Atheist's wager
The Atheist's wager, coined by the philosopher Michael Martin and published in his 1990 book Atheism: A Philosophical Justification, is an atheistic response to Pascal's wager regarding the existence of God.
One version of the Atheist's wager suggests that since a kind and loving god would reward good deeds – and that if no gods exist, good deeds would still leave a positive legacy – one should live a good life without religion. This argument assumes that if a god exists, they are benevolent and just, rather than arbitrary or punitive in their judgment of human actions. This contrasts with Pascal's wager, which presumes a god who rewards belief and punishes disbelief regardless of moral conduct. Philosophers such as John Schellenberg have argued that a perfectly just deity would be more likely to reward sincere moral behavior and intellectual honesty rather than belief for its own sake. Another formulation suggests that a god may reward honest disbelief and punish a dishonest belief in the divine.
Explanation
Martin's wager states that if one were to analyze one's options in regard to how to live one's life, one would arrive at the following possibilities:- One may live a good life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case one goes to heaven: one's gain is infinite.
- One may live a good life without believing in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case one goes to heaven: your gain is infinite.
- One may live a good life and believe in a god, but no benevolent god exists, in which case one leaves a positive legacy to the world; one's gain is finite.
- One may live a good life without believing in a god, and no benevolent god exists, in which case one leaves a positive legacy to the world; one's gain is finite.
- One may live an evil life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case one goes to hell: one's loss is infinite.
- One may live an evil life without believing in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case one goes to hell: one's loss is infinite.
- One may live an evil life and believe in a god, but no benevolent god exists, in which case one leaves a negative legacy to the world; one's loss is finite.
- One may live an evil life without believing in a god, and no benevolent god exists, in which case one leaves a negative legacy to the world; one's loss is finite.
Given these values, Martin argues that the option to live a good life clearly dominates the option of living an evil life, regardless of belief in a god. Whether one believes in god has no effect on the outcome.