A Critique of Bronwyn Finnigan's Ideas in the Article "The Buddha's Lucky Throw and Pascal's Wager"

Abstract

        The objective of this research article is to critique Bronwyn Finnigan's ideas in 'The Buddha's Lucky Throw and Pascal's Wager' by primarily studying related documents. The research method used is philosophical argumentation. Finnigan proposes six key ideas: (1) The Buddha and Pascal used the same type of reasoning in their respective wagers, including dominance reasoning. The researchers agree. (2) The Buddha's wager does not mention infinite value. The researchers disagree, citing the Apannaka Sutta, which mentions Nirvana—a concept that could be considered infinite value in Buddhism. (3) There is no evidence of karma and rebirth. However, the researchers disagrees, arguing that case studies of individuals who report past-life memories may constitute such evidence, and that, in some instances, truth and evidence need not necessarily coincide. (4) The wager in the Apannaka Sutta conflicts with the Kalama Sutta because there is no proof of the truth until one can know it for oneself through meditation. The researchers disagree because, in some cases, self-knowledge can be gained through thought. (5) The doctrine of anattā is often regarded as incompatible with the concept of rebirth. However, the researchers disagree, arguing that the process of death and rebirth of the five aggregates can be coherently explained through the principles of the three characteristics, the law of dhamma continuity, and dependent origination. (6) The wager presented in the Apannaka Sutta appears unconvincing when it assumes that those who accept the doctrines of karma and rebirth will consequently behave morally. The researchers disagree with this assumption and counters it by referencing empirical studies on belief in heaven and hell, as well as research on the effectiveness of graphic warning labels on cigarette packaging. A similar critique applies to individuals who reject karma and rebirth yet continue to behave immorally.