(1) Pascal makes an interesting argument about why we should believe in God. However, some people would not view this as a “rational” argument for God’s existence per se, but rather merely a “rational” argument for buying an insurance policy. In other words, we buy an insurance policy for rational reasons, namely we believe that there might be a fire that destroys our property one day in the future. However, we do not buy an insurance policy because we actually believe that a fire exists at present. Indeed, if a fire did exist at present, we would call the fire department, rather than the insurance company—that would be the rational thing to do in a situation where an actual fire existed. Is Pascal’s argument merely a rational argument for buying an insurance policy just in case God does exist? Or does Pascal’s argument convince you that God does, in fact, exist? Why or why not? When answering this question make sure to include references to the assigned readings.
Is Pascal’s argument merely a rational argument for buying an insurance policy just in case God does exist?