It's easy to derive an interesting mathematical toy that sort of relates to the question - if you have two courses of action, to pick a random example whose specifics aren't important you could destroy the planet or not do that, and if you happen to know how many people each action will damn... in this case suppose it's however many people are alive now, or however many people are alive now plus that many again when the population has fully turned over plus that many again as many times as God wants there to be future generations... or maybe arguably that means you'd succeed or fail if and only if God wants you to, and there is actually no difference in any outcome no matter what you do? Well, if that's true then it doesn't matter, now, does it, nothing matters then. Anyway one of those courses of action is several times better, because it damns several times fewer people.
But if you don't know - maybe there's a thing you could do that you think will destroy the planet, but maybe instead it will create twenty extra planets and fill them with people all of whom will be damned - you can just say it could do either and if you take gambles like that thousands of times then you're an idiot and should realize your planet destruction schemes never work but eliding some important details it'd tend to lead to on average damning ten times the population of Earth - no, more than that, unless each of the others gets destroyed after one generation - anyway that neat mathematical toy exists and is loosely related to the question but does not, in fact, answer it, because how do you come to a conclusion other than "this course of action might cause any result" and... and do you actually want to do what damns the fewest people on average, what if there's a way to maybe damn zero people and get everyone out of Hell but it could go wrong and so on average similar gambles damn a person and a half, and instead of that you can do something guaranteed to damn only one person ever - it's not like you can ever actually damn half a person, right? Or, no, you can, if you send them to Hell for a while but then destroy it - is that half, or is it some other fraction - how do you even come up with a neat mathematical toy that works with how it's possible Hell won't be destroyed, ever -
and is it even wrong, if it's never destroyed, if it goes on forever?
...No yeah definitely, or at least, if it isn't wrong he doesn't care, except in the sense that God might interfere with trying to destroy Hell if that is wrong.
Anyway, how can you get anywhere besides absolute doubt? Well, why does he think he was in Hell? Because they lied to him about math, actually, and he could check that - or maybe they didn't, maybe they were confused, and not good at teaching humans, or maybe he misremembers, and in neither case can he trust what he remembers them teaching him, clearly, and in two of the cases that's not because the problem is with him.
He's not sure where to go with that other than "trust people who say true things about math" and he's not sure how to find someone like that, and it can't be Atsinni or selected by Atsinni because Atsinni would know what kind of test it was, which is a pervasive problem and he needs to be able to get useful information from people controlling everything he perceives while not being misled by any of it and... man, this sucks.
That's the point at which he gives up and just admires Atsinni's scarf and lets himself get lost in the movement of the needles.