Does God exist? Theology is a core area of study in philosophy. While a lot of religion call for belief in God, there is also this idea that God doesn’t. And prominent philosophers including Buddha avoided the argument altogether. Here we try to figure out how a person can be safe in the afterlife from the wrath of God.
So what happens when science creeps into philosophy? Here goes.
If you believe in God and God exists, then you are safe.
If you believe in God and God doesn’t exist, then you are safe.
If you don’t believe in God and God exists, then you are not safe.
If you don’t believe in God and God doesn’t exist, then you are safe.
Translating this into logic terms
Given,
E → God exists
B → Believe in God
S → You are safe in the afterlife
From the above statement you can see that you are safe if either God doesn't exist or you believe in God. We can’t choose the whether or not to make God exist. However we can choose to believe in God. We can already see the logic in it.
The above diagram can be improved for a smaller gate delay.
However, considering the case that God does not exist and yet you believed makes your belief quite futile. So one asks what if one believes in God and all that abstinence for no future gain, while one could have not believed and had all the fun. In other words, does he have a good chance of having fun on earth and avoid the afterlife mishap.
So, let’s look at this in terms of chance. Now we enter the domain of Statistics which looks at the stuff between 0 and 1 (i.e. the certainty boundaries) which basic logic can’t define.
Analysis in statistical terms
PE → probability that God exists
PB → probability that the person believes in God
PS → probability of safety
Given that you believe (PB = 1),
PS = 1
Given that you don’t believe (PB = 0),
PS = 1 - PE
Meaning? If you believe, you have 100% chance of being safe. If you don’t, then your chance of being safe is the probability that God does not exist.
So what is the probability that any given person is safe?
PS = 1 - PE(1 - PB)
So? Believe in God. You are safe that way.
The above discussion takes into consideration only two parameters. Any others parameters that should be taken into account in this dialogue?
Apparently some prehistoric dude called Pascal had a similar idea too. The theory was called Pascal’s Wager (a.k.a. Pascal’s Gambit). It is one of three 'wagers' which appear in his Pensées. A terrible shame that blogging services weren’t available back then.
5 comments:
woah, now THAT is a lot. lol.
and when i thought that philosophy and logic didnt interwine.
that should really shut up a lot of them atheists into silence, at least for the fraction of a milisecond.
i mean, take it this way: lets just say that to believe in God is "insanity". then u come to the entire philosophical dilemma as to whether its better to be sane and unhappy, or insane and happy?
i mena, in my opinion: if God did not exist: there is no meaning to sanity, and if futile faith made living this life a whole lot better: i'd rather stick to ignorance. :)
heeeheee haaa haaa. This stuff is really good. I can’t stop thinking about these formula’s now.
:) hats off mate. wud be useful in a intro to logic design eh...
IF writing philosophy in logical expressions is inter-twining the two,
THEN there is good link.
your expressions however, bases the "safe"ty factor on "afterlife" .. to believe in God do u have to believe in "afterlife"
WHATIF afterlife does not exist and the rest of the scenarios u state are applied?
another WHATIF is WHATIF God was so cool God doesnt wrath dudes even if there was an afterlife or there was none!
ah! brb there flies my brain
great! my comment has nothing or little to do with the article.
first, existence itself is fascinating and big and mind blowing and all. and this thing we call logic, is the framework for our existence (or our perception of reality.. blah insert more philosophical terms).
you see, i hate logic. i hate it because i cannot make sense outside of it. why cant 1 + 1 be 3? the way i see it, logic itself is THE BIGGEST human limitation. can there be an escape from it for us and still exist and be able to process reality? for many of you, the whole idea of escaping logic will sound... mad! enjoy your boundaries.
thank you
Post a Comment