On 4/26/2011 9:48 PM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 4/26/2011 4:47 PM, Doug Miller wrote:

Indeed, that might be something to worry about. If I'm wrong, and
there really
isn't an afterlife, oh well, when I'm dead I'm dead, and that's that.
OTOH, if
Dawkins is wrong, and there really is an afterlife, I don't think he's
going
to enjoy it much.

I believe it was Pascal that first argued this very view.

I thing ALGOL came before Pascal:-)

Besides, I myself argued this very view long before Pascal was invented.
--
Jack
You Can't Fix Stupid, but You Can Vote it Out!
http://jbstein.com

On 4/27/2011 12:12 PM, Jack Stein wrote:
On 4/26/2011 9:48 PM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 4/26/2011 4:47 PM, Doug Miller wrote:

Indeed, that might be something to worry about. If I'm wrong, and
there really
isn't an afterlife, oh well, when I'm dead I'm dead, and that's that.
OTOH, if
Dawkins is wrong, and there really is an afterlife, I don't think he's
going
to enjoy it much.

I believe it was Pascal that first argued this very view.

I thing ALGOL came before Pascal:-)

Besides, I myself argued this very view long before Pascal was invented.

Perhaps you could have created a language called SHEOL ...