Pascal argues that true reason requires a balance between doubting, certainty, and submission, and that failing to recognize when each is appropriate leads to intellectual error.
David Hume
An Enquiry Concerning Human UnderstandingPhilosophy's Humble Scope
Hume explains that due to the force of Pyrrhonian doubt and the imperfection of our faculties, we must confine our judgments to common life and experience, leaving sublime topics aside. This provides a grounding principle for Pascal's rule: we should doubt where our faculties are inadequate and submit to natural instinct in practical matters.
David Hume
An Enquiry Concerning Human UnderstandingProportion Belief to Evidence
Hume provides the concrete method of proportioning belief to the evidence. This enacts Pascal's prescription by offering a measurable criterion for when to doubt (low evidence), when to feel certain (high evidence), and implicitly when to submit (when evidence is balanced or inaccessible).
Friedrich Nietzsche
Beyond Good and EvilThe Myth of Certainty
Nietzsche deconstructs the notion of 'immediate certainty,' arguing that even basic propositions like 'I think' involve a chain of unproven assumptions. This challenges the possibility of attaining the kind of certainty Pascal's rule relies upon, suggesting that the boundaries between doubt, certainty, and submission may be inherently unstable.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Beyond Good and EvilSkepticism as Soporific
Nietzsche portrays skepticism not as a temporary phase but as a cultivated attitude of aloofness and refusal to commit, using figures like Montaigne and Socrates to illustrate a stance of perpetual inquiry and distrust. This offers an alternative to Pascal's call for discerning judgment, advocating instead a consistent suspension of judgment.
