#11 Pascal’s Bet
“Peter said to Him, ‘We have left all we had
to follow you!’ ‘I tell you the truth,’ Jesus said to them, ‘ no one who has
left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the
kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the
age to come, eternal life.’[1]”
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), the 17th
century French mathematician, physicist, inventor, and Christian philosopher
and writer is my all-time favorite mathematician. Pascal developed a
measurement for barometric (air) pressure, a hand cranked device that
added numbers (precursor to the computer, which is why the computer language ‘Pascal’
bears his name), studies in geometry and probability and the Pascal triangle.
But non-technical people may know him best for his collection of theological
thoughts that he jotted down in a notebook and had hoped to turn into his most
important theological treatise. However he died before his 40th birthday and
had not even begun the work, so his brother and one sister assembled his diary
of notes into subject areas and published this enduring tome, Pensées,
which means “thoughts” in French. Some of my favorite quotes are:
·
“Inside of each
man is a God-shaped vacuum;
·
The heart
has its reasons, which reason does not know;
·
Man is a
reed – but a thinking reed;
·
Man looks at
the stars and wonders – monkeys do not.[2]”
The reason I mention Pascal is
that there is an interesting section in Pensées where Pascal discusses
believing in God, and that one would have to be imprudent not to believe. His
argument is really in the form of a decision
tree or decision table, which I
have taught for years at Pepperdine and Pascal’s discussion made a good example
of this type of decision making, although that specific type of analysis had
not yet been developed in the 17th century.
“Let us then examine this point, and say, ‘God is or He is not.’ …
you must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. … 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 … if there is an equal risk of
gain and loss, if you only gain two lives, instead of one, you might still
wager. But if there were three lives to gain, you would have to play … and you
would be imprudent, when you are forced to play, not to chance your life to
gain three at a game where there is an equal risk of loss and gain.[3]”
First of all, everyone of us who
has been born must make this decision; it’s not optional. Either consciously or
unconsciously by our actions, we demonstrate our decision. Depending on whether
we believe there is a god determines whether we just “grab for the gusto!” and
live our lives selfishly, or live sacrificially for others. But believing in
God means living a sacrificial life of service, not to be saved, but in
gratitude for our salvation. If there is no God, then there is 0 payoff (no
afterlife). But if there is a God either the payoff is eternal life (infinity)
or eternal separation from God (negative infinity). Pascal then goes on to
state:
“… if there were an infinity of
chance, of which only one would be for you, you would still be right in
wagering one to win two, and you would act stupidly, being obliged to play, by
refusing to stake one life against three at a game in which out of an infinity
of chances there is one for you, if there were an infinity of an infinitely
happy life to gain.[4]”
Thus Pascal
put an interesting logical and philosophical interpretation on Peter’s and
Jesus’ discussion. What do you think? Have you ever heard of Pascal’s bet
before? Click on the comment section and let me know or if this is an email
version, there is a link to the blog website at the bottom.
