people, even in the case of belief, feel that they ought to believe in God because of the potential consequences of not believing. Belief doesn't work that way. James Franklin : No, I agree, belief is not subject to the control of the will that way. On the other hand, investigation of evidence is. The suggestion of Pascal's Wager is whatever you think are live options in religion, there's something to be said for investing your effort in looking into the live ones that might have a good payoff. So are you going to look into some? Peter Slezak : Yes, I do, I spend a lot of my time looking into it or arguing about it, and I think that makes perfect sense. Alan Saunders : But you do, don't you, Peter, you do find that you encounter quite a lot of bad theological or God-centred argument? Peter Slezak : I think they're all bad. I mean, I think all of the arguments that are... Alan Saunders : Some are worse than others, presumably? Peter Slezak : Yes, some are worse than others, but I think they're all bad, but they're all very compelling and people find them persuasive. I find with my arguments with students and others, if you run it in a domain that they don't have a personal commitment to, they see quickly that the argument's flawed. Alan Saunders : This is quite common, isn't it, Jim? I mean, there's a famous fallacy called the Monte