zlacker

> Specially since, in the chance they're actually right we'd be both saving the world and improving people's health

It's funny you mention this and the "god" example, and yet you are an atheist. Can't you make the same argument about the existence of God? It might be unlikely that a God exists, but just in case He does, it is infinitely better to be religious. Because you'd end up in hell otherwise.

(This is not my original idea, it was brought up the first time by Blaise Pascal)

>>misja1+(OP)
Pascal's wager was stupid then and still is stupid.

>>misja1+(OP)
Pascal's wager only works if you presuppose that gods don't care about beliefs in other gods. What if they are fine with atheists, but despise those who believe in false gods? Even the christian god is described as jealous! So it doesn't seem safe to believe in any god, on account of not angering the "real ones" due to misbelief.