Blogger Incongruous Circumspection Responds to a Pascal's Wager Argument from a Reader.

When he wrote a great blog post about his change in beliefs from fundamentalist to agnostic and his friend's reactions, titled Who Am I Now, Really? , an anonymous reader left a comment that in his words was a "veiled Pascal's Wager". See his great rebuttal to that comment here, Answering a Veiled Pascal's Wager.

The Pascal's Wager argument is often used by fundamentalists as a "what if you are wrong?" argument. It basically states that if a skeptic is wrong, in the afterlife they will lose everything, but a believer who is wrong will lose nothing, other than believing in something that turned out not to be true, because that person (according to the argument) lived a better and more fuller life due to their faith.It was named after the 1700's mathematician and Christian, Blaise Pascal.

I have talked about Incongruous Circumspection before in my favorite bloggers post. He's one of those bloggers that doesn't post often, but each post is worth waiting for.