As you pointed out/hinted at, overloading pascal's wager pretty easy. Once you mention a god, the theist assumes only his god or a set few could be considered but what lies beneath is the fact that he has absolutely no idea which god is correct (by bringing up this argument up in the first place) and you can rightfully assume there are infinite amount of gods with any set of rewards/punishments, even god(s) that reward people for NOT believing in them.
There's another argument against Pascal's Wager that i like: One could imagine a god who is benevolent to anyone who does not use The Wager but offers eternal hell for ONLY those who use Pascal's Wager.
After having watched this video, and one you made about PCS like 2 years ago; I can only say that I 99.99987% agree. The differential is: I do not believe Shawn is as mature as he says he is, and if he's as mature as i "think" he is, I was (sort of) exactly like him when I was his age. If so, they make medication for that.
Pascal's Wager always forces me to point out that Christians are basically saying I should believe in their god as a "just in case," which would mean I'm tricking their god into letting me into heaven.
I think Hitchens said it best when , instead of trying to debunk Pascal's wager, he simply stated that it was a load of bullshit "Religious Hucksterism". You sir are expanding on that point brilliantly. 5 stars and faved. For those of you presented with Pascal's wager, don't get sucked into the debate. just call it what it is, a religious con job and tell the person who presented it to you to fuck off.
I would say I did decide to start with the WORST first (the fundamentalist doomsday scenario), and than work my way down to the best (hell is entirely one's own fault)...
I still believe the foundations of our universe were created by something, but I doubt this entity is anywhere close to being God-like, it is indeed quite impotent in the face of a more or less, unjust, chaotic, entropic universe... We have to resurrect God WITHIN OURSELVES...
NouraTheMuslimah: Yes, god is defined in such a way that it is impossible to disprove. Isn't that handy.
But Clutch didn't miss the point. The point of Pascals wager isn't that you can't prove or disprove god's existence, it's that despite that fact you should believe anyway because of the possible rewards. If that's not directing away from the argument I don't know what is.
You can't prove the negative, that's illogical. Why? You can't prove there is no leprechaun, you can't prove that the other gods didn't exist, and neither the Olympus. What if Zeus is the real god? Or Apollo? Or Mithras? Or any other god that have existed in the past. You say: They don't exist.
I say: Just like your god.
Why? Because every god had been the same, and all created by men, so they can control the masses, and make them fear their authority.
I fallowed Pascal's wadger when I was Christian. In reality I didn't love God. He killed infants, animals, pregnant women, destroyed cities and punishes people based on faith, sexual orientation or ideas. No rational person can love someone like that.
"JUst because I don't see that your are green doesn't mean that you are not."
Uh... no. You are trying to twist the most basic and simplistic example into some convoluted philosophy. Oh, and not to mention, you seem to miss the point: its about forcing yourself to believe he is green. If you dont see green, you wont believe it.
"It is hard to put the complexity of our dynamics into words."
I disagree, Clutchology did a fantastic job doing just that.
"Why don't you really do something rather than riding on Coat-tails of unrealistic beliefs"
Oh wow, are you going to say not believing in the Magic Man in the sky is an "unrealistic belief", now?
So, by avoiding my point and claiming I missed yours you ask what I am doing for society, using your self-proclaimed humanitarian efforts as reasonable cause?
If your "help" is by preaching your bible, then you arn't helping anyone. In fact, you are damaging them.
My "accomplishments"? I dont need to explain myself to the likes of you, who just used deflection to avoid answering my claim with self-righteousness.
I wonder if you have even looked at my channel. Have you? I've been assembling an archive of the best material on the subject of CRUSHING ignorance and destroying the laughable tactics of religious people.
As you appear to be a kid with a drum set and some opinions, I think you are SERIOUSLY overstating your position.
If I were some perfect, all-powerful deity, I'd be horribly insulted by "love" given me "just in case" I'm real, out of fear, etc. If humans can see through B.S., a deity most certainly could.
Then again, if I were a such a being, I'd appreciate and reciprocate love, but never demand it - love is given freely, never forced. Nor would I want worship or praise, etc.; what perfect being needs such things?
So, when I ascend to godliness in my next incarnation, love me freely and fear me not. ;p
I think believers of some faiths would disagree with on your point about how they spend their time covering their ass--especially if their belief requires them to proselytize, which the believer would deem highly beneficial to anyone he helps "save" from eternal damnation.
Nonetheless, anyone with half a mind and the will to glance at Pascal's Wager should be able to see the false dichotomy inherent in it.
