Indiana Jones & Pascal's Wager: Crash Course Philosophy #15

 

Pragmatism, Pascal's Wager, and the Leap of Faith: Navigating Belief and Reason

When you were young, did your parents ever tell you to eat your spinach so you’d grow up strong? Or in college, did you set your clock ahead by ten minutes to trick yourself into being on time? These are examples of what philosophers call "useful fictions"—things we choose to believe because they make our lives easier or better in some way. This concept lies at the heart of pragmatism, a philosophical movement that values beliefs not for their truth but for their practical benefits.

The Pragmatic Approach to Belief

Pragmatism encourages us to focus less on whether a belief is true and more on whether it’s useful. For instance, does it really matter if spinach is the key to muscle growth? If believing that it is convinces you to eat more greens and improve your health, then it’s a belief worth having, according to the pragmatist.

This way of thinking has deep roots in American philosophy, with figures like William James advocating for it. But one of the earliest and most fascinating applications of pragmatism comes from 17th-century mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal. Pascal proposed a pragmatic approach to one of life’s biggest questions: Does God exist?

Pascal’s Wager: Betting on God

Pascal’s argument, known as Pascal’s Wager, is less about proving God’s existence and more about the practicality of belief. Imagine life as a grand gamble where you must decide whether to believe in God. Pascal argued that if you choose to believe in God and He exists, you gain infinite reward—heaven. If you believe and He doesn’t exist, you lose very little. On the other hand, if you choose not to believe and God does exist, you risk infinite punishment—hell. Given these stakes, Pascal suggested that the smartest bet is to believe in God, even if there’s only a slight chance He exists.

But is it really that simple? Critics argue that living a life of religious devotion isn't without cost, especially if it turns out that God doesn’t exist. You might miss out on various worldly pleasures or experiences. Yet Pascal countered that belief in God has inherent benefits, such as a sense of security, meaning, and comfort in the idea that someone is looking out for you and that death isn’t the end.

Faking It Till You Make It

Pascal went a step further, suggesting that even if you start out believing in God out of self-interest, this belief can eventually grow into genuine faith. How? By immersing yourself in religious practices—going to church, praying, and spending time with believers—you essentially train yourself to believe. Over time, what starts as going through the motions can become a deeply ingrained part of your belief system.

This process is reminiscent of a scene from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Throughout the film, Indiana Jones is portrayed as a skeptic, but when faced with a series of tests of faith, he does what needs to be done to survive—even if it means taking a literal leap of faith. Pascal might have seen Indy’s actions as the first steps on a path to genuine belief.

Kierkegaard’s Leap of Faith: Beyond Reason

While Pascal’s Wager is pragmatic, Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard took the concept of belief even further. He argued that true religious belief requires what he called a leap of faith—a commitment that defies reason and evidence. According to Kierkegaard, faith isn’t something you can achieve through logic; it’s an irrational, deeply personal act of trust in something beyond understanding.

This idea is again illustrated in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. In the film’s climax, Indy faces an impossible jump across a dark abyss to reach the Holy Grail. There’s no visible way to make the jump—it’s suicide. But Indy steps out into the void, trusting that something will catch him. And it does—an invisible bridge appears. For Kierkegaard, this leap is what faith is all about: trusting in the unknown, even when it makes no logical sense.

The Risks of Belief Without Evidence

However, both pragmatism and Kierkegaard’s leap of faith come with risks. While believing in God because it’s practical or comforting might work for some, it’s not a foolproof path to happiness or truth. Forcing yourself to believe in something just because it seems like the safest bet can lead to disillusionment or even unhappiness, especially if the belief never becomes genuine.

Moreover, if we accept beliefs based on faith alone, without evidence or reason, we open the door to all kinds of dangerous or unjustified beliefs. If we can leap to God, why not to Bertrand Russell’s famous “teapot” orbiting the sun, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Worse still, what if we leap to beliefs that justify denying others their rights or even harming them?

Faith is a deeply personal journey, and while pragmatism and the leap of faith offer ways to navigate the uncertainties of belief, they also remind us of the importance of balancing faith with reason. After all, in the complex game of life, it’s not just about making the safest bet—it’s about finding a belief system that genuinely enriches our lives without leading us astray.