PDC Homepage

Home » Products » Purchase

Res Philosophica

ONLINE FIRST

published on January 5, 2018

Joseph Anderson, Daniel Collette
DOI: 10.11612/resphil.2018.95.1.1639

Wagering with and without Pascal

Pascal’s wager has received the attention of philosophers for centuries. Most of its criticisms arise from how the wager is often framed. We present Pascal’s wager three ways: in isolation from any further apologetic arguments, as leading toward a regimen intended to produce belief, and finally embedded in a larger apology that includes evidence for Christianity. We find that none of the common objections apply when the wager is presented as part of Pascal’s larger project. Pascal’s wager is a successful argument in its proper place. However, the most interesting features of our first two presentations of the wager turn out to be either irrelevant or missing from our reading: infinite utility and the relativity of evidence. The successful wager is a boring wager. Still, this study shows us how the wager might profitably be incorporated into different apologetic contexts and why it often can’t.

Not yet a subscriber? Subscribe here
Already a subscriber? Login here

This document is only accessible with a subscription