Clutchology, I was thinking of doing my own Pascal's Wager bit, but I think you really covered the last pieces I havn't really seen in others so much.
Actually no, and thats the whole point of why Pascal's Wager is a friggin joke.
There is no intellectual integrity involved with it. Its a cop-out, a lie, a fraud, a cheat.
Those who use it think they can fool said god and get the rewards anyway... this is where the fallacy crushes any argument of their actually believing.
Look up the studies done by Dr. Solomon Asch. It will give you a lot of insight into why people "believe" what they "believe". It shows how pretty much everyone in the world will deny what they know to be the truth simply to fit in with the masses. The study is how I personally explain how so many people can be fooled into believing in "gawd".
In religion, pascal's wager is self-capsising. You either believe or you don't. You can't fool your deiety into this, that is if your deiety is all omnipotent.
Well said, R.J. What religion tends to do to people is try to force them to believe in stuff based on fear and not on actual facts. And, while people spend their lives fearing their imaginary deities, they will most likely be wasting their time and missing opportunities to make the world a better place or to expand their minds. Anyway, great video. :)
Great video Clutchology. That was a good attack against Pascal's silly little wager. You have covered all the bases:
1. If an omnipotent being exists he cannot be fooled by an insincere profession of belief to save ones own soul
2. All religions require a belief in a specific god, and each type of god contradicts the other, and therefore believers are just as likely to be wrong as the unbeliever.
3. One cannot WILL oneself to believe in anything - one must be convinced.
Nice - one of the best treatments of Pascal's wager I've seen. I also like the Atheist Experience vid on youtube (watch?v=v9WRG4e6m2s) - Matt reels of almost exactly the same reasons in their live show, which seems impressive somehow - though I'm sure he's done that speech quite a few times.
Cost-benefit analysis is actually a pretty good way to make decisions (it's the basis of rationality, IMO). The two biggest problems I see with Pascal's Wager are
1) The false dichotomy: there are plenty of other religions.
2) The payout and penalty must be infinite for the Wager to work. But since these are mere assertions, the "effective" payout and penalties must be based on your confidence in the stated payout & penalty's veracity--which is less than infinite.
In any case the wager is to "believe," not merely stat that you do. A kind of doublethink might work. Russel said (and I'm paraphrasing, because I read it long ago) that one might convince oneself that two plus two equals five for religious reasons, but that that would be only a "Sunday truth." Two plus two would still be four when you were working your accounts.
God's perspective, if he really is as good as the Christians say he is, wouldn't he think better of the atheists that aren't trying to lie to him than the people trying to fool him? I would think so.
I don't know. Most Christians conceptions of this god's goodness seem very much to be centred along the 'God is good because he is' lines, which means that anything which is god is good, and anything without god is bad.
With the narcissism that the character is portrayed with in the OT, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that he'd appreciate the effort to appease his ego more than the honesty of those that didn't.
Come to think about it you are slowly starting to look like a Naumakin.
TheMrgoku1985 3 months ago
Like the shirt!
pooooccurs 8 months ago
excellently put!
ah8717 9 months ago
Nice video, subscribed
911650 1 year ago
As you pointed out/hinted at, overloading pascal's wager pretty easy. Once you mention a god, the theist assumes only his god or a set few could be considered but what lies beneath is the fact that he has absolutely no idea which god is correct (by bringing up this argument up in the first place) and you can rightfully assume there are infinite amount of gods with any set of rewards/punishments, even god(s) that reward people for NOT believing in them.
Di66en6ion 1 year ago
Very nice
Kenneth1238 2 years ago
I suspect Blaise Pascal WAS making a joke and no one got it.
RHYMEMAIDEN1 2 years ago
Exactly! You have completely debunked the Pascal's wager. 5/5 and fav'ed.
dewonthegrass 2 years ago
I think, that you are mentally not well yet.
aishasgoat 2 years ago
There's another argument against Pascal's Wager that i like: One could imagine a god who is benevolent to anyone who does not use The Wager but offers eternal hell for ONLY those who use Pascal's Wager.
bludwine2309 2 years ago
your subscriber base is criminally low.. every vid iv seen so far is 5/5
Airicks1 2 years ago
Wtf
ToriFuckYou 2 years ago
choose the one with the worse hell!!!
