I came up with this a while back and figured I would share.
This is my personal counter to Pascal's wager. Sure the Atheist's wager would suffice, but I find this to be a bit more fun. It helps point out the true absurdity of Pascal's wager.
- There are many different religions. Many of which are mutually exclusive. Many of which contain their own hell(s). It is also possible that all of these religions are false and we are all going to a hell we know nothing about.
- Without being able to know for certain which one is correct, we have no way of knowing how to avoid these hells.
- We are more likely to end up in a hell, than to end up in a heaven.
- If we really want to hedge our bets, we should cultivate a spirit of detached masochism.
- If we enjoy being tortured yet do not yearn for torture (we could take it or leave it), then our hell would be at best enjoyable and at worst boring.
The masochism must be detached, that is one must be able to take it or leave it, otherwise refusal to torture might be used as torture. This might be an impossible sentiment to cultivate, but the math doesn't lie. If we REALLY wanted to hedge our bets, this is the way to do it. Combine this with the Atheist's wager and all the bases are covered. The masochist's wager also manages to turn any hell into the equivalent of any heaven, which are also at best enjoyable and at worst boring.
The best part about this argument is the looks on people's faces when they realize that you can use Pascal's logic to encourage S&M.