I have been confronted no less than six times this week with some twit or another regurgitating Pascal’s Wager, the theistic sucker bet. And each and every one of them believes he/she/it was the first one to pose what to the simple minded religious drones must seem like a stumper…

It goes like this (to the atheist);
If you are right, no harm, no foul, we all just die. But if I’m right, you will suffer a torturous eternity at the hands of my merciful and loving sky buddy…

One does not have to have a deep understanding of logic or formal debate to see at a cursory glance why this bit of fluff fails.

First, this isn’t even an argument for (or against) the existence of a god. It’s a pointless threat made to someone who doesn’t believe the basic premise. That makes it a bit of narcissistic metaphysical masturbation, not meant to influence it’s purported target, but rather to allow the theist to ‘gloat’ over the impending fiery doom they fervently hope will descend on the folks who have made them feel so stupid, for so long about believing.

Second, it is a classic ‘False Dichotomy”, a dishonest representation that there are ONLY two possible points of view. This of course relies entirely on the one posing the wager having the one TRUE religion. Since all religions are mutually exclusive to some degree, and even most sects are exclusive in their certainty of having the favor of god and the patent on salvation, it’s pretty obvious that the ‘odds’ are stacked against the theistic standpoint. But more importantly, the Wager poses a false equality between the position of the existence of a magical, invisible and intangible being, and that of reality.

To quote Dr. Dawkins;

 “...when two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong.”