W. James and S. Frank: Two Interpretations of Pascal’s Wager

Abstract

Blaise Pascal is considered one of the most influential thinkers of his time, and his questions about the nature and position of man in the world remain relevant to this day. Pascal’s famous wager continues to be a subject of discussion among thinkers of various orientations. This article analyzes two interpretations of Pas­cal’s famous argument in defense of religious faith – those of W. James and S.L. Frank. By examining both thinkers’ interpretations of Pascal’s Wager, the article highlights the distinctive perspectives of W. James and S.L. Frank on the concept of religious experience. The basis for this comparison is the re­ception of W. James’s philosophical and religious ideas by the Russian philo­sopher. James’s ideas were relevant during the Russian religious renaissance of the early 20th century, receiving both positive reviews and criticism. The author of the article identifies similarities and differences in the two interpretations of Pascal’s Wager, which allows for a deeper understanding of the philosophical spirit of both W. James and S.L. Frank. It is emphasized that the views of the Ame­rican pragmatist and the ideological interpretation of the wager by the Russian philosopher share a particular approach to the concept of religious experience. Turning to the ideas of W. James and S.L. Frank provides a foundation for as­serting that, on the ground of the domestic intellectual tradition, both religious experience and religious philosophy are “integrated” into the philosophy of com­munication, transcending purely religious thought