To believe or not to believe? What happens when this question It is placed to a mathematical?
We calculate that utility we can receive from having faith in It Gave and us compare it to the one calculated in case where we do not faith. That way we could determine mathematically how much helpful (should) believe it or not.
It's not a crazy to have had this idea, but the mathematician,scientist,philosopher Blaise Plascal.

Blaise Pascal
Portrait of Blaise Pascal

P (IS) = Probability that It Gave there
P (NE) = Probability that It Gave does not exist
In (IS) = Convenience in believing that It Gave there
In (NE) = Convenience in believing that It Gave does not exist

Let us assume that you have no clue about the existence of God.
We can assume P(IS) = P(NE)=0.5 , ie the probability that God exists is equal to the probability that God does not exist.

Consider instead, l’utility which derives from the different choices. I securities dell’utility They are a measure of the convenience of choice. The choice is obviously to believe or not to believe.
Basically I believe that God exists, and exists,having gained life everlasting, I have an infinite convenience; while in all other cases, I will always have a measure of 'utility over indicated with securities unknown x,Y,from.

If you think, God exists and I have a 'utility infinity.
If you think, and God does not have a’ utility of value x.
I do not think, God exists and I have a’ utility of value Y.
I do not think, and God does not have a’ utility of value from.

I have the following table:

God Exists God Does Not Exist
I Think Utilities = 8 probability = 1/2 probability = 1/2 = x Utilities
I do not believe probability = 1/2 Utilities = y probability = 1/2 = z Utilities

We neglect for now the quantitative difference between x, and e z.
The utility of a decision is defined as a product of the probabilities for the utility derived from that decision.

Flatulence = P1 * U1 + P2 * U2 + ... + ...

In our case we have:

U1(IS) = 8, U2(IS) = x, U1 (NE) = Y, U2 (NE) = Z
P1(IS) = P2(IS) = P2(NE)=P1(NE)= 1/2

The utility is believing:

Flatulence (IS) = P1(IS) * U1(IS) + P2(IS) * U2(IS) = 0,5 (x + 8) = 8

The utility does not believe it:

Flatulence (NE) = P1(NE) * U1(NE) + P2(NE) * U2(NE) = 0,5 (y + z)

Flatulence (IS) It is endless, and therefore it is in any case much greater Utot (NE).

So you might think.

Theological Problem

Let's start by saying that the reason is not enough: only the faith can give salvation. Although Blaise Pascal has implemented a mathematical reasoning, He designed on the occasion of his studies related to gambling, It not indulges in a reassuring certainty geometric, but he launched into a painful and lived search of God, not the God of the wise, but the God of Jesus, Jesus Christ same.
The scientist was one of the main figures of the 'Jansenist abbey of Port-Royal, where his sister Jacqueline had decided to undertake the life monastic. The main theological activities Pascal s’ framed in the dispute with the Jesuits on the link between freedom and divine grace. Sectionals (1656 about), Pascalian texts in French prose published anonymously, They are the result of these clashes.
For the Jesuits'uomo It can save himself, and it maintained its freedom against God after the original sin: repentance is sufficient for salvation. The will has not been hopelessly corrupted by original sin:l’uomo It has freedom of act. Through the sacrifice of Son, God gives everyone the opportunity to save. Repentance, need to redemption, It can arise at any time, Also dying life . We can define the Jesuits "progressives", as they were trying to reconcile demands and pressures humanities with traditional theological problems. Even the Church Fathers (remember among all, i Santi, Thomas and Agostino) had made their time. Not that went ignored, but it had to carry out a fusing with contemporary culture.
Very conservative, the Jansenists believed not questionable works of the Fathers: they had be applied as they had been conceived, He had only understand. Their morale was rigid and did not leave too much room for free interpretations. L’uomo, with original sin, He has lost all right,corrupt in a definitive manner, It has no chance of survival without the intervention of divine grace (very reminiscent of S. Agostino). Only God can choose who to save, without the 'uomo can afford to sentencing. So only the Grace can direct the will on track. A Grace, once granted can not guarantee perseverance, and also at the right can be subtracted according to the will of God at any time (as happened to Peter when he denied the Maestro).
To close with a lighter note, we must say that the extreme rigor and hardness of moral Jansenist, Pascal founded a love charitable and unconditional for the next.

The bet Pascal last edit: Tuesday,15 January 17:24, 2008 the nabladue

More share buttons
Share on Pinterest