Mixed strategies, uncountable times, and Pascal's Wager: a reply to Robertson Academic Article uri icon

abstract

  • Pascal's Wager holds that one has pragmatic reason to believe in God, since that course of action has infinite expected utility. The mixed strategy objection holds that one could just as well follow a course of action that has infinite expected utility but is unlikely to end with one believing in God. Monton (2011. Mixed strategies can't evade Pascal's Wager. Analysis 71: 642-45.) has argued that mixed strategies can't evade Pascal's Wager, while Robertson (2012. Some mixed strategies can evade Pascal's Wager: a reply to Monton. Analysis 72: 295-98.) has argued that Monton is mistaken. We show that Monton is correct, highlight the crucial assumptions that he relies on, and shed some light on the role of mixed strategies in decision theory. © 2012 The Authors 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Analysis Trust. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals. permissions@oup.com.

author list (cited authors)

  • Easwaran, K., & Monton, B.

citation count

  • 2

publication date

  • September 2012