Nades129 2 years ago
EVERYONE TOGETHER AS A WHOLE IS GOD
fnick262 2 years ago
Dear Clutch,
After having watched this video, and one you made about PCS like 2 years ago; I can only say that I 99.99987% agree. The differential is: I do not believe Shawn is as mature as he says he is, and if he's as mature as i "think" he is, I was (sort of) exactly like him when I was his age. If so, they make medication for that.
dj092768 2 years ago
Pascal's Wager always forces me to point out that Christians are basically saying I should believe in their god as a "just in case," which would mean I'm tricking their god into letting me into heaven.
HelplessVictim 2 years ago 2
THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!
HellKainK66 2 years ago
I think Hitchens said it best when , instead of trying to debunk Pascal's wager, he simply stated that it was a load of bullshit "Religious Hucksterism". You sir are expanding on that point brilliantly. 5 stars and faved. For those of you presented with Pascal's wager, don't get sucked into the debate. just call it what it is, a religious con job and tell the person who presented it to you to fuck off.
MagellansUnderwear 2 years ago
I keep getting more impressed by the young and brilliant people on youtube, you are one of them!
anetchi 2 years ago
Hehe lol I like this one...
tukumurulu 2 years ago
Pascal's Wager had me for the longest time...
I would say I did decide to start with the WORST first (the fundamentalist doomsday scenario), and than work my way down to the best (hell is entirely one's own fault)...
I still believe the foundations of our universe were created by something, but I doubt this entity is anywhere close to being God-like, it is indeed quite impotent in the face of a more or less, unjust, chaotic, entropic universe... We have to resurrect God WITHIN OURSELVES...
DChatc 3 years ago
catholics and muslems and jews beleave in the same god.
jordler 3 years ago
No, they all believe in an Abrahamic God, but they are different.
More accurately, they each believe that the others believe in a false form of their god, and that theirs is the only true one.
Clutchology 3 years ago
@jordler and Krishnaits, Hundus, Vishnuans and thousands of others believe in different gods,
PepperGeorge 1 year ago
chrome in the dome
lead in the head
change in the brain
HAMMERSMASHDICK 3 years ago
i think you missed te whole point
it doesnt direct away from te argument, the point is that, you cant prove God doesnt exsist
NouraTheMuslimah 3 years ago
NouraTheMuslimah: Yes, god is defined in such a way that it is impossible to disprove. Isn't that handy.
But Clutch didn't miss the point. The point of Pascals wager isn't that you can't prove or disprove god's existence, it's that despite that fact you should believe anyway because of the possible rewards. If that's not directing away from the argument I don't know what is.
dave28lax 3 years ago 5
You can't prove that flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist yet you don't see people (honestly) believing in it.
BlackSephir 3 years ago 3
You can't prove the negative, that's illogical. Why? You can't prove there is no leprechaun, you can't prove that the other gods didn't exist, and neither the Olympus. What if Zeus is the real god? Or Apollo? Or Mithras? Or any other god that have existed in the past. You say: They don't exist.
I say: Just like your god.
Why? Because every god had been the same, and all created by men, so they can control the masses, and make them fear their authority.
EnlightedFreethinker 3 years ago 7
"it doesnt direct away from te argument, the point is that, you cant prove God doesnt exsist "
Talk about misdirection and Shifting the Burden of Proof!!!
We dont HAVE the burden of proof, therefor we dont have to prove anything.
YOU have to prove your Magic Man is real. THAT is the point. We know you cant, though, so you are left to logical fallacies.
Woops, fail.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
I bet - "no gods"
thatgaybloke 3 years ago 3
Good bet.
plaayer13 3 years ago 2
Sound reasoning.
godsentyes 3 years ago
Very well stated. The whole point to life is to live it, and live it well.
werewolfchewtoy 3 years ago 2
I fallowed Pascal's wadger when I was Christian. In reality I didn't love God. He killed infants, animals, pregnant women, destroyed cities and punishes people based on faith, sexual orientation or ideas. No rational person can love someone like that.
ginkiba3 3 years ago 7
JUst because I don't see that your are green doesn't mean that
you are not.
Believe is a bad word, we should just know , humans have
a long way to go..
Your book will be very interesting, from your presentation
It is hard to put the complexity of our dynamics into words.
However its understandable the way you articulate ..
I am here for other people, to help them with their lives ,
provide renewable energies. a way of life to give back
to the people what they already have and didnt knowit
Ramakim 3 years ago
"JUst because I don't see that your are green doesn't mean that you are not."
Uh... no. You are trying to twist the most basic and simplistic example into some convoluted philosophy. Oh, and not to mention, you seem to miss the point: its about forcing yourself to believe he is green. If you dont see green, you wont believe it.
"It is hard to put the complexity of our dynamics into words."
