Pascal’swager argument was a lot more vicious. To believe in God is nothing but a bet on something you cannot prove one way or the other. Then he used to say: Go to Church, to confession, take communion. Ig God does not exist that would not harm you. If God does exist then you will benefit from it later. His very argument is proof that God is nothing but a mental construction, a concept. So I would prefer Buddha and his answer. If God created the universe, who created God? We cannot answer the question: What was the origin of the universe in which we are only one little spec of nearly nothing? So let the question open and answer this one, which a lot easier: What can I do not to destroy the little piece of universe in which I happen to live?

As for AI in that? It has nothing to do with it since AI was created by us and not the result of any natural procedure. AI is not human. AI is not thinking. AI is just collecting data and sorting it out to get to the statistically most probable conclusion. AI is an extension of our intelligence and mind. Just like a car is an extension of our legs that prevent us from walking, AI is an extension of our intelligence and mind that may — there might be a chance we could be saved from that — prevent us from thinking. Pascal never used his wager argument to prevent us from thinking. And he went up Puy de Dôme to measure the pressure of the atmosphere on our feeble beings.