1 upvotes, 0 direct replies (showing 0)
View submission: Is Pascal’s Wager still valid?
Thanks for your reply.
I was just thinking that Pascal's Wager seems a bit more powerful to me in terms of punishment avoidance, since some might hold the view that pain avoidance should be prioritized over pleasure seeking.
For example, imagine two scenarios: in the first, you have a 50/50 chance of going to either heaven or hell after you die (assume infinite positive and negative utility, respectively), and in the second you have a 100% chance of going to neither. You just end.
I'd definitely pick the second of these options, and I'd feel much better about my life if the second of these were true. I think the argument can be made that the negative prospect of going to Hell far outweighs the positive prospect of going to Heaven.
This seems to align with prioritarian considerations (that increasing emphasis should be placed on the worst off, and once you are past a certain threshold of positive wellbeing it has much less normative significance to level you up any further)
There's nothing here!