree, then you're wrong.
comments please. do you believe in a 'god'? if so why? if not, why not?
before you do tho...
think about this.
Blaise Pascal set out a really convincing arguement for believing in god and it went a little something like this...
imagine you're at the ponies and there's two horses racing, Fortune and Quicksilver.
the chance of fortune winning is 60% (.6) and quicksilver 40% (.4) correspondingly, if fortune wins you'll get a $10 payoff (say from a $5 wager) and quicksilver will win you $20 (but it costs you only $3 to make this bet). Using the expected value formula (which only works because rational gambling [HAHAHAHA only i can say that with a straight face] is not just about chance, payoff or cost... it's a function of all three) which is given by:
(Chance*Payoff) - Cost = Expected value
so the expected value of Fortune is $1 and the expected value of Quicksilver $5.
now lets apply this to religion. this time the horses are called Atheism and God. The chances of each winning are about 50% (.5). The cost of betting on both is finite (we'll say $1000 for each); you either do all the god loving things or you avoid them. simple. the payoff is completely different for both, however. If you win by betting on atheism, you get nothing. you die and that's it (but i'll put $5000 into your bank account just because); no ultimate epiphany or realisation of self since yourself is just a mesh of biological and chemical reactions. if you bet on god and win, the payoff is infinite. eternal live, paradise; the whole kit and kaboodle. nice.
so lets go all expected value on this.
Atheism: (.5*5000)-1000 = 1500 (finite)
God: (.5*infinity)-1000 = infinity
Pascal submits that the ONLY logical thing someone can do in this situation is bet on god.
bet on god and win; win it all. bet on god and lose; lose nothing.
bet on atheism and win; win nothing. bet on atheism and lose; lose everything.
there's a few arguements against this justification.
(i) you bet on god because you win the most will send you right to hell (courtesy of William James). I think that this just justifies believing in a god. one generally changes their lives to accomodate such a belief.
(ii) 50%? who says it's not 37.32423%? or why not 10%? it's because it's two options. in the end the probability assignment is irrelevant.
(iii) what about hindu gods? old greek gods? the judeo-christian god? i think this is a guide for belief in something greater... Pascal aimed it the judeo-christian form... but that doesnt mean anyone else has to.
Now, what do you think? ;)
i'm taking this right to the top!
gymige was orsm. i punished my body for all my sins :) i've been absolved for today.... no... not yet... i'm yet to give money to the salvos. THEN i'll be saved from eternal damnation in bowels of satan.
i swear... if this whole god thing is for real (as per the bible) then i dare say we'd have to be absolving ourselves of our sins every day if not every hour. i dunno. it seems so unrealistic. i've come to believe in a god, but not the god espoused by any of the major religions. i've come to think that there was once a correct form of belief, but over the millions of years that knowledge has warped in a crude form of world-wide chinese whispers.
that's what i think.
if you disagree, then you're wrong.
comments please. do you believe in a 'god'? if so why? if not, why not?
before you do tho...
think about this.
Blaise Pascal set out a really convincing arguement for believing in god and it went a little something like this...
imagine you're at the ponies and there's two horses racing, Fortune and Quicksilver.
the chance of fortune winning is 60% (.6) and quicksilver 40% (.4) correspondingly, if fortune wins you'll get a $10 payoff (say from a $5 wager) and quicksilver will win you $20 (but it costs you only $3 to make this bet). Using the expected value formula (which only works because rational gambling [HAHAHAHA only i can say that with a straight face] is not just about chance, payoff or cost... it's a function of all three) which is given by:
(Chance*Payoff) - Cost = Expected value
so the expected value of Fortune is $1 and the expected value of Quicksilver $5.
now lets apply this to religion. this time the horses are called Atheism and God. The chances of each winning are about 50% (.5). The cost of betting on both is finite (we'll say $1000 for each); you either do all the god loving things or you avoid them. simple. the payoff is completely different for both, however. If you win by betting on atheism, you get nothing. you die and that's it (but i'll put $5000 into your bank account just because); no ultimate epiphany or realisation of self since yourself is just a mesh of biological and chemical reactions. if you bet on god and win, the payoff is infinite. eternal live, paradise; the whole kit and kaboodle. nice.
so lets go all expected value on this.
Atheism: (.5*5000)-1000 = 1500 (finite)
God: (.5*infinity)-1000 = infinity
Pascal submits that the ONLY logical thing someone can do in this situation is bet on god.
bet on god and win; win it all. bet on god and lose; lose nothing.
bet on atheism and win; win nothing. bet on atheism and lose; lose everything.
there's a few arguements against this justification.
(i) you bet on god because you win the most will send you right to hell (courtesy of William James). I think that this just justifies believing in a god. one generally changes their lives to accomodate such a belief.
(ii) 50%? who says it's not 37.32423%? or why not 10%? it's because it's two options. in the end the probability assignment is irrelevant.
(iii) what about hindu gods? old greek gods? the judeo-christian god? i think this is a guide for belief in something greater... Pascal aimed it the judeo-christian form... but that doesnt mean anyone else has to.
Now, what do you think? ;)