Blaise Pascal: Should I "Wager" that he was a man of our time?

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes, I personally think Blaise Pascal was a man not only of his time, but of ours as well, and a man of other times, for obvious reasons. He is a man of our present moment, even if not specifically of the year 2020; yet, he is also timeless in that he is existentially timely. And I say this because, essentially, and as the short video I'm posting about him below points out, there was a whole lot more to Pascal's Christian thinking than just the one single idea for which he is so often cited and stereotyped over ...

And for how many of you is the Pascal presented in the video the same one you've already heard about?

 

[Amittai]

Superb - glass half empty - the way we get hope wrong

 

[Moral Orel]

All glasses are full. One half water, one half air.

 

[zippy2006]

All glasses are full. One half water, one half air.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

All glasses are full. One half water, one half air.

Nice. And funny.

I was beginning to wonder where you've been and what you've been up to. Good to see you're still alive and kick'n, Nick. I guess we know that the glass is definitely at least half full ...

 

[public hermit]

I was upset by a trifle. Then, simply bored. But, Pascal's pessimism has taken me to new heights as I realize I am less miserable than he!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I was upset by a trifle. Then, simply bored. But, Pascal's pessimism has taken me to new heights as I realize I am less miserable than he!

I'm glad to hear that his pessimism has helped someone else to "feel better." I was kind of 'betting' that it would.

 

[JohnClay]

BTW if there were two incompatible religions and the punishment for being against one of them was an eternity of suffering and the other had a million years of suffering then Pascal's Wager would involve choosing the one that allows you to avoid the most severe penalty.... maybe that's why the church tradition of eternal suffering became the most popular.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

BTW if there were two incompatible religions and the punishment for being against one of them was an eternity of suffering and the other had a million years of suffering then Pascal's Wager would involve choosing the one that allows you to avoid the most severe penalty.... maybe that's why the church tradition of eternal suffering became the most popular.

It's always a possibility, but the fact is, we'll never know.

But whether we can or we can't ever know this, there's more to Pascal's Wager than just the consideration of Eternal Punishment. There's also more to Pascal's thinking than just his Wager, which is what I'm trying to focus upon in this thread, John.

Good to see you here!

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Yes, I personally think Blaise Pascal was a man not only of his time, but of ours as well, and a man of other times, for obvious reasons. He is a man of our present moment, even if not specifically of the year 2020; yet, he is also timeless in that he is existentially timely. And I say this because, essentially, and as the short video I'm posting about him below points out, there was a whole lot more to Pascal's Christian thinking than just the one single idea for which he is so often cited and stereotyped over ...

Interesting video. However around 6:40 it says that secularists don't have faith in angels but have faith in the IMF, Medical Research, Silicon Valley and Politics so in a few years we will bring paradise on this planet. Secularists and many Christians put their earned trust in these things because they are the only things that have demonstrated that they have improved life on this planet. Secularists in general don't believe we can bring paradise to earth, maybe some cults do.

Also, to say humans are only sinful and wretched is a disservice to all. We do good and bad things for good and bad reasons. We are not inherently sinful, that is damaging to say to a child or adult if that is your continuous message.

 

[Amittai]

[]

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Interesting video. However around 6:40 it says that secularists don't have faith in angels but have faith in the IMF, Medical Research, Silicon Valley and Politics so in a few years we will bring paradise on this planet. Secularists and many Christians put their earned trust in these things because they are the only things that have demonstrated that they have improved life on this planet. Secularists in general don't believe we can bring paradise to earth, maybe some cults do.

...well, as I've said before, when secularists, or more specifically 'humanists' can create Eternal Life with a wave of a techno-vibe wand, or whatever, then let me know.

Also, to say humans are only sinful and wretched is a disservice to all. We do good and bad things for good and bad reasons. We are not inherently sinful, that is damaging to say to a child or adult if that is your continuous message.

... we have to keep in mind that Pascal had a rough life, and for him, maybe people around him who bullied him or were doing things to make life a little harder on him contributed to his thinking that people are 'only' sinful and wretched.

For my part, I'd say people are all sinful, but the extent to which they are each 'wretched' will depend on how much abeyance to the Devil they each like to invest themselves in (whether they know it or not). So, my view of human nature is slightly rosier than Pascal's, but I catch his pessimistic drift, nevertheless, and it is one that, even if slightly darker than usual, is one which reflects the words of Jesus and those of the Apostle Paul.

The great thing is that I taught my son, and am still teaching my son, all of this.
And I shall continue to do so, along with all of that great epistemological stuff I have sitting on my selves at my beck and call.

