Raises the interestingly phrased problem:
This would make some sense if Christians find Pascal's Wager appealing for emotional and psychological reasons rather than for logical and evidentiary reasons. Perhaps, then, countering Pascal's Wager with logical objections will always fall on deaf ears and we need counter-arguments with their own emotional and psychological appeal.Which points out that there are times when reasoning is not the basis for the argument, and thus one must deal with the actual context of the issue as raised.
Rather than the apostasy of neoLiberalism, and assume that it must be an argument, and then addressable in terms of putting forward a series of propositions to establish a conclusion.
My typical response to Pascal's Wager has been of the form
Why not live as IF you are going to be re-incarnated.But for some reason that is not as emotionally satisfying to the whole Place it all on one chance of pitch and toss crowd.
Since if Ganesh is to clear the way,
Then the way will be clear....