Question

If memory serves me correctly, at one time you rejected one of the arguments against Pascal’s wager. I’m referring to the argument that even if the wager is correct, there is still no way to know which religion one should choose. You said that even if that is true, randomly choosing a religion is still preferable to having no religion. Seemingly, though, there is also a way to choose a religion. Since Pascal is trying to maximize gains, and not to choose the “proper” path, then the religion one should choose is the one that demands the least in this world (assuming there is no evidential preference for one of the religions, and assuming all religions promise a reward that is the best that can be given). So for example, it would be preferable to choose Christianity over Judaism, since its demands are lighter. Am I correct in this analysis? (I am ignoring the question of whether the wager is mathematically sound.)