Skip to main content

View Diary: Global Warming and Pascal's Wager (11 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Pascal's wager re God is unlike global warming (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bright Creature, antirove

    because global warming is obviously occurring. Pascal was addressing a situation in which there is some possibility that God exists, so the best bet is to believe, since non-belief brings eternal damnation.
       Of course, the bet only works if the god that exists is the Christian God and not, say, the Aztec sun god.
       I can't think of any situation in which there is a rational choice to not believe something that is clearly happening.
       The problem isn't that TPTB don't believe that global warming is happening. They reason that the effects won't be catastrophic within their lifetimes, and so there is no reason to interrupt the flow of profits now.
       They will not be bothered by constricted food supplies or weather disasters, which are the short run impacts of global warming.

    •  Personally, I think my argument (0+ / 0-)

      above is stronger than Pascal's wager because of your reasons above. The form of the logic is pretty much the same but the premises of my argument is more assured. An argument has to be both true and valid (sound) to be a good one, and it's only as good as the premises upon which it is built. So, Pascal gets into trouble at the outset because he starts off with something so incredibly abstract (God). Global warming isn't so much as abstract as it is in our faces.  So, same logic as Pascal, only a stronger argument.

    •  As for the powers that be (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I agree with you. However, there is that great unwashed other that does believe and they are numerous. If you saw the debates with Bill Nye and that Aussie Creationist guy you would find ample proof there. So we have TPTB and also the fervently ignorant to work with.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site