Examlex
Pascal argues that if we do a cost-benefit analysis of the matter, it turns out that it is eminently reasonable to get ourselves to believe that God exists, regardless of whether we have good evidence for that belief. The argument goes something like this: Regarding the proposition "God exists," reason is neutral. It can neither prove nor disprove it. But we must make a choice on this matter because not to choose for God is in effect to choose against God and lose the possible benefits that belief would bring. Because these benefits of faith promise to be infinite and the loss equally infinite, we must take a gamble on faith.
-According to Pascal, as finite humans, we are incapable of knowing
Q3: Russell is concerned with the question of
Q4: d'Holbach says that because of the multiplicity
Q5: James asserts that to determine the truth
Q5: Russell says that religious beliefs can be
Q6: According to James, those who refuse to
Q7: According to James, in cases where there
Q10: Socrates was a philosophical gadfly.
Q10: Feminists reject the notion of embodiment.
Q13: James asserts that the possession of true
Q17: Mrs Brown is to have 40 mg