Anti-Pascal's Wager
I have to say that I went to see Religulous on opening day. Not just because of my personal beliefs (if you didn't know I was atheist, SURPRISE!), but because of how powerful of an influence religon has on the policies of the United States and various other countries. It doesn't answer all of the questions. The evolution of the United States into a christian nation is only briefly glossed over (evolution... heh heh). Like many documentaries (and mockumentaries) it provokes the audience into learning more about our current situation on a local and global scale. Despite seeing what I think to be completely ludicrous from a political stand point, I can't simply claim ignorance on it or else my voice won't be heard.
I've actually spent a lot of time looking at different religions, mythologies and whatnot far before the release of this movie. (You can attribute that to my beliefs if you wish, but prior to doing this, I was ignorant to pretty much anything regarding any religion) Watching it was a natural step/diversion for me amidst all of the issues going on today. I've also come to learn that many Christian groups have come to hate Bill Maher for statements he and George Carlin have made about the church and religion as a whole. I don't have much of an opinion of his other statements at the moment, but they are entitled to their opinion as long as it isn't imposed on another person (which it isn't).
After coming out of the theater I was met by a group of Christian protestors that were obviously against the movie. Including a little handing out flyers and wearing a shirt with such an agressive religious phrase, I doubt she even knew what it meant. My immediate reaction was take a picture and post it on LJ, but one of the older people stopped me. It is a situation I wanted to flag the race card, but there was a black guy watching the entire protest (that looked oddly like something I just saw in Religulous). Then again, the black guy was in full military uniform that I find to be another big issue of itself. I don't want to get into that though.
So this guy comes up to me and makes the assumption that I saw the movie and that I am Atheist. Although he was right, I don't think this movie is just for Atheists. I think Bill Maher makes it very clear that the biggest problem he addresses is how religion affects the policies of a nation. I felt like at the time they were there mainly because previous statements he had said. The guy talked to me as though I were Bill himself. After a few minutes of me ignoring most of his statements, refusing his flyer, and trying to say I have religious tolerance. I fucked up by mentioning my grounds for disbelief were in science. I hoped he wasn't prepared with a counter-arguement, but he was.
There are numerous ways that the existence of god is "scientifically proven". They hurt my brain in how illogical they are though. The most well known of these is the idea of Creationism (i.e. Intelligent Design) as a counterpoint to Darwin's theory of evolution. This guy however decided to use a heavily flawed proof by math. I didn't know it had a name at the time, but it was something that was alluded to in Religulous. This was the decision table known as Pascal's Wager.
Here is the wager in a short table:
God Exists (G) God doesn't Exist (-G) Believes in God (B) +∞ (heaven) +N (nothing) Does not Believe in God (-B) -∞ (hell, death, purgatory) -N (nothing)
In short the Wager declares there is only good that can come out of believing in god. Looks all nice and scientific but it fails on epic proportions. Anyone who has taken high school english can see the rather large either-or fallacy prevalent in the above here. Oh yeah, I did mention that this decision table is generally used in math so how is it refuted in that sense? Although it is consistent that each column adds up to the same value (in this case 0), a decision table must address all possibilities. All possibilities are not expressed here, therefore the values currently assigned to each decision is invalid.
What exactly am I talking about? Does God care if you don't worship Him or does He get all pissy when you die? What if you picked the wrong God to believe in? If you see it as Him when it is really Her, will She consider it cute, are you considered the equivalent of an atheist or to a degree above/below an atheist? Wether you look at this from a english standpoint or a math standpoint, all of this should be addressed for this wager. Otherwise, this wager academically is a shitload of fuck.
So yeah, I figured all this out when it was posed to me. The only thing I didn't know was that it was famous and actually had a name. It was such an absurd claim to me that my only reaction was a laugh and I walked away. I figure from this point that there was no point to the counter argument and imposing my rationale against him wasn't going to alleviate the headache that he cause upon me. Besides, someone else appeared to have gotten more aggravated than me as several officers arrived on the scene.
