Pascal's Wager should not be followed, it is flawed.

Premise one is agreed with by myself in the majority of situations. I feel it is a good idea to make decisions that maximize benefits. There are some exclusions obviously. If perhaps my beneficial decision hurt others then I would not agree. Or perhaps if the outcome of said decision was a very negligible benefit then I would also not agree as the work required to acquire such outcome would outweigh the minor benefit. An example of this situation would be myself walking down the street, if I walk 20 feet to my right I will be shielded by a building that will allow for minor wind reduction which will make my walking slightly easier. However the benefit is so minor that making this decision in itself is not worth my time. Conclusion: I generally agree with Beem0r, there are times I would disagree though. If Beem0r attempts to twist this into one of those instances then I will argue this point further, until then..... Premise two, I also agree with the structure of this one. Though, I do not think the logic being attached to it is necessarily correct. It is a good idea if you don't know what the outcomes will be to weigh the possible outcomes. Example, since I don't know what the outcome of buying a lottery ticket will be I should decide on the possible outcome. I can calculate that the chances of me winning are 1:1,000,000,000 therefor I can also deduce that buying the ticket will probably receive me a bad net benefit. Conclusion don't buy the ticket. The problem with Beem0r's case is that we don't actually know what the probability is. Not only is it impossible for myself to determine the benefit but it is equally impossible to determine the probable benefit. There is absolutely not guarantee that the religion one is attempting to settle with actually will put forth infinite happiness. Not only is there this lack of a guarantee but there is absolutely no definite probability from which we can derive an equation from which we may determine probable benefit. What are the chances that LaVeyan Satanism if followed will actually give the disciple eternal happiness on death? Anyone? There is absolutely no way to determine the probability. Not of LaVeyan Satanism or of any other religion. It is IMPOSSIBLE to determine the likely benefit under Beem0r's model. Premise three I obviously do not agree with at all. Here is the text: "Deciding to follow a religion you are uncertain about is a rational choice [Given that eternal rewards are promised]." Let me propose some counter examples that would work under this logic. a. I walk up to a little kid, I look that kid in the eye, I state, "You should cut off your arm, if you do so you might have eternal salvation." Analysis: -50 Arm cutting off hurts. -20 Relationship points from people who think a missing arm is unattractive. -20 Physical points from disabilities to participate in many sports. -10 Depression might occur. + 10,000,000,000,000,000 Eternal salvation might happen. Conclusion: Obviously at this point it would be a good idea for the little kid to chop off his or her arm. (Disclaimer: Honestly, it's not, please don't do this.) b. I read in a magazine that some experts believe that if Atlantis existed then it would have been an infinitely wealthy city. Perhaps I should attempt to discover it? Analysis: -100 I will become a laughing stock among professional treasure hunters and the scientific community. -20 Will cost a great deal of money. -10 Will take a great deal of time. + 9999999999999 Infinite riches! Conclusion: Let's do it! Here's the point. In both of these situations I am using Beem0r's model. The problem with the model stems from the fact that there is no way for myself or anyone to determine the likelihood of locating the eternal reward. There is no way to find the probable benefit. Under Beem0r's model you SHOULD follow every path that MIGHT lead to eternal salvation, no matter how ludicrous, how unlikely, or how detrimental to yourself. As long as the detriment does not outweigh the infinite salvation. This logic is flawed, this is not a reason to waste one's time devoting to a cause. Other problem's with Pascal's wager. A. Which religion.....? There are so many aren't there? How are you going to know which one. You could try choosing them all, but most of them say something to the effect of, "I am jealous god!" So that doesn't quite work... Well I suppose you could just pick one and hope it is the right one, at least you'll have a bit of a chance right? Nay, many religions also state, "worship no false idol". It would be better to be undecided in most religions eyes than to be worshiping the wrong god. Imagine if you were god, two groups of people are before you. The first group is worshiping a random false idol something you specifically tell them not to do in your holy book. The other group isn't worshiping anyone, they are just confused and sad. Who do you like more? Obvious choice. B. Choosing to follow a religion on Pascal's Wager is a sham. If you are simply following the religion in the hopes that you will achieve eternal salvation then you won't. If a god truly exists and you somehow chose the right religion to follow then that omnipotent god will be able to see your mind. It will see that you are simply following that religion for the point of eternal salvation. Following a religion simply because one desires eternal salvation is not truly following a religion at all. The individual who does such has no true faith. The individual is simply a gambler who will be punished as any other non-believer. C. If a god truly wanted us to follow it. Truly wanted us to know that it had created us, then it would just simply tell us so. I challenge Beem0r to explain one legitimate reason a god would not just simply come to us and tell us what had happened.