No single argument may settle the question alone, but together the arguments form a cumulative case, and Pascal's Wager adds a prudential reason to believe.
Tagged: Arguments for God
The cumulative case treats the arguments for God as strands in a single rope rather than links in a single chain. No one argument may be decisive on its own, but together the cosmological, teleological, moral, and experiential arguments may make God's existence more probable than not. Pascal's Wager adds a different kind of reason: if God exists, belief gains infinitely, and if God does not exist, belief loses little, so reason counsels wagering on God. The two approaches differ, since the cumulative case argues from evidence, while the Wager argues from prudence.
The Argument in Form
- The cosmological argument gives some reason to believe in a first cause.
- The teleological argument gives some reason to believe in a designer.
- The moral and experiential arguments give further reason to believe in a good and present God.
Therefore, taken together, the arguments make God's existence more probable than not; and prudence counsels wagering on God.
Proponents and History
Richard Swinburne gave the cumulative case its best-known modern form, arguing in The Existence of God that several independent arguments, each with modest force, together make theism more probable than not. Blaise Pascal presented the Wager in the Pensées in the seventeenth century, as a practical argument addressed to someone who cannot settle the question by reason alone. The two approaches are often combined: the cumulative case supplies the evidence, and the Wager supplies the reason to act on it.
Standard Objections
Critics of the cumulative case reply that weak arguments do not strengthen one another if they share the same flaws, and that the total case must also weigh the arguments against God, including the problem of evil. The Wager faces the many-gods objection: if many gods might exist, wagering on one carries its own risks, and the Wager gives no way to choose between them. Critics also argue that belief cannot be adopted at will, and that a God worth worshipping would not reward belief chosen for its payoff. Defenders reply that the Wager is a counsel to seek God, not a proof of God.
References
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy — Pascal's Wager Free / open access
- Oxford Bibliographies — Cumulative Arguments and Pascal's Wager Subscription
Related Across the Site
- Argument from Consciousness Argument — Conscious, intentional minds are difficult to explain on a purely physical account of the world, and theism explains them better.
- Argument from Miracles Argument — Reports of miracles, above all the resurrection of Jesus, provide evidence that a supernatural power acts in the world.
- Argument from Reason Argument — The reliability of human reason, and the laws of logic themselves, point to a rational ground beyond the natural world.
- Argument from Religious Experience Argument — Widespread and persistent religious experiences are best explained by a transcendent reality that people genuinely encounter.
- Cosmological Argument Argument — Everything that begins to exist has a cause, and the universe began to exist, so the universe has a cause.
- Moral Argument Argument — Objective moral values and duties exist, and they are best explained by a moral lawgiver.
- Ontological Argument Argument — God is the greatest conceivable being, and a being that exists is greater than one that does not, so God must exist.
- Teleological / Design Argument Argument — The order, complexity, and fine-tuning of the universe point to a designer rather than to chance alone.
Related Arguments
- Problem of Evil — The suffering of the world is said to count against a God who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and perfectly good.
- Cosmological Argument — Everything that begins to exist has a cause, and the universe began to exist, so the universe has a cause.
- Teleological / Design Argument — The order, complexity, and fine-tuning of the universe point to a designer rather than to chance alone.
- Moral Argument — Objective moral values and duties exist, and they are best explained by a moral lawgiver.