The Atheist's wager, coined by the philosopher Michael Martin and published in his 1990 book Atheism: A Philosophical Justification, is an atheistic response to Pascal's wager regarding the existence of God.[1]
One version of the Atheist's wager suggests that since a kind and loving god would reward good deeds – and that if no gods exist, good deeds would still leave a positive legacy – one should live a good life without religion.[2][3] Another formulation suggests that a god may reward honest disbelief and punish a dishonest belief in the divine.[4]
Martin's wager states that if one were to analyze their options in regard to how to live their life, they would arrive at the following possibilities:[2][5]
The following table shows the values assigned to each possible outcome:
| A benevolent god exists | No benevolent god exists | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belief in god (B) | No belief in god (¬B) | Belief in god (B) | No belief in god (¬B) | |
| Good life (L) | +∞ (heaven) | +∞ (heaven) | +X (positive legacy) | +X (positive legacy) |
| Evil life (¬L) | −∞ (hell) | −∞ (hell) | −X (negative legacy) | −X (negative legacy) |
Given these values, Martin argues that the option to live a good life clearly dominates the option of living an evil life, regardless of belief in a god. Whether one believes in god has no effect on the outcome.
|
| |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concepts in religion |
| ||||||||||||
| Conceptions of God |
| ||||||||||||
| Existence of God |
| ||||||||||||
| Theology |
| ||||||||||||
| Religious language |
| ||||||||||||
| Problem of evil |
| ||||||||||||
|
(by date active) |
| ||||||||||||
| Related topics |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
