Atheist's wager

The Atheist's wager, coined by the philosopher Michael Martin and published in his 1990 book Atheism: A Philosophical Justification, is an atheistic response to Pascal's wager regarding the existence of God.[1]

One version of the Atheist's wager suggests that since a kind and loving god would reward good deeds – and that if no gods exist, good deeds would still leave a positive legacy – one should live a good life without religion.[2][3] This argument assumes that if a god exists, they are benevolent and just, rather than arbitrary or punitive in their judgment of human actions. This contrasts with Pascal's wager, which presumes a god who rewards belief and punishes disbelief regardless of moral conduct. Philosophers such as John Schellenberg have argued that a perfectly just deity would be more likely to reward sincere moral behavior and intellectual honesty rather than belief for its own sake.[4] Another formulation suggests that a god may reward honest disbelief and punish a dishonest belief in the divine.[5]

  1. ^ Oppy, Graham (2019). A Companion to Atheism and Philosophy (First ed.). Wiley. p. 221. ISBN 978-1-119-11918-0.
  2. ^ Martin, Michael (1990). Atheism: A Philosophical Justification. Temple University Press. pp. 232–238. ISBN 978-0-8772-2642-0.
  3. ^ Berry, Alvin F. (2011). So What If...the God of the Bible Exists...Does It Really Matter at the End ... Dog Ear Publishing. p. 10. ISBN 978-1-457-50020-6.
  4. ^ Schellenberg, John L. (2015). The Hiddenness Argument: Philosophy’s New Challenge to Belief in God. Oxford University Press. pp. 52–55. ISBN 978-0-19-873308-9.
  5. ^ Stahl, Philip A. (2007). Atheism: A Beginner's Handbook: All You Wanted to Know About Atheism and Why. iUniverse. pp. 39–42. ISBN 978-0-5954-2737-6.

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search