I disagree, Clutchology did a fantastic job doing just that.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago 2
You Missed my point .. Why don't you really do something
rather than riding on Coat-tails of unrealistic beliefs ..
My Bet Is, we are here to help the less fortunate, what are you doing besides stereotyping bad religion...
perpetuate what is true on not.. Tell us what your accomplishments are & what you are doing to help..
Like I do!!!!
Ramakim 3 years ago
"Why don't you really do something rather than riding on Coat-tails of unrealistic beliefs"
Oh wow, are you going to say not believing in the Magic Man in the sky is an "unrealistic belief", now?
So, by avoiding my point and claiming I missed yours you ask what I am doing for society, using your self-proclaimed humanitarian efforts as reasonable cause?
If your "help" is by preaching your bible, then you arn't helping anyone. In fact, you are damaging them.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
My "accomplishments"? I dont need to explain myself to the likes of you, who just used deflection to avoid answering my claim with self-righteousness.
I wonder if you have even looked at my channel. Have you? I've been assembling an archive of the best material on the subject of CRUSHING ignorance and destroying the laughable tactics of religious people.
As you appear to be a kid with a drum set and some opinions, I think you are SERIOUSLY overstating your position.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
Thats what you are interested in, I have not judged you in the manner of witch you are judging me..
I actually admire your page.. Try not to bring folks down to you level, I don't have the time to upload everything I do for
people..out there doing it.. You can't put words in my mouth dude.
You have no Idea what I believe In!!!
I see you choosing Hate over Love!!!!
Peace Man..
Ramakim 3 years ago
Who would live in a house like this?
BSEmadcow 3 years ago
If I were some perfect, all-powerful deity, I'd be horribly insulted by "love" given me "just in case" I'm real, out of fear, etc. If humans can see through B.S., a deity most certainly could.
Then again, if I were a such a being, I'd appreciate and reciprocate love, but never demand it - love is given freely, never forced. Nor would I want worship or praise, etc.; what perfect being needs such things?
So, when I ascend to godliness in my next incarnation, love me freely and fear me not. ;p
Katatawnic 3 years ago 3
very impressive, indeed.
good refutation - thanks a lot!
- greg
Greggs41 3 years ago
Liked the music and realized we buy shirts from the same place =D
Di66en6ion 3 years ago
I think believers of some faiths would disagree with on your point about how they spend their time covering their ass--especially if their belief requires them to proselytize, which the believer would deem highly beneficial to anyone he helps "save" from eternal damnation.
Nonetheless, anyone with half a mind and the will to glance at Pascal's Wager should be able to see the false dichotomy inherent in it.
skewed12 3 years ago
"I think believers of some faiths would disagree with on your point about how they spend their time covering their ass"
Actually, skewed12, I think you missed the point.
People with "faith" arn't guilty of this logical fallacy because they really do see a green guy with a gun to their head.
And thats the whole point, people who use Pascal's Wager DO NOT have faith in anything. They are selfish cowards. Thats it.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
Clutchology, I was thinking of doing my own Pascal's Wager bit, but I think you really covered the last pieces I havn't really seen in others so much.
Awesome job! I'll just reference others here.
Pretty much said exactly what I was thinking.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
It would seem to be a sort of metaphysical
insurance.You pay for a false sense of security
with intellectual integrity instead of money.
Your intellect could be used in better ways as
could your money.I HATE insurance.
angryislander56 3 years ago 2
"You pay for a false sense of security
with intellectual integrity instead of money."
Actually no, and thats the whole point of why Pascal's Wager is a friggin joke.
There is no intellectual integrity involved with it. Its a cop-out, a lie, a fraud, a cheat.
Those who use it think they can fool said god and get the rewards anyway... this is where the fallacy crushes any argument of their actually believing.
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
Good vid.
Fataalex 3 years ago
Nice shirt
BadYahweh 3 years ago
Look up the studies done by Dr. Solomon Asch. It will give you a lot of insight into why people "believe" what they "believe". It shows how pretty much everyone in the world will deny what they know to be the truth simply to fit in with the masses. The study is how I personally explain how so many people can be fooled into believing in "gawd".
tattooskin72 3 years ago
Hopefully people will learn from this vid.
jesokingcryst 3 years ago 2
In religion, pascal's wager is self-capsising. You either believe or you don't. You can't fool your deiety into this, that is if your deiety is all omnipotent.
Domzdream 3 years ago
great concept about the gun ... might make a good song do you mine if I still that idea and build upon it ?
