Rationality Of Pascal's Wager, Feasibility of Jean-Paul Sartre’s Atheistic Morality (1750 words)

  1. Home
  2. Homework Library
  3. Philosophy
  4. General Philosophy
  5. Rationality Of Pascal's Wager, Feasibility of Jean-Paul Sartre’s Atheistic Morality (1750 words)


On the Rationality of Pascal's Wager (Against the Agnostic)
Pascal's wager can be considered appealing as an option available to human beings, given that the existence of God seems, after millenia of philosophers have done work on the subject, to remain in the end an open question. If so, then agnosticism would appear to be the "most rational" response to the question of God's existence. Discuss the rationality of the wager against objections to it as these objections might be urged by the agnostic.

On the Feasibility of Jean-Paul Sartre’s Atheistic Morality
It is a common belief, especially among the religiously devout, that ethical values are directly related to the existence of God. Thus, without God, no ethics. The atheist Sartre was at pains to show that the supposedly intimate relation between God and ethics is not necessary. Evaluate the feasibility of the atheist's position by constructing an ethical theory with a focus on one specific value(any value so for example, honesty, happiness, duty, courage, justice, etc) so that relevant questions and problems associated with this value can be adequately and comprehensively treated.

Solution Preview

This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.

Pascal’s wager is not an argument for the existence of God but simply a demonstration that to bet that God exists is the rational decision. I can either choose to believe God exists or he does not. The die is cast. I must choose. There are four outcomes. (1) I believe in God but God does not exist, in which case I lose nothing because I at least led a good life. (2) I believe in God and God does exist which is the jackpot -- for I am rewarded with everlasting life in Heaven. (3) I do not believe in God and God does not exist, in which case I end up losing because I could have had a virtuous life and all I have to gain from not believing in God is nothingness and finally (4) I do not believe in God and God does exist in which case I am cast into eternal hellfire and am punished for all eternity....

This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution

Assisting Tutor

Related Homework Solutions

Study Guide on the Textbook: Doing Philosophy 5th Edition, Schrick and Vaughn
Homework Solution
2.1 Cartesian Dualism: Ms <---> Nonphysical substance that interacts with the body. Body and mind and different substances. Conclusion: Descartes deductive arguments are valid but unsound. Empirically speaking there is no immaterial substance. Thus
Get help from a qualified tutor
Live Chats