Editing Pascal's wager (section)

== The wager ==
The wager uses the following logic (excerpts from ''Pensées'', part III, §233):

* God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives
* A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up
* You must wager; it is not optional
* Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing
* Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
* But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves.

Pascal asks the reader to analyze humankind's position, where our actions can be enormously consequential, but our understanding of those consequences is flawed. While we can discern a great deal through [[reason]], we are ultimately forced to gamble. Pascal cites a number of distinct areas of uncertainty in human life:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!width="180"|Category
!Quotation(s)
|-
| Uncertainty in all
| This is what I see, and what troubles me. I look on all sides, and everywhere I see nothing but obscurity. Nature offers me nothing that is not a matter of doubt and disquiet.<ref name="Pensée #72">{{Cite web|url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/18269/18269-h/18269-h.htm|title=The Project Gutenberg eBook of Pascal's Pensées, by Blaise Pascal.|website=www.gutenberg.org}}</ref>
|-
| Uncertainty in man's purpose
| For after all what is man in nature? A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either.<ref name="Pensée #72"/>
|-
| Uncertainty in reason
| There is nothing so conformable to reason as this disavowal of reason.<ref name="Pensée #72"/>
|-
| Uncertainty in science
| There is no doubt that natural laws exist, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.<ref name="Pensée #72"/>
|-
| Uncertainty in religion
| If I saw no signs of a divinity, I would fix myself in denial.  If I saw everywhere the marks of a Creator, I would repose peacefully in faith.  But seeing too much to deny Him, and too little to assure me, I am in a pitiful state, and I would wish a hundred times that if a god sustains nature it would reveal Him without ambiguity.<ref name="Pensée #229">[http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18269/18269-h/18269-h.htm#p_229 ''Pensée'' #229]</ref>

We understand nothing of the works of God unless we take it as a principle that He wishes to blind some and to enlighten others.<ref name="Pensée #72"/>
|-
| Uncertainty in skepticism
| It is not certain that everything is uncertain.<ref name="Pensée #72"/>
|}

Pascal describes humanity as a finite being trapped within [[divine incomprehensibility]], briefly thrust into being from non-being, with no explanation of "Why?" or "What?" or "How?" On Pascal's view, human finitude constrains our ability to achieve truth reliably.

Given that reason alone cannot determine whether God exists, Pascal concludes that this question functions as a coin toss. However, even if we do not know the outcome of this coin toss, we must base our actions on some expectation about the consequence. We must decide whether to live as though God exists, or whether to live as though God does not exist, even though we may be mistaken in either case.

In Pascal's assessment, participation in this wager is not optional. Merely by existing in a state of uncertainty, we are forced to choose between the available courses of action for practical purposes.