Blaise Pascal, a 17th-century French mathematician, physicist, and philosopher, presents a compelling argument for belief in God. According to Pascal, faith in God is not only morally permissible, but it is also to our practical advantage (Vaughn, 2018). In the Pensées, the author presents the idea that betting on the existence of God is a beneficial choice, regardless of whether God exists or not. He suggests that believing in God can bring positive benefits if God does not exist. However, if God does exist, those who have faith in God will be rewarded with eternal happiness, while those who do not believe will endure eternal punishment. The morality of faith in God depends on personal beliefs and values, and it is up to each individual to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a belief.
The writings of Augustine, a prominent early Christian philosopher and theologian, deeply influenced Pascal. Moreover, he was familiar with skeptical philosophers such as Michel de Montaigne and Pierre Charron, who emphasized the limits of human reason and the importance of doubt (Vaughn, 2018). Pascal was influenced by the Stoic philosophy, which stresses the importance of personal ethics and cultivating a virtuous life. However, he was associated with the Jansenist movement, a religious and philosophical tradition that emphasized the importance of grace and predestination in the Christian faith.
The strengths of other thinkers are that Augustine’s emphasis on the role of faith and grace in our relationship with God helped to shape Pascal’s view that belief in God is necessary for salvation. The Stoic philosophy focused primarily on personal ethics and may not be directly connected to religious beliefs, which can be seen as a weakness in Pascal’s reasoning for faith in God (Vaughn, 2018). Another weakness is that the Jansenist movement was controversial within the Christian faith, and its emphasis on grace and predestination may not be acceptable to all religious traditions.
The argument that challenges accepting the existence of God without concrete proof is rooted in the notion of rationality. According to this argument, belief in God is not rational unless supported by adequate evidence (Vaughn, 2018). Those who hold this view argue that it is not morally permissible to believe in God simply because it is to our practical advantage. Instead, belief in God should be based on evidence, such as scientific evidence or personal experience. In addition to the argument from rationality, some also argue that belief in God without sufficient evidence is not morally permissible because it is intellectually dishonest (Vaughn, 2018). Moreover, belief in God without sufficient evidence can lead to harmful consequences, such as rejecting scientific knowledge or persecuting those with different ideas. Conversely, some argue that God may favor those who identify as atheists or agnostics, as they only reject the belief without sufficient proof. After all, they use God’s gift of reason to decide (Vaughn, 2018). This argument is based on the idea that God values honesty and integrity and would, therefore look favorably upon those who use their sense to arrive at their beliefs.
In conclusion, the question of whether it is morally permissible to believe in God just because it is to our practical advantage is complex. Pascal argues that belief in God is not only ethically acceptable but is also to our practical advantage, while critics of Pascal’s argument point out that his reasoning is flawed in several ways. The fight against believing in God without sufficient evidence is based on the principle of rationality and the idea that belief should be based on evidence. However, some argue that God would look kindly at those who use their reason to arrive at their opinions, even if those beliefs are not in line with religious doctrine. Ultimately, the morality of faith in God is subjective and depends on an individual’s personal beliefs and values. It is up to each person to decide whether it is morally permissible to believe in God just because it is to their practical advantage and to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a belief.
Reference
Vaughn, L. (2018). Philosophy Here and Now: Powerful Ideas in Everyday Life. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.