logoalt Hacker News

bilsbieyesterday at 7:54 PM2 repliesview on HN

Good question. Perhaps you found the wrong one?

I mean there’s such a wide selection you can even believe in simulations these days.

Or if that’s still too much there’s always the Pascal’s wager God. Still better than nothing.


Replies

TuringTestyesterday at 9:28 PM

I find Pascal's wager is of the same nature as Aquinas' Five Ways to prove God, or accelerationists about the inevitability of a Singularity: believing that your own rational argument can be the basis to prove a fact about reality merely because it feels internally consistent.

Needless to say, I don’t find them at all convincing. This 'nothing' is much better than catching unconvincing unneeded supernatural entities.

show 1 reply
wat10000yesterday at 8:04 PM

Why bother, though? What does trying to believe in this ill-defined entity do for me?