Pascal's wager

French philosopher Blaise Pascal had posed an interesting dilemma known as Pascal’s Wager. It goes like this. Though it is not possible to know for certain whether God exists or not, one must wager on God’s existence. Pascal argues that it is more beneficial for one to bet that God does exist than otherwise. His reasoning being, if one believes that God exists, and He actually does, then one earns eternal bliss of divine benediction. And such a believer has nothing much to lose if, indeed, He does not exist.

Whereas if one does not believe that God exists, and He actually does, one loses the possibility of divine blessings. Also, a sceptic has nothing to gain if, after all, He actually does not exist.

In the Bhagwad Gita, verses 2:32-38, Arjun is beset with remorse over fighting a bloody fratricidal war. Krishn advises him that since war has already been declared, he has a choice: fight or desert. If he fought, he would either be victorious or die a hero’s death. Surrender would bring only ignominy, and a valiant death is better than a life in disgrace.

This dilemma lends itself to everyday life as well. For example, one has to decide on reposing trust on a new acquaintance or colleague. It is better to trust, for, if one’s faith turns out to be justified, it makes for a mutually beneficial relationship. If otherwise, one may perhaps stand to lose a little. The distrustful, however, loses a potential friend.

Tennyson had said in an elegy for a friend who died young, ”Tis better to have loved and lost/ Than never to have loved at all.’