Long time, no writing on my lj. Also this is probably my most risky entry as well. Totally worth it. Bring on the flame fire and brimstones if you want, I'll bring the marshmallows because I haven't had smores in years.
I've actually spent a lot of time looking at different religions, mythologies and whatnot far before the release of this movie. (You can attribute that to my beliefs if you wish, but prior to doing this, I was ignorant to pretty much anything regarding any religion) Watching it was a natural step/diversion for me amidst all of the issues going on today. I've also come to learn that many Christian groups have come to hate Bill Maher for statements he and George Carlin have made about the church and religion as a whole. I don't have much of an opinion of his other statements at the moment, but they are entitled to their opinion as long as it isn't imposed on another person (which it isn't).
After coming out of the theater I was met by a group of Christian protestors that were obviously against the movie. Including a little handing out flyers and wearing a shirt with such an agressive religious phrase, I doubt she even knew what it meant. My immediate reaction was take a picture and post it on LJ, but one of the older people stopped me. It is a situation I wanted to flag the race card, but there was a black guy watching the entire protest (that looked oddly like something I just saw in Religulous). Then again, the black guy was in full military uniform that I find to be another big issue of itself. I don't want to get into that though.
So this guy comes up to me and makes the assumption that I saw the movie and that I am Atheist. Although he was right, I don't think this movie is just for Atheists. I think Bill Maher makes it very clear that the biggest problem he addresses is how religion affects the policies of a nation. I felt like at the time they were there mainly because previous statements he had said. The guy talked to me as though I were Bill himself. After a few minutes of me ignoring most of his statements, refusing his flyer, and trying to say I have religious tolerance. I fucked up by mentioning my grounds for disbelief were in science. I hoped he wasn't prepared with a counter-arguement, but he was.
There are numerous ways that the existence of god is "scientifically proven". They hurt my brain in how illogical they are though. The most well known of these is the idea of Creationism (i.e. Intelligent Design) as a counterpoint to Darwin's theory of evolution. This guy however decided to use a heavily flawed proof by math. I didn't know it had a name at the time, but it was something that was alluded to in Religulous. This was the decision table known as Pascal's Wager.
Here is the wager in a short table:
God Exists (G) God doesn't Exist (-G) Believes in God (B) +∞ (heaven) +N (nothing) Does not Believe in God (-B) -∞ (hell, death, purgatory) -N (nothing)
In short the Wager declares there is only good that can come out of believing in god. Looks all nice and scientific but it fails on epic proportions. Anyone who has taken high school english can see the rather large either-or fallacy prevalent in the above here. Oh yeah, I did mention that this decision table is generally used in math so how is it refuted in that sense? Although it is consistent that each column adds up to the same value (in this case 0), a decision table must address all possibilities. All possibilities are not expressed here, therefore the values currently assigned to each decision is invalid.
What exactly am I talking about? Does God care if you don't worship Him or does He get all pissy when you die? What if you picked the wrong God to believe in? If you see it as Him when it is really Her, will She consider it cute, are you considered the equivalent of an atheist or to a degree above/below an atheist? Wether you look at this from a english standpoint or a math standpoint, all of this should be addressed for this wager. Otherwise, this wager academically is a shitload of fuck.
So yeah, I figured all this out when it was posed to me. The only thing I didn't know was that it was famous and actually had a name. It was such an absurd claim to me that my only reaction was a laugh and I walked away. I figure from this point that there was no point to the counter argument and imposing my rationale against him wasn't going to alleviate the headache that he cause upon me. Besides, someone else appeared to have gotten more aggravated than me as several officers arrived on the scene.
Long time, no writing on my lj. Also this is probably my most risky entry as well. Totally worth it. Bring on the flame fire and brimstones if you want, I'll bring the marshmallows because I haven't had smores in years.