No. This cartoon has nothing to do with Pascal’s wager, which I think is weak and misguided (so, I don’t find much disagreeable about Matt’s position).
Regardless, I’m not really sure why I or anyone else should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality. What qualifies him as an authority?
No. This cartoon has nothing to do with Pascal’s wager, which I think is weak and misguided.
Oh, good. Yet what did you mean with the book labelled “Pascal” on the floor and the caption “The worst enemy of an unexamined conscience?”
Regardless, I’m not really sure why I or anyone else should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality.
I don’t know who said that you should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality but it certainly wasn’t me. Pascal’s Wager is weak and misguided and Dillahunty spells out those weaknesses very clearly and so well that it’s very few people find much that is disagreeable with his position.
Pascals’ Wager is terrible yet people still use it. It’s an instant fail in any conversation.
Christopher Hitchens: Pascal’s wager = religious hucksterism
Yet what did you mean with the book labelled “Pascal” on the floor and the caption “The worst enemy of an unexamined conscience?”
How did you make the leap from “Pascal” on the cover of a book and the title “The Worst Enemy of an Unexamined Conscience” to Pascal’s Wager? What made you connect them? What does an unexamined conscience have to do with a poorly formulated gamble? Were you just looking for a place and an excuse to promote the assumed superiority of your worldview?
I already told you that I don’t find much that I disagree with Matt Dillahunty’s view on Pascal’s wager. Same applies to the opinion of the late Christopher Hitchens. So, what is the purpose of posting another video related to an opinion that we both agree is flawed?
As for what I meant by it, well, that’s something I won’t reveal until the book comes out.
How did you make the leap from “Pascal” on the cover of a book and the title “The Worst Enemy of an Unexamined Conscience” to Pascal’s Wager?
Not much of a leap from Pascal to Pascal’s Wager, surely?
The worst enemy of an unexamined consience could mean anything so it’s possible that that, again, you meant Pascal’s Wager.
As for what I meant by it, well, that’s something I won’t reveal until the book comes out.
Then someone who reads the phrase “The worst enemy etc.” will be left to guess. Guesses often miss their mark. It happens in life. Doesn’t stop people guessing though.
Were you just looking for a place and an excuse to promote the assumed superiority of your worldview?
What worldview?
I already told you that I don’t find much that I disagree with Matt Dillahunty’s view on Pascal’s wager. Same applies to the opinion of the late Christopher Hitchens.
Then we are in agreement. Pascals’ Wager is terrible yet people still use it. It’s an instant fail in any conversation.
Well, the book could’ve been on the programming language Pascal. ;)
Yeah, I agree with you on Pascal’s wager. I have never given it much weight and I have never used it in any conversation in my life. But, as his wager shows, even great minds can promote bad ideas. Then and now.
Pascal’s wager? Really?
(shakes head sadly)
Pascal’s Wager Debunked
No. This cartoon has nothing to do with Pascal’s wager, which I think is weak and misguided (so, I don’t find much disagreeable about Matt’s position).
Regardless, I’m not really sure why I or anyone else should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality. What qualifies him as an authority?
Joshua
No. This cartoon has nothing to do with Pascal’s wager, which I think is weak and misguided.
Oh, good. Yet what did you mean with the book labelled “Pascal” on the floor and the caption “The worst enemy of an unexamined conscience?”
Regardless, I’m not really sure why I or anyone else should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality.
I don’t know who said that you should accept Matt Dillahunty as an authority on what is and isn’t true about reality but it certainly wasn’t me. Pascal’s Wager is weak and misguided and Dillahunty spells out those weaknesses very clearly and so well that it’s very few people find much that is disagreeable with his position.
Pascals’ Wager is terrible yet people still use it. It’s an instant fail in any conversation.
Christopher Hitchens: Pascal’s wager = religious hucksterism
How did you make the leap from “Pascal” on the cover of a book and the title “The Worst Enemy of an Unexamined Conscience” to Pascal’s Wager? What made you connect them? What does an unexamined conscience have to do with a poorly formulated gamble? Were you just looking for a place and an excuse to promote the assumed superiority of your worldview?
I already told you that I don’t find much that I disagree with Matt Dillahunty’s view on Pascal’s wager. Same applies to the opinion of the late Christopher Hitchens. So, what is the purpose of posting another video related to an opinion that we both agree is flawed?
As for what I meant by it, well, that’s something I won’t reveal until the book comes out.
Joshua
How did you make the leap from “Pascal” on the cover of a book and the title “The Worst Enemy of an Unexamined Conscience” to Pascal’s Wager?
Not much of a leap from Pascal to Pascal’s Wager, surely?
The worst enemy of an unexamined consience could mean anything so it’s possible that that, again, you meant Pascal’s Wager.
As for what I meant by it, well, that’s something I won’t reveal until the book comes out.
Then someone who reads the phrase “The worst enemy etc.” will be left to guess. Guesses often miss their mark. It happens in life. Doesn’t stop people guessing though.
Were you just looking for a place and an excuse to promote the assumed superiority of your worldview?
What worldview?
I already told you that I don’t find much that I disagree with Matt Dillahunty’s view on Pascal’s wager. Same applies to the opinion of the late Christopher Hitchens.
Then we are in agreement. Pascals’ Wager is terrible yet people still use it. It’s an instant fail in any conversation.
Well, the book could’ve been on the programming language Pascal. ;)
Yeah, I agree with you on Pascal’s wager. I have never given it much weight and I have never used it in any conversation in my life. But, as his wager shows, even great minds can promote bad ideas. Then and now.
Joshua