Is there a Pascalian-esque Wager specific to Mormonism?

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Honorentheos said:

If accepted, eternity with the likes of Joseph F Smith, Boyd K Packer and Bruce R McKonckie. And they each think their being there meant they were right.

Who doesn't like fireworks?

😃

If false, an existence better than you can presently imagine in the company of Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, and Janis Joplin. And they also think they've got it right and are willing to prove it.

Seems like a pretty compelling argument to me.

I'll take the first group every time

I actually lived the 60's.   It was hardly great.  I know you are joking I guess but it doesn't work

Waking up not knowing where you are or how you got there or what happened in between is not much fun in reality.  And the conversation?  "OH Wow man............................................................  Yeah , heavy dude.................................................

No thanks

Edited September 7, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Honorentheos]

BTW, I literally lol'd at the huh. That was perfect.

[Honorentheos]

2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I'll take the first group every time

I actually lived the 60's.   It was hardly great.  I know you are joking I guess but it doesn't work

Waking up not knowing where you are or how you got there or what happened in between is not much fun in reality.  And the conversation?  "OH Wow man............................................................  Yeah , heavy dude.................................................

No thanks

Somehow endless high priest quorums don't seem very pragmatic to me. Of course, neither is an eternal party in a place so awesome we'd kill ourselves to go there if we saw it but hedonism seems like as good a philosophy for the eternities as any.

[Bernard Gui]

5. You gain everything the Father has, or you don't. 

[Bernard Gui]

33 minutes ago, Honorentheos said:

Somehow endless high priest quorums don't seem very pragmatic to me. Of course, neither is an eternal party in a place so awesome we'd kill ourselves to go there if we saw it but hedonism seems like as good a philosophy for the eternities as any.

Except neither the celestial nor the telestial kingdoms are as you describe them. Either way, however, you get precisely what you want.

 

Edited September 7, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Honorentheos]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Except neither the celestial nor the telestial kingdoms are as you describe them. Either way, however, you get precisely what you want.

 

People say that. But this is a thread about Pascal's wager. So saying a person gets precisely what they want if Mormonism is the involved with the true proposition leaves the wager essentially meaningless. All sides of the wager yield the same result. P=true; everyone gets precisely what they want. P=false; status quo.

Anyway, I'd wager a fair amount that if you were to get all the high priests that ever have, do now, or will exist in an infinite room holding infinite high priest quorum discussions, it will eventually come to blows. The only reason it doesn't happen often now is the short time frame and after-church pot roast comas.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Honorentheos

[stemelbow]

17 hours ago, cksalmon said:

What would it look like?

To get you started...

1. Mormonism is true, or Mormonism is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. You must wager (it is not optional).
4. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that Mormonism is true. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain [what?]; if you lose, you lose [what?]
5. ?

 

 

 

Welll everyone or near everyone is saved in Mormonism and receives a kingdom of glory.  So believe or not.  If Mormonism is true everyone gains, whether you believe it or not.  If not true, then who cares, huh?  There are too many other options out there you'll never be able to figure out which is best anyway.

[Robert F. Smith]

14 hours ago, Honorentheos said:

Somehow endless high priest quorums don't seem very pragmatic to me. Of course, neither is an eternal party in a place so awesome we'd kill ourselves to go there if we saw it but hedonism seems like as good a philosophy for the eternities as any.

 

4 hours ago, Honorentheos said:

People say that. But this is a thread about Pascal's wager. So saying a person gets precisely what they want if Mormonism is the involved with the true proposition leaves the wager essentially meaningless. All sides of the wager yield the same result. P=true; everyone gets precisely what they want. P=false; status quo.

Anyway, I'd wager a fair amount that if you were to get all the high priests that ever have, do now, or will exist in an infinite room holding infinite high priest quorum discussions, it will eventually come to blows. The only reason it doesn't happen often now is the short time frame and after-church pot roast comas.

Suggesting that any or all of the kingdoms of glory would be like endless HP group meetings seems rather atavistic to me.  So too the notion of two incompatible people here being destined to forever sting each other like a couple of scorpions.  Indeed, if St Paul is correct to say that we will be changed and incorruptible on that great day, why wouldn't eternity be filled with infinite joy -- more in keeping with your hedonistic choice?  Endless progeny, and endless worlds.  Take that to your parimutuel betting window.

