In Steven M. Cahn & David Shatz (eds.), Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 250- (1982)
AbstractA. Pascal's statement of his wager argument is couched in terms of the theory of probability and the theory of games, and the exposition is unclear and unnecessarily complicated. The following is a ‘creative’ reformulation of the argument designed to avoid some of the objections which have been or might be raised against the original
Similar books and articles
On Rescher on Pascal's Wager.Graham Oppy - 1991 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 30 (3):159 - 168.
Is a Jamesian Wager the Only Safe Bet? On Jeff Jordan's New Book on Pascal's Wager.Volker Dieringer - 2009 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 91 (2):237-247.
Pascal's Wager is a Possible Bet (but Not a Very Good One): Reply to Harmon Holcomb III.Graham Oppy - 1996 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 40 (2):101 - 116.
Wagering Belief: Examining Two Objections to Pascal's Wager.D. Groothuis - 1994 - Religious Studies 30 (4):479 - 486.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Surreal Decisions.Eddy Keming Chen & Daniel Rubio - 2020 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 100 (1):54-74.
Wagering Against Divine Hiddenness.Elizabeth Jackson - 2016 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 8 (4):85-108.
Pascal, Pascalberg, and Friends.Samuel Lebens - 2020 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 87 (1):109-130.
The Nature and Rationality of Conversion.Paul Faulkner - 2019 - European Journal of Philosophy 27 (4):821-836.
The Unlikely Comeback of Pascal’s Wager: on the Instability of Secular Post-Modernism.Samuel Lebens & Daniel Statman - forthcoming - Philosophia:1-12.
References found in this work
The Will to Believe: And Other Essays in Popular Philosophy.William James - 1979 - New York: Cambridge University Press.