Pascal's Wager Revisted

yaaarrrgg · 05-31-2007

There's a famous problem in Mathematics called "the hundred suitors problem."

Basically, the riddle is this:

There is a maiden who must select one husband (and only one

) out of one hundred suitors. Each suitor is presented in random order, but only once. The maiden must accept the suitor, or reject the suitor and pass on the next. Of course, once she makes a choice, it is final. The question is, what method of choice should she use to maximize her chances of picking the best husband?

The solution:

1. reject the first third suitors, for comparsion
2. then pick the first suitor that is better than all the others in the comparison group

Using this methodology, the chances of picking the best suitor is about 1/3. Not bad odds. Contrast this with picking one at random, or picking the first suiter, the odds are 1/100.

With religion, there is a similar problem in that a person is presented with N religious options, and given a choice between them.

If someone really wants to maximize their probabilities of finding the best religion, they would categorically always reject the first religion presented to them. The likelihood that the first suitor is the best is fairly low. This also helps to couteract the ingrained biases one develops in a geographic region where one particular relious viewpoint is dominant. Of course, an objection might be: why can't a person examine all regions, then make her choice? This is a valid object to the model I presented.

But almost always, a person's religious views are simply a copy of what their parents believe, which are a function of the geographic region and culture. In other words, the basic method that 99% of people use is: they accept the first religion presented to them, and justify it with someting like Pascal's wager.

It was unfortunate that Pascal gave up mathematics to pursue religion, since otherwise he could have increased his chances of survival.

Adanedhel · 05-31-2007

I think that the best way of choosing the best suitor is to take first one that impressed the most. In this way you choose the best one for you. You don't have to take chances. It's like in life. You meet a girl (or a boy) and you like her, then you get married. You don't know if she is the best one you can get.

But it doesn't matter, the most important is that YOU think she's (or he's) best for you. Maybe my thinking is not strictly mathematical but that's first what came into my mind.

yaaarrrgg · 06-01-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adanedhel

I think that the best way of choosing the best suitor is to take first one that impressed the most. In this way you choose the best one for you. You don't have to take chances. It's like in life. You meet a girl (or a boy) and you like her, then you get married. You don't know if she is the best one you can get.

But it doesn't matter, the most important is that YOU think she's (or he's) best for you. Maybe my thinking is not strictly mathematical but that's first what came into my mind.

Good points ... I suppose in real life (outside of the 100 suitors riddle) the method just translates to "don't marry the first guy/girl you meet." It's sometimes wrong advice though ... just like any advice.

Rasczak · 06-01-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by yaaarrrgg

There's a famous problem in Mathematics called "the hundred suitors problem."

Basically, the riddle is this:

There is a maiden who must select one husband (and only one

) out of one hundred suitors. Each suitor is presented in random order, but only once. The maiden must accept the suitor, or reject the suitor and pass on the next. Of course, once she makes a choice, it is final. The question is, what method of choice should she use to maximize her chances of picking the best husband?

The solution:

1. reject the first third suitors, for comparsion
2. then pick the first suitor that is better than all the others in the comparison group

Using this methodology, the chances of picking the best suitor is about 1/3. Not bad odds. Contrast this with picking one at random, or picking the first suiter, the odds are 1/100.

With religion, there is a similar problem in that a person is presented with N religious options, and given a choice between them.

If someone really wants to maximize their probabilities of finding the best religion, they would categorically always reject the first religion presented to them. The likelihood that the first suitor is the best is fairly low. This also helps to couteract the ingrained biases one develops in a geographic region where one particular relious viewpoint is dominant. Of course, an objection might be: why can't a person examine all regions, then make her choice? This is a valid object to the model I presented.

But almost always, a person's religious views are simply a copy of what their parents believe, which are a function of the geographic region and culture. In other words, the basic method that 99% of people use is: they accept the first religion presented to them, and justify it with someting like Pascal's wager.

It was unfortunate that Pascal gave up mathematics to pursue religion, since otherwise he could have increased his chances of survival.

You are preaching to the choir. There doesn't seem to be any committed believers here, so all that time you spend coming up with clever ways you hope no one has heard before to discredit religion is somewhat wasted here.

I suggest, if you want to have the most impact, go after the religion with the most believers. Find some Muslim boards and share your gospel with them. Tell them that Islam, being the first religion they were likely exposed to, is wrong. Just don't show them any cartoons of Mohammed.

yaaarrrgg · 06-01-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasczak

You are preaching to the choir. There doesn't seem to be any committed believers here, so all that time you spend coming up with clever ways you hope no one has heard before to discredit religion is somewhat wasted here.

