Lee Corbin pointed out the difference in costs between the
cryonics wager and Pascal's wager (Although I might disagree with him
with his assertion that the Cryonic win is less than infinite) and
James rogers pointed out the fact that Pascal's wager suffers from
"having the potential for infinite mutually-exclusive choices, only
one of which is correct, at a finite cost. Therefore, the expected
benefit must approach zero when applied to the entire space of
possible religions." And some others have expressed some good ideas
also.
Thanks for all of these responses! I tried to put forth most
of these ideas in my response, yet not quite so eloquently.
It also seems to me that fundamentally, there is a good and
valid idea in the idea of Pascal's wager. It's just that it is
poorly applied when considering the existence of God, and is much
more appropriate and does validly apply to Cryonics!?
Brent Allsop
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:02 MDT