Betting the Infinite: Why Pascal’s Wager Still Haunts Modern Choice
If you have ever felt that religious belief was more of a survival strategy than a spiritual epiphany, you are in good company with Blaise Pascal. In a standout episode of the History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps titled You Bet Your Life: Pascal’s Wager, Peter Adamson strips away the Sunday school veneers to reveal a 17th-century thinker who was essentially the first modern decision theorist.
Pascal wasn't trying to prove God existed through traditional logic. Instead, he treated the soul like a chip on a roulette table. The brilliance of Adamson’s coverage lies in how he frames this not as a theological lecture, but as an existential high-stakes poker game.
The Mathematics of the Soul
Pascal’s Wager is often simplified to a binary choice, but Adamson explains it through a four-part matrix that any modern risk manager would recognize. The logic is deceptively simple: if you bet on God and win, you gain everything (infinity). If you bet on God and lose, you lose very little (a few Sunday mornings and some worldly pleasures).
Adamson highlights that Pascal’s innovation was the introduction of infinity into the expected value equation. In the world of probability, any positive chance multiplied by infinity remains infinite. This means that even if you think the existence of God is extremely unlikely, the sheer scale of the potential reward makes the "Yes" bet the only rational choice.
The Golden Nugget: "Wherever there is infinity, and where there is no infinity of chances of losing against one of winning, there is no scope for wavering, you have to chance everything. You're betting your life for the chance of winning an infinity of lives."
The Many-Gods and the Perverse Deity
Of course, a wager this bold invites heavy criticism. Adamson navigates the two most famous rebuttals with his characteristic clarity:
- The Many-Gods Objection: Diderot famously pointed out that an Imam could use the same logic for Islam as Pascal used for Christianity. If every religion promises an infinite reward, how do you know which window to place your bet at?
- The Perverse God: What if there is a deity who specifically rewards skeptics and punishes those who believe only out of self-interest? If that possibility has even a non-zero probability, it throws the whole calculation into a tailspin.
Adamson notes that Pascal was aware of these tensions. For Pascal, the wager was never the final destination; it was a psychological nudge intended to get the "libertine" or the habitual skeptic to stop making excuses and start the process of seeking.
Faking It Until You Make It
One of the most human elements of this episode is the discussion of "wagering" as a physical practice. When Pascal’s hypothetical skeptic complains that they simply cannot force themselves to believe, Pascal’s advice is remarkably pragmatic: act like you do. Take the holy water, go to the masses, and follow the rituals.
This isn't just about hypocrisy. It’s about the idea that our actions can eventually shape our convictions. By dampening our "passions," we create space for belief to take root naturally.
The Jansenist Twist
Adamson concludes with a vital piece of context that many amateur philosophy buffs miss. Pascal was a Jansenist. This means he believed salvation was entirely a matter of divine grace, not something humans could earn through a clever bit of math. This creates a fascinating paradox: why bother with a wager if your fate is already sealed by God?
The answer, as Adamson suggests, is that the wager itself might be the instrument God uses to draw a person toward grace. It is a thought-provoking end to a discussion that bridges the gap between the rigid logic of the 1600s and the way we weigh risks in our own lives today. Whether you are a believer or a skeptic, this episode reminds us that we are all wagering our lives on something.
Listen to History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps: https://podranker.com/podcast/history-of-philosophy-without-any-gaps