"Pascal’s Wager"
Pascal argued that, facing the ultimate question "does God exist," which reason cannot fully prove or disprove, a person must in the end make some choice (even "suspending judgment and not choosing" is itself an actual choice); that being so, one may as well weigh it in terms of probability and payoff: the potential gain from wagering that God exists (eternal bliss) is infinite, while the cost required (giving up some worldly pleasures) is finite, so a rational person should choose to believe — this decision-theoretic argument for faith was thereafter long a classic case in philosophy for the question "whether a pragmatic reason for faith can replace evidence of truth."