there is no such thing as hell.

Possibiltilities are the potential for things to be real. There are numbers betwene 1 and 0. Odds if you will. The more knolwedege and experience you have will increase that possibiltiy for the likelyhood of that to be real. Thus you can say a possibility is an idea or thought that is tranforming into existiance. I would argue harry potter is not possible because it is outside the realms of scientific plausability. thus there is no chance for it to be a realitly. Only know it true, I think that is only in an individuals perspective. What if you have false memories? Are those memories real despite the fact that they were warped from what was real? Imagination is the exploration of possibiltiies while odds are most cannot be possible, imagination is what transforms our current being into something new. That is what innovation is all about, having an idea (which is not real) and creating it so that it is real. Thus without the real idea of it per say... It would never exist. Your argument is attempting to paint pictures in black and white, however you are missing the fact that we live in many shades of grey (50 right?) As a child you offred rewards for your behavior, like a cookie for being quiet in class. Does that cookie exist? No but the real possibility of geting that cookie drives the child to be successful in their classroom. So just because at that moment the possibiltiy is false and they child does not see the cookie, does not deem that the cookie does not exist nor does it mean they will not receieve a cookie. The same concept for hel. You might not believe it exists, you will not know it exists until your deaths, but its possibility is real enough. So back to the matter at hand pascals wager is a common sense argument in why it is more logical to accept the possibility of hell as real rather than say its fault be default. From the wiki: Pascal's original formulation of the wager was written down as a fairly short paragraph in Pensées amongst several other notes that could be considered "wagers".[1] Its argument is rooted in game theory and that the best course of action is to believe in God regardless of any lack of evidence, because that option gives the biggest potential gains. Pascal's original text is long-winded and somewhat convoluted philosophy-speak,[2] but it can be distilled more simply: If you believe in God and God does exist, you will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven: thus an infinite gain. If you do not believe in God and God does exist, you will be condemned to remain in hell forever: thus an infinite loss. If you believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded: thus a finite loss. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded, but you have lived your own life: thus a finite gain. The gains and losses associated to outcomes 3 and 4 can be thought of as the opportunity costs of feigning belief and living in accordance with religious norms, since these are typically more restrictive than secular laws. These costs are finite because of human mortality. Mathematically, a finite gain or loss is negligible compared to an infinite gain or loss as would be incurred during an eternal afterlife. Therefore, Pascal concluded that it was a much better choice to believe in God rather than not. The Wager can also be seen in table form and it becomes clear that belief gives you a reward or (practically) nothing, while disbelief gives you punishment or nothing: Re-affirms the poin that the idea of hell is not only real but benficial to know it exists.