 

[Amittai]

Clizby well spotted. And the corporations always pose as "rationalist". I always filter out both kinds of trope! That's probably why I can't always say what is nicest for what others are going through. It's because I have had to defend my own sensitivity to rubbish, myself and am then exhausted.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

...well, as I've said before, when secularists, or more specifically 'humanists' can create Eternal Life with a wave of a techno-vibe wand, or whatever, then let me know.

Again, give me reason to believe there is an afterlife then I will believe it. I can probably give a million examples with good evidence of secular science helping people, saving their lives, and increasing their quality of life. Do you have one example with good evidence of God healing anyone or improving their lives?

... we have to keep in mind that Pascal had a rough life, and for him, maybe people around him who bullied him or were doing things to make life a little harder on him contributed to his thinking that people are 'only' sinful and wretched.

For my part, I'd say people are all sinful, but the extent to which they are each 'wretched' will depend on how much abeyance to the Devil they each like to invest themselves in (whether they know it or not). So, my view of human nature is slightly rosier than Pascal's, but I catch his pessimistic drift, nevertheless, and it is one that, even if slightly darker than usual, is one which reflects the words of Jesus and those of the Apostle Paul.

I think people can suck. However, people can be awesome as well. Christians want to give you the credit for the bad things you do and God the credit for the good things you do. The fact is we should get the credit for doing the good things as well, because we did these things.

The great thing is that I taught my son, and am still teaching my son, all of this.
And I shall continue to do so, along with all of that great epistemological stuff I have sitting on my selves at my beck and call.

I am teaching my kids to think for themselves, what skepticism and critical thinking actually are. To have good reasons for their beliefs whatever they are.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Again, give me reason to believe there is an afterlife then I will believe it. I can probably give a million examples with good evidence of secular science helping people, saving their lives, and increasing their quality of life. Do you have one example with good evidence of God healing anyone or improving their lives?

Healing, no. Improving their lives---well, that's a different thing and the term improving is a vague term. But, improving my life. Yes, in general, I'd say that my own implementation of Christianity has improved my life ...

I think people can suck. However, people can be awesome as well. Christians want to give you the credit for the bad things you do and God the credit for the good things you do. The fact is we should get the credit for doing the good things as well, because we did these things.

You've been hanging around the wrong Christians, because what you describe isn't what I would do. I agree with you that ALL credit and merit should go to all involved in some human process of 'betterment.' I just give credit to people without leaving out due Thanks to the Lord for His Providence (and sometimes Judgements).

I am teaching my kids to think for themselves, what skepticism and critical thinking actually are. To have good reasons for their beliefs whatever they are.

It sounds like you and I are doing very similar things. In fact, I've been so successful, that my son, at this very moment, is, after having achieved literally a 4.0 grade point average, is just about to graduate with a Master's degree

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Healing, no. Improving their lives---well, that's a different thing and the term improving is a vague term. But, improving my life. Yes, in general, I'd say that my own implementation of Christianity has improved my life ...

Sure, and there are many atheists that it caused much emotional trauma for.

It sounds like you and I are doing very similar things. In fact, I've been so successful, that my son, at this very moment, is, after having achieved literally a 4.0 grade point average, is just about to graduate with a Master's degree

Sounds great.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I was upset by a trifle. Then, simply bored. But, Pascal's pessimism has taken me to new heights as I realize I am less miserable than he!

Oh, that's you and me, both! ... still, I have to admit that I a bit envious of the fact that Pascal apparently received two lion's shares of intelligence.

 

[public hermit]

Oh, that's you and me, both! ... still, I have to admit that I a bit envious of the fact that Pascal apparently received two lion's shares of intelligence.

Haha, wow, how in the world did I come up with that comment?

You're right about Pascal's intelligence. I read somewhere that he is considered the first existential philosopher, which I had always given to Kierkegaard. But, I can see why someone might say that. Existentialism is your area, what do you think about that?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Haha, wow, how in the world did I come up with that comment?

You're right about Pascal's intelligence. I read somewhere that he is considered the first existential philosopher, which I had always given to Kierkegaard. But, I can see why someone might say that. Existentialism is your area, what do you think about that?

Honestly, I don't know for sure. But in reading the portions of Kierkegaard that I have, and having done so after having read Pascal's Pensees, it was almost like Kierkegaard--being the man of letters that he was in his own right-- knew his Pascal and also knew that Pascal had just barely tapped into the existential angst brought on by Descartes' dalliance with (Pyrrhonic) Skepticism.

Kierkegaard seems to have decided to more fully draw out what Pascal had only barely brought up for consideration in the ongoing engagement between Philosophy and Christian Theology.

In that sense, one might say Pascal was the first modern existentialist.

 

[public hermit]

Kierkegaard seems to have decided to more fully draw out what Pascal had only barely brought up for consideration in the ongoing engagement between Philosophy and Christian Theology

That makes sense. Kierkegaard took Pascal's "thoughts" and fleshed them out, so to speak.