Pascal's Wager and Assumptions

A large portion of Chapter 5 from Inventing Arguments is devoted to hidden assumptions and the use of subversion in one's arguments as well as underlying values. The section outlines the common use of vague definitions and questionable syllogisms to convince the audience of a statement that may not be completely true or academically viable. Most of these hidden assumptions follow a simple formula. The presenter makes a claim and links an assumption where the support for the claim is taken to be apparent or self evident. In particular, the section that dealt with how some assumptions may use underlying moral values as part of the self evident argument reminded me of one of the most famous assumptions of all time. Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's Wager, in the simplest form, is an Argument for why it is better to believe in the Christian God than anything else. It reads something like this :

1. "God is, or He is not"
2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
4. You must wager. (It's not optional.)
5. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
6. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

On a table, it might look something like this:

In his argument, Pascal does not address the consequences for belief and nonexistence of God, simply because he views the infinite positive benefit of heaven as enough bargaining power.



However, there is still some problem with Pascal's Wager, which was initially viewed as the triumph of reason in theology. If one Assumes that all past and potential religions operate under the same circumstances as christianity, then the mathematical advantage of the wager is nullified. Additionally, famous philosopher Voltaire was extremely critical of the wager, saying that a vested interest in a God did not provide evidence of his existence.
In this sense, Pascal's Wager is a great example of an incomplete assumption. While it initially makes sense to the reader and sounds impressive, it falls apart under closer scrutiny due to faulty support.

A response to Aztec Tat

The Tata Nano is definitely a decent appeal to ethos, what with its consistent veiled outrage at human consumption and dependence. The man who peddles these buggies consistently comes from a place of authority with a message that most of us can easily relate to. In fact, I was following your argument perfectly until you described the Tata Nano as potentially impotent due to a low price tag subtracting from the social appeal. It was of my opinion that, much like many cars Ford has released in Europe, the Tata Nano was never designed to see American shores. Americans do not buy small, efficient cars, especially not when we can afford to put things on a credit card for years at a time. I believe the main appeal of the Nano comes from its potential for markets like India, where the crowded streets cry not only for a smaller, more efficient design, but a vehicle that the average Indian family can afford.  Additionally, while we complain of high gas prices here, the cost is practically inconsequential when compared to most places around the world where gasoline costs more than the equivalent of 5 USD per liter.  I believe that one should never stop questioning the sources of ethos, and that even letting "equally knowledgeable people" guide our decisions can lead to danger and nescience.