finding betterment

and pursuing it

last updated on 23rd february

The words "better" and "bet" likely share an Old English root—bēttan, meaning "to improve." Over time, "better" retained its meaning of superiority, while "bet" likely implied an attempt to better one's fortune through wagering.

Though they have diverged in meaning, their connection lies in the idea of improvement or gain.

Therefore, we can say that to better oneself is to bet on oneself.

But what does that truly mean? If better is built into the language of betting, does that imply that every effort toward improvement carries an element of risk? When we seek betterment—whether in our careers, relationships, or personal growth—are we simply making calculated wagers on uncertain outcomes?

This idea complicates our understanding of progress. We often assume that improvement is linear, that newer means better, and that each step forward is inherently valuable. But better is always comparative—it depends on what we're measuring against. And if improvement is a bet, then who decides the odds?

Consider Pascal,s Wager, proposed by the 17th-century French philosopher Blaise Pascal. In his work Pensées, Pascal explores the rationality of believing in God in the absence of definitive proof. He posits that individuals are essentially engaged in a life-defining gamble regarding this belief.

Pascal contends that a rational person should adopt a lifestyle consistent with the existence of God and actively strive to believe in God. The reasoning behind this stance lies in the potential outcomes:

1. If God exists, then the person is justified in believing in God.
2. If God does not exist, then the person is justified in not believing in God.
3. If the person believes in God and God exists, they gain eternal life and happiness in Heaven.
4. Conversely, if the person does not believe in God and God exists, they face eternal damnation.
5. If the person believes in God and God does not exist, they only face a finite loss, and vice versa.

Therefore, Pascal argues that believing in God's existence is the most pragmatic choice, as the potential benefits far outweigh the potential losses.

This "wager" of sorts is not about the existence of God per se, but rather about the rationality of belief. The choice to believe—or not—becomes a bet on an unknowable outcome, where the consequences of one's decision are entirely dependent on the outcome of the gamble.

In many ways, this mirrors how we approach the idea of betterment. Every time we strive for something better, we are placing a wager on an uncertain future. We assume that a career change, a new relationship, or a bold innovation will lead to improvement, but there are no guarantees. We weigh potential losses and gains, much like Pascal's argument, and calculate whether the pursuit of "better" is worth the risk. And just as Pascal's Wager is criticized for oversimplifying belief, our own assumptions about progress often go unexamined.

If better is comparative, then betterment requires an underlying belief system—a set of values that define what "better" means. But who constructs this system? Do we define it for ourselves, or do we unconsciously accept a framework imposed by society, tradition, or economic incentives?

In technology, for example, companies push constant innovation, equating "new" with "better," even when advancements sometimes complicate rather than improve our lives.

In our personal lives, we are conditioned to chase higher salaries, greater achievements, or idealized versions of happiness, often without questioning whether these pursuits align with our actual well-being.

Pascal's Wager forces us to consider whether the bets we make are rational. Are we truly betting on something valuable, or are we simply playing along with an assumed logic of improvement? The paradox is that we cannot avoid placing bets; to do nothing is itself a wager on the status quo.

The question, then, is not whether we should bet, but how consciously we choose the risks we take.

To blindly gamble on improvement is to abdicate responsibility for our own betterment. If every attempt at progress is a wager, then we must decide what stakes we're willing to play for.