While it has become common opinion that God’s existence can not be proven rationally and is solely a matter of faith and subjectivity, philosophers were keen on speculating theories on the subject wee into the Age of Reason. Pascal’s wager is a practical argument for belief in God formulated by French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal in the 17th century.
In his Pensées, Pascal applied elements of game theory to show that belief in the Christian religion is rational. He argued that people can choose to believe in God or can choose to not believe in God and that God either exists or he does not. Under these conditions, if a person believes in the Christian God and this God actually exists, they gain a place in paradise; if a person does not believe in the Christian God and God exists, they receive infinite suffering. On the other hand, if a person believes in the Christian God and God does not exist, then they receive some finite disadvantages from a life of Christian living, and if a person does not believe in this God and God does not exist, then they receive some finite pleasure from a life lived unhindered by Christian morality. It is then that Pascal states, “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.”
American philosopher William James objected to the argument that it supported belief in any religion that promised an eternal afterlife. Others have objected that though the argument does give one a reason for believing in the Christian God, it does not make that belief “rational” in the proper sense.
