Little in the philosophical circle in China has been written about Pascal's Wager,an argument usually in the West considered as important as the all-famous Ontological Argument.Built on decision theory,the Wager aims to argue that we should opt to believe in God,regardless whether God in fact exists or not.Although there is a plethora of controversies in connection with the details of the Wager,not too long ago the consensus was that the argument is nonetheless valid.The situation has changed,however,after the so-called"mixed strategies"were first introduced by Duff and then refined by Hájek.Their thought is that,by taking into consideration of the mixed strategies,either the Wager can be shown to be guilty of the fallacy of false alternatives,or it can be shown to be deprived of its practical value.A thread of interesting discussion about the mixed strategies has then emerged and gained attention.The present paper tries to move forward the discussion by questioning the notions of"uncountably many die rolls"and"to wager for God based on foreseeing".
万方数据
维普