"men are that they might have joy." (II Nephi 2:25)

“This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39)

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

Suggesting that any or all of the kingdoms of glory would be like endless HP group meetings seems rather atavistic to me.  So too the notion of two incompatible people here being destined to forever sting each other like a couple of scorpions.  Indeed, if St Paul is correct to say that we will be changed and incorruptible on that great day, why wouldn't eternity be filled with infinite joy -- more in keeping with your hedonistic choice?  Endless progeny, and endless worlds.  Take that to your parimutuel betting window.

"men are that they might have joy." (II Nephi 2:25)

“This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39)

He probably doesn't like all the noise from all those kids.  

They're not much fun while you are partying with Jimi Hendrix.

[Honorentheos]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

Suggesting that any or all of the kingdoms of glory would be like endless HP group meetings seems rather atavistic to me.  So too the notion of two incompatible people here being destined to forever sting each other like a couple of scorpions.  Indeed, if St Paul is correct to say that we will be changed and incorruptible on that great day, why wouldn't eternity be filled with infinite joy -- more in keeping with your hedonistic choice?  Endless progeny, and endless worlds.  Take that to your parimutuel betting window.

"men are that they might have joy." (II Nephi 2:25)

“This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39)

Let's see. How's this go again?

	P=True	P=False
Wager for God	Spend eternity in what amounts to endless nursery. (a step up from High Priest Quorum, I grant you that)	Status quo
Wager against God	Best. Concert. Ever.	Status quo

 

Only, let's add something to the false side:

	P=True	P=False
Wager for God	Spend eternity in what amounts to endless nursery. (a step up from High Priest Quorum, I grant you that.)	Spent mortality in what amounts to endless meetings and competitive religion, wondering why two earrings merited prophetic pronouncement but whether or not there were pre-Adamites is not for us to know...at least when the lights go out you won't realize it so you can't regret it. That's a plus I guess.
Wager against God	Best. Concert. Ever.	Spent life living it according to social norms and cultural values with awareness this life is the one chance you get so best to make the most of it.

Still a compelling argument to be sure.  Where do I sign up?

Edited September 8, 2016 by Honorentheos

[Five Solas]

The majority of LDS may not appreciate the full extent of their current downside in this equation.  Not being able to pair that rib-eye steak with JM Cellars Tre Fanciulli (that's just an example--albeit a truly excellent one).  Many of you don't know what it means to enjoy a great steak (or fresh Halibut, or take your pick).  It simply doesn't go with water, juice, pop, etc.--no matter where you sourced it.  Mitt Romney, for all his worthiness & money--by God's grace, I regularly get to enjoy a good meal more than he does.  How funny is that?

I never had an alcoholic beverage until ~ six months after I became a Christian.  It was January 2006 and I was 37 years old.  And I won't forget the Pyramid Hefeweizen that revealed yet another measure of God's goodness, at Costa's Restaurant in Seattle's U-District. 

May I humbly suggest none of you wager in ignorance... 

:0)

--Erik

[waveslider]

4 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

The majority of LDS may not appreciate the full extent of their current downside in this equation.  Not being able to pair that rib-eye steak with JM Cellars Tre Fanciulli (that's just an example--albeit a truly excellent one).  Many of you don't know what it means to enjoy a great steak (or fresh Halibut, or take your pick).  It simply doesn't go with water, juice, pop, etc.--no matter where you sourced it.  Mitt Romney, for all his worthiness & money--by God's grace, I regularly get to enjoy a good meal more than he does.  How funny is that?

I never had an alcoholic beverage until ~ six months after I became a Christian.  It was January 2006 and I was 37 years old.  And I won't forget the Pyramid Hefeweizen that revealed yet another measure of God's goodness, at Costa's Restaurant in Seattle's U-District. 

May I humbly suggest none of you wager in ignorance... 

:0)

--Erik

I used to wait tables for nearly 20 years in the fine dining arena. Although there are a lot to wine parings that can compliment a nice meal, it is highly overrated in my opinion. Although it does add an element to the awesome meals, by creating a type of status symbol for others to see, and helps you to learn to discern slight nuances in sight, smell, and flavors, one can still do that without the wines, as long as it is a world class chef who has put together the meals. The key is to take your time, experience the presentation of the food, and atmosphere of the dining facility, take in the bouquets of scents, feel the textures of the foods, and enjoy the after tastes before taking the next bite.