I suggest, if you want to have the most impact, go after the religion with the most believers. Find some Muslim boards and share your gospel with them. Tell them that Islam, being the first religion they were likely exposed to, is wrong. Just don't show them any cartoons of Mohammed.

I don't really care about converting people as much as having a rational discusion about philsophers and different schools of thought.

Overall, I think Pascal had a good idea ...

Ilya · 06-01-2007

I don't think that many people actually take Pascal's wager seriously, and those who do aren't likely to be persuaded by math.

latecomer · 06-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasczak

I suggest, if you want to have the most impact, go after the religion with the most believers. Find some Muslim boards and share your gospel with them. Tell them that Islam, being the first religion they were likely exposed to, is wrong. Just don't show them any cartoons of Mohammed.

get your facts straight.
Major religious groups - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mr. Jaggers · 06-02-2007

deleted

bns · 06-02-2007

@yaaarrrgg
The only problem is that with a suitor, you just want a good one. With religion, most of them claim to be the only right one. Most people are not looking for a good religion that will make them happy, they're determining the destiny of their eternal soul. So picking a "good" religion is meaningless to believers. I think your point is a valid one, however.

MRiGnS · 06-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasczak

I suggest, if you want to have the most impact, go after the religion with the most believers. Find some Muslim boards and share your gospel with them. Tell them that Islam, being the first religion they were likely exposed to, is wrong. Just don't show them any cartoons of Mohammed.

Why does it have to be a muslim board?

The religion with the most believers is by far christianity with the roman catholic denomination.

there are 2.3 billion christians and roman catholics being the greatest denomination with about 1.1 billion people.

the islam has 1.3 billion believers with the sunnis being the greatest denomination of 0.8 billion.

05-31-2007	#1 (permalink)
yaaarrrgg Eligible for a custom title Join Date: May 2007 Location: Indiana, USA Posts: 779	Pascal's Wager Revisted There's a famous problem in Mathematics called "the hundred suitors problem." Basically, the riddle is this: There is a maiden who must select one husband (and only one ) out of one hundred suitors. Each suitor is presented in random order, but only once. The maiden must accept the suitor, or reject the suitor and pass on the next. Of course, once she makes a choice, it is final. The question is, what method of choice should she use to maximize her chances of picking the best husband? The solution: 1. reject the first third suitors, for comparsion 2. then pick the first suitor that is better than all the others in the comparison group Using this methodology, the chances of picking the best suitor is about 1/3. Not bad odds. Contrast this with picking one at random, or picking the first suiter, the odds are 1/100. With religion, there is a similar problem in that a person is presented with N religious options, and given a choice between them. If someone really wants to maximize their probabilities of finding the best religion, they would categorically always reject the first religion presented to them. The likelihood that the first suitor is the best is fairly low. This also helps to couteract the ingrained biases one develops in a geographic region where one particular relious viewpoint is dominant. Of course, an objection might be: why can't a person examine all regions, then make her choice? This is a valid object to the model I presented. But almost always, a person's religious views are simply a copy of what their parents believe, which are a function of the geographic region and culture. In other words, the basic method that 99% of people use is: they accept the first religion presented to them, and justify it with someting like Pascal's wager. It was unfortunate that Pascal gave up mathematics to pursue religion, since otherwise he could have increased his chances of survival. Last edited by yaaarrrgg : 05-31-2007 at 11:00 AM.

05-31-2007	#2 (permalink)
Adanedhel Be gentle, newcomer Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1	Re: Pascal's Wager Revisted I think that the best way of choosing the best suitor is to take first one that impressed the most. In this way you choose the best one for you. You don't have to take chances. It's like in life. You meet a girl (or a boy) and you like her, then you get married. You don't know if she is the best one you can get. But it doesn't matter, the most important is that YOU think she's (or he's) best for you. Maybe my thinking is not strictly mathematical but that's first what came into my mind.

06-01-2007	#6 (permalink)
Ilya Eligible for a custom title Join Date: May 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 107	Re: Pascal's Wager Revisted I don't think that many people actually take Pascal's wager seriously, and those who do aren't likely to be persuaded by math.

06-02-2007	#8 (permalink)
Mr. Jaggers Commentator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 39	Re: Pascal's Wager Revisted deleted Last edited by Mr. Jaggers : 06-09-2007 at 02:46 PM.
Mr. Jaggers Commentator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 39

06-02-2007	#9 (permalink)
bns Moderator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Indiana, USA Posts: 1,648	Re: Pascal's Wager Revisted @yaaarrrgg The only problem is that with a suitor, you just want a good one. With religion, most of them claim to be the only right one. Most people are not looking for a good religion that will make them happy, they're determining the destiny of their eternal soul. So picking a "good" religion is meaningless to believers. I think your point is a valid one, however.