Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- From: "LastCardSwings" <a838ad6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:05:16 -0700
On Jun 1 2006 12:06 PM, John Kerr wrote:
Sometimes we find ourselves thinking from a phylosophical point of view,
where an assumed fact is involved. Newcomb's Paradox comes to mind. If
the thinker understands the difference between assumed and actual, then
I can find no fault with Krigman's analysis of Pascal's Wager. But if
they do not understand the difference...then I agree that it could be
harmful to continue with the assuption that it is of no "harm".
It is difficult to "argue" from either side.....I think it ends up being
a "pick em" thing, that conforms to your own phylosophical view.
Just my "definately not humble" opinion. :)
JB
I prefer Newton's Law.....One Fig Per Cookie
________________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- From: Redleathers
- Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- References:
- Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- From: Mason
- Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- From: John Kerr
- Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- Prev by Date: Catch New Bonuses in Online casinos
- Next by Date: Re: Redleathers Las Vegas Trip Report
- Previous by thread: Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- Next by thread: Re: Does Pascal's Wager Have a Counterpart in Gambling
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