ATF of Axiom of Discord
AxiomofDiscord 3 years ago
"There are FOUR lights!" - Capt. Jean Luc Picard, USS Enterprise
ILYIAB 3 years ago
""There are FOUR lights!" - Capt. Jean Luc Picard, USS Enterprise"
Okay, now that was awesome! Points for the reference!
ThatOneQuestion 3 years ago
I applaud you
noprob8ob051 3 years ago
Agree 100%. Good vid!
Paxmax 3 years ago
I thought pascals wager was a joke...?
An0nym0usPunK0930 3 years ago
Well said, R.J. What religion tends to do to people is try to force them to believe in stuff based on fear and not on actual facts. And, while people spend their lives fearing their imaginary deities, they will most likely be wasting their time and missing opportunities to make the world a better place or to expand their minds. Anyway, great video. :)
HaleyMary 3 years ago
Pascal's wager is a fool's bet.
sockpuppetsfromhell 3 years ago 3
nicely done
sh00008 3 years ago
Outstanding video!
Largo64 3 years ago
Great video Clutchology. That was a good attack against Pascal's silly little wager. You have covered all the bases:
1. If an omnipotent being exists he cannot be fooled by an insincere profession of belief to save ones own soul
2. All religions require a belief in a specific god, and each type of god contradicts the other, and therefore believers are just as likely to be wrong as the unbeliever.
3. One cannot WILL oneself to believe in anything - one must be convinced.
alphacause 3 years ago
Love your shitte.
XVX for life, R.A.S.H. 'til death.
aquamammal 3 years ago
Nice - one of the best treatments of Pascal's wager I've seen. I also like the Atheist Experience vid on youtube (watch?v=v9WRG4e6m2s) - Matt reels of almost exactly the same reasons in their live show, which seems impressive somehow - though I'm sure he's done that speech quite a few times.
dave28lax 3 years ago
Great video. It reminds me of the parable of the talents. Pascal does seem to miss the point - betting on truth isn't a way to discover it.
Question: Is belief in God the same as belief in religion(s)?
MePaulTube 3 years ago
Often so, but not necessarily. In the context of the Wager, yes, as it uses the religious concept of hell to make its point.
Clutchology 3 years ago
Cost-benefit analysis is actually a pretty good way to make decisions (it's the basis of rationality, IMO). The two biggest problems I see with Pascal's Wager are
1) The false dichotomy: there are plenty of other religions.
2) The payout and penalty must be infinite for the Wager to work. But since these are mere assertions, the "effective" payout and penalties must be based on your confidence in the stated payout & penalty's veracity--which is less than infinite.
Sorry, I'm a math wonk.
CousinoMacul 3 years ago
In any case the wager is to "believe," not merely stat that you do. A kind of doublethink might work. Russel said (and I'm paraphrasing, because I read it long ago) that one might convince oneself that two plus two equals five for religious reasons, but that that would be only a "Sunday truth." Two plus two would still be four when you were working your accounts.
Largo64 3 years ago
Love this video Clutch.
One more thing to add.
God's perspective, if he really is as good as the Christians say he is, wouldn't he think better of the atheists that aren't trying to lie to him than the people trying to fool him? I would think so.
Br0k3nS41nt 3 years ago
I don't know. Most Christians conceptions of this god's goodness seem very much to be centred along the 'God is good because he is' lines, which means that anything which is god is good, and anything without god is bad.
With the narcissism that the character is portrayed with in the OT, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that he'd appreciate the effort to appease his ego more than the honesty of those that didn't.
They're still going to hell, though.
Clutchology 3 years ago
I guess it depends on the interpretation of God. Some Christians see good as morality, others find him doing good because it is.
Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral, or is it moral because it is commanded by God?
Br0k3nS41nt 3 years ago
suPERB, my friend.
zebruh 3 years ago
+ Not grovling your life away to gods who aren't there = Priceless.
thruthem 3 years ago
Really curious whats the music on the background? Sorry for the offtopic :)
Ajaar 3 years ago
I should put it in the description box for you. It's Evanescence - Lies
Clutchology 3 years ago
incredibly insightful video!
zuzerey 3 years ago
Great video! Pascal's Wager is the stupidest thing in the world.
Christianity itself has thousands of denominations. Some d.'s say others go to Hell.
AtheistKang 3 years ago 4
Ah, fantastic! Something I missed! Not only the religion itself must be right, but in many cases the specific denomination of that religion.
They really do stack the odds against you, don't they?
Clutchology 3 years ago
It's like Las Vegas in the end the house always wins.
Fataalex 3 years ago