A Walk with William James, Part 3: Vote

Carrying over from last post, I'd just like to point out, so no one misses them, the very interesting metaphors James deploys in his chapter Habit. Specifically, he states that acquiring character over time is like...

A Tax

Insurance

A Savings Fund

I find these metaphors deep and delightful. One more quote from James about habit and character:

"Sow an action, and you reap a habit; sow a habit and you reap a character; sow a character and reap a destiny."

Moving to a new topic...

Many religious people are familiar with Pascal's Wager. Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) was a French mathematician, scientist, and philosopher. In his book Pensées, Pascal offers his famous wager:

"God either exists or He doesn't. Based on the testimony, both general revelation (nature) and special revelation (Scriptures/Bible), it is safe to assume that God does in fact exist. It is abundantly fair to conceive, that there is at least 50% chance that the Christian Creator God does in fact exist. Therefore, since we stand to gain eternity, and thus infinity, the wise and safe choice is to live as though God does exist. If we are right, we gain everything, and lose nothing. If we are wrong, we lose nothing and gain nothing. Therefore, based on simple mathematics, only the fool would choose to live a Godless life. Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have nothing to lose. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is."

Summarizing, the bet is if God exists or not. If you bet YES and live your life as a Christian one of two outcomes await you. Either you are right and reap an eternal reward or you are wrong and are no worse off than any other person.

If you bet NO and live as a godless heathen then one of two outcomes await you. Either you are right and die like everyone else or you are wrong and face an eternity in hell (as punishment for your godless life).

Weighing these payoffs, Pascal makes the following conclusion: If you bet YES you have everything to gain and if you be NO you have everything to lose. Thus, the reasonable bet is to bet YES and live as if there is, indeed, a God.

Ever since Pascal religious faith has often been cast as a bet. Faith is betting on the future and the ultimate configuration of the Cosmos.

I've never really liked the metaphor of faith as bet. It seems too filled with wishful thinking and passivity. If faith is a bet, you could lose the bet. The point of a life might be for naught.

One of the things I like about James is that he uses a different metaphor for faith. James states that faith is a vote. Faith is voting for the world we wish to live in.

I think this is a profound point. Reality dictates to the bet. A vote dictates to reality. A bet waits, passively, for the final outcome. A vote creates an outcome.

Comparing and contrasting:

Bet
Reflects reality
Passive
Waiting Game
Value is Extrinsic

Vote
Creates reality
Active
Engaged in the Now
Value is Intrinsic

Now to some, the metaphorical switch from betting to voting doesn't really get to the Big Question: Does God exist? I agree. But the reason I like the idea of voting is that regardless of the outcome of the Big Question a vote is intrinsically valuable. It is an active engagement in trying to create a better world (that is what a vote is all about). And if we campaign hard enough and get enough votes from our friends, family, neighbors, and citizens (from this nation and from all nations) then we just might succeed in making this world a better place.

I don't like the idea that I'm engaged in a big crap shoot. But I do like the idea that I'm in a political campaign, voting with my feet, voting with my life, voting to make this world better than how I found it.