Check out this new paper by Saul Smilansky, who turns the tables on Pascal’s Wager (see also here and image below). In brief, Professor Smilansky’s argument is that God will be more upset at people who accept the wager (i.e. belief in God) but still commit moral transgressions than at atheists who reject the wager but live good moral lives. Although I am not buying Smilansky’s argument (since we are all sinners), it is worth reading and thinking about. Hat tip: Brian Leiter.
Welcome to the online home of the IASS
Philosophical thought from an amateur and armchair thinker. No expertise, just speculation.
In Conversation with Legal and Moral Philosophers
Relitigating Our Favorite Disputes
PhD, Jagiellonian University
Inquiry and opinion
Life is all about being curious, asking questions, and discovering your passion. And it can be fun!
Books, papers, and other jurisprudential things
Ramblings of a retiree in France
BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH
Natalia's space
hoping we know we're living the dream
Lover of math. Bad at drawing.
We hike, bike, and discover Central Florida and beyond
Making it big in business after age 40
Reasoning about reasoning, mathematically.
I don't mean to sound critical, but I am; so that's how it comes across
remember the good old days...
"Let me live, love and say it well in good sentences." - Sylvia Plath
a personal view of the theory of computation
Submitted For Your Perusal is a weblog wherein Matt Thomas shares and writes about things he thinks are interesting.
Logic at Columbia University
Just like the Thesis Whisperer - but with more money
the sky is no longer the limit
Technology, Culture, and Ethics
Just like the horse whisperer - but with more pages
Poetry, Other Words, and Cats
prior probability 
Question and this only loosely related to the topic above; is it possible to have intra-personal Prisoner’s Dilemma over the God question?
that is a fascinating possibility, since can’t “know” whether God is one of the players!
That really would be an interesting question to further explore.
Thomas Schelling once wrote about our “multiple selves” so this approach is feasible
I guess I owe a great debt to the work of Thomas Schelling.
P.S.: Here is a lecture Schelling delivered on the problem of multiple selves: https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_resources/documents/a-to-z/s/schelling83.pdf
I love his theory of egonomics. I can’t thank you enough for introducing me to Schelling.
I actually applied his conception to the scaling of the collective action problem last year.
https://beta.briefideas.org/ideas/e0152a80aaea6d057991b253db25a17d
I certainly believe the same can be done for PD dynamics.
I will absolutely check this lecture out some point before next Monday. Time is working against me … busy week… Quarter end at work and I am trying finish an essay before the week of the US elections.