یک پیش فرض (غلط) توی برهان قمار پاسکال هست, این که باور داشتن یا نداشتن به چیزی یک انتخاب هست, که هر کس می تونه بدون در نظر گرفتن مدارک و شواهد انجام بده !

ریچارد داوکینز توی کتابش به همین مسئله اشاره میکنه:
[COPY]
Believing is not something you can decide to do as a matter of policy. At least, it is not something I can decide to do as an act of will[/COPY]

آستین کلاین هم همین ایراد رو به برهان قمار پاسکال میگیره :

[COPY]For one thing, it assumes that believing or not believing is a choice which a person can make rather than something determined by circumstances, evidence, reason, experience, etc. Wagering requires the ability to choose through an act of will, and it seems unlikely that belief is something which you can choose through an act of will. I, as an atheist, do not choose atheism — I am incapable of believing a claim without good reason, and currently, I lack any good reasons to believe in the existence of any gods. Atheism is not chosen, but rather the automatic consequence of my circumstances as I understand them.[/COPY]

مگه خداباور ها می تونند اسب تک شاخ یا اژدها رو باور کنند؟ (بدون هیچ شاهد یا مدرکی برای وجود این موجودات)