Let Egalitarian Universalism (EU) be the doctrine that God exists and gives everyone infinite happiness, and that the quantity of this happiness is the same for everyone. The traditional formulation of Pascal’s Wager obviously does not work in the case of the God of EU.
Ed Gracely in Analysis (1988) presented an instructive problem about wagering on heaven and hell. It tells us something interesting about Pascal’s Wager. Suppose you find yourself in hell and Satan himself has pity on you. He offers you this game of chance.
Here’s an argument that poses a problem for developing a theory of the Trinity.
I want to give this argument in part to provoke a bit of discussion of the role of FOL in philosophy. Though, I don’t think the argument carries great weight.
Let ‘w’ refer to any world. Then “exists in” expresses a perfectly fine relation between entities and worlds. Let S be the set of worlds in which history ends in 30 BC.
Pretend that the following argument is sound. Let ‘God’ abbreviate the indefinite description ‘a being than which none greater can be conceived’.
Recent Comments