But as long as there were people who wanted to also experience wine parings with their meals (it did help me that I was inactive for a while and therefor knew what to suggest) I always enjoyed selling a couple of $400.00 bottles of wine to them, as opposed to an $80-90.00 bottle they would have picked on their own. It sure did boost up the diner tab quite a bit, which by default boosted the tip amount, not to mention their sense of giving a healthier tip because they were feeling a little bit tipsy, temporarily feeling a little better for the moment, and wanted to thank me for the suggestion of having them spend more money than they would have otherwise, if they were left to pick the wine on their own, because it was something they never would have tried before and they liked it, without checking the bank account until after the hang over sets in the next day. Even though the wine is a little better quality, the fact is they would still have liked their choice of the more familiar wines they are used to because the medium priced wines were just as nuanced, but in a little different way. The name on the bottle often means more than the actual contents because the contents vary bottle to bottle anyway. It's kind of a psychosomatic type of Jedi mind trick that any good waiter knows how to capitalize upon, and those patrons will always come back for more, year after year, even requesting you to be their waiter over and over again because as a waiter you were able to create memories that they will never forget, as to how much fun it can be to splurge for the more expensive things in life once in a while.

So while it may be fun to not have to worry about the WOW, it sure is a lot less expensive to not experience a some wine parings. My wager is on the cool clean water, after the aftertaste of the food has diminished enough to clean the palate for then next course. I find I enjoy it much better than the huge dent in the old wallet, and the heavy feeling in the morning from having a couple too many glasses of wine with the meal, and I am still able to visit the temple the next day if I like. To each their own I guess.... The grass is always greener...

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Five Solas said:

The majority of LDS may not appreciate the full extent of their current downside in this equation.  Not being able to pair that rib-eye steak with JM Cellars Tre Fanciulli (that's just an example--albeit a truly excellent one).  Many of you don't know what it means to enjoy a great steak (or fresh Halibut, or take your pick).  It simply doesn't go with water, juice, pop, etc.--no matter where you sourced it.  Mitt Romney, for all his worthiness & money--by God's grace, I regularly get to enjoy a good meal more than he does.  How funny is that?

I never had an alcoholic beverage until ~ six months after I became a Christian.  It was January 2006 and I was 37 years old.  And I won't forget the Pyramid Hefeweizen that revealed yet another measure of God's goodness, at Costa's Restaurant in Seattle's U-District. 

May I humbly suggest none of you wager in ignorance... 

:0)

--Erik

I don't need any new vices, thank you very much.  I'll keep my $45 too.  

You should try some coke- trust me it's better.

[Robert F. Smith]

16 hours ago, Honorentheos said:

Let's see. How's this go again?

	P=True	P=False
Wager for God	Spend eternity in what amounts to endless nursery. (a step up from High Priest Quorum, I grant you that)	Status quo
Wager against God	Best. Concert. Ever.	Status quo

Only, let's add something to the false side:

	P=True	P=False
Wager for God	Spend eternity in what amounts to endless nursery. (a step up from High Priest Quorum, I grant you that.)	Spent mortality in what amounts to endless meetings and competitive religion, wondering why two earrings merited prophetic pronouncement but whether or not there were pre-Adamites is not for us to know...at least when the lights go out you won't realize it so you can't regret it. That's a plus I guess.
Wager against God	Best. Concert. Ever.	Spent life living it according to social norms and cultural values with awareness this life is the one chance you get so best to make the most of it.

Still a compelling argument to be sure.  Where do I sign up?

There are a lot of yokels invested in competitive religion, who are deeply fearful of discussing pre-Adamites, whose faith is deeply flawed and derivative ("borrowed light"), and who might think a theoretical wager makes sense.  But to me that seems just silly, even as I broaden the best concert ever to include that Zimmerman kid from HIbbing Minnesota and one of his later girlfriends (Joan), which I think certainly must continue somewhere beyond the sky.

It all goes back to false premises guaranteeing false conclusions.

[Robert F. Smith]

http://qz.com/778767/to-tell-someone-theyre-wrong-first-tell-them-how-theyre-right/?utm_source=YPL&yptr=yahoo&ref=yfp 

Quote

The 17^th century philosopher Blaise Pascal is perhaps best known for Pascal’s Wager which, in the first formal use of decision theory, argued that believing in God is the most pragmatic decision.

 

Edited September 12, 2016 by Robert F. Smith