/lit/ - Literature

>>14505795
The mistake a lot of people make is thinking that Pascal was a great mathematician so he must also be a great philosopher.

>>14505795
Keep reading

>>14505795
>religious writings are archaic nonsensical ad hoc cluster fucks without any coherent arguments
woah who woulda thought

>>14505795
Pascal died before he could finish it. Just read it as a collection of aphorisms and essays.

>>14505795

>Penises

>>14505795
it depends on the editor. some editors tried to organize the whole stuff so that it looks like a treatise. usually good editors don't do it so yeah it reads like a collection of aphorisms and essays, like the other anon said. there's nothing wrong with that.

Have you read even philosophy before?

Because he didn't write the book.
It was in a worse state than Nietzsche's Will to Power

>>14505908
>anime picture
>incorrect use of “fallacy”
>atheism
The pseud trinity

>>14505808
but descartes did

>>14505795
>Let us then examine this point ,and say, "God is, or He is not." But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here.There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager? According to reason, you can do neither the one thing nor the other; according to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions. Do not, then, reprove for error those who have made a choice; for you know nothing about it. "No, but I blame them for having made, not this choice, but a choice; for again both he who chooses heads and he who chooses tails are equally at fault, they are both in the wrong. The true course is not to wager at all. Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional

fuck you pascal you already gave me the correct option you cant tel me not to chose it

>>14510266
He simply stating that one must make a choice, irregardless of the evidence at hand, no?

>>14508540
>but descartes did
heh...