Clifford's Argument Analysis

Improved Essays
James presents the idea that our human nature is to believe things that we are passionate about even if there is no sufficient evidence to support the belief. What tends to drive our beliefs is the passion that is behind it. James has a placed a set of standards on any hypothesis to determine if the hypothesis has enough evidence to support the claim. These standards include whether the hypothesis is living or dead, forced or avoidable and momentous or trivial. All of these are taken into consideration to determine if the hypothesis can be considered as a legitimate option, James states that a legitimate option has to have the standards of being live, forced and momentous. When thinking about the existence of God James believes that there is …show more content…
This seems reasonable to believe since Clifford’s whole argument is based upon the principle of having sufficient evidence. But what evidence does a person have to leave a question unanswered? Their decision to do so would mean that one would believe that there is sufficient evidence to make a decision but contradicts the fact that Clifford says there was not sufficient evidence. James believes that this is one aspect of Clifford’s argument that he does not agree with. James does not agree with the idea that we shouldn’t believe ideas on insufficient evidence since it closes our minds off to suspense. James responded to Clifford by saying that our feelings towards a certain belief no matter what they are, are just a mere reflection of our passion. He believes that we should be able to be satisfied with our choice instead of living an uneasy life where we always worried. James also believes that the Christians should need no sufficient evidence for what they believe in. James says that one’s belief in a certain religion has no significant impact on others, but can only help the one who believes. These are all ways that James disagrees with

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The Rogerian Argument, coming from Carl Rogers’ theory, is an effective analysis within written arguments. Essentially, it involves adopting the role of a once therapist to aid in solving or coming to a compromise of an issue. The passage “Letter to a Southern Baptist Minister” written by Edward O. Wilson, argues that religion and science could potentially join together. The author uses restatement, which just manipulates the words of the speaker to change their understanding. He proves his point by not confronting his opponent in an adversarial argument.…

    • 1028 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Summary John Arthurs has a unique stance on world hunger and moral obligation and the way that we should handle these issues. He opens up his argument by analyzing one of Pete Singers rules “If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it. “(666) Arthur believes that rule of life is a flawed one. He counters this statement by giving a scenario using Singers moral rule. Arthur states “All of us could help others by giving away or allowing others to use our bodies.…

    • 769 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A hot debate relevant for today is the question of how the constitution is to be interpreted. When writing the constitution, the founding fathers were clearly living in an ern which entailed concerns that are different from concerns today. During the constitutional convention, men discussed debated until they agree on what should become the framework for our great nation. Because of this the constitution appears to be ambiguous on many particular issues which we face today. Are we then to address those issues in light of the context in which the constitution was written, or are we to view it as a living document that’s meaning changes with time?…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In William James', “The Will to Believe, James provides a defensive response to religious faith regarding W. T. Clifford's position in his essay, "The Ethics of Belief" (James, 2001). Within his stance, James suggests that his views have a somewhat broader scope that Clifford’s (Princeton University, n.d.). Moreover, that in certain cases, it is not only permissible but inevitable that a person’s passional, non-rational nature will determine that person’s belief (Princeton University, n.d.). In summary, James presents that anything that is proposed for our belief is a hypothesis and that any question about which of the two hypotheses to accept is a person’s option (Princeton University, n.d.).…

    • 1184 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this essay I will be comparing to sides of an argument pertaining to the expenses of universal healthcare in the United States. One written by a man named Greg Olear, and the other by an anonymous author. The first batch of arguments are for a universal healthcare system written by Greg Olear. His first argument says that this is in the Constitution, stating it is the job of the president, the Congress, and the Supreme Court to, above all, uphold the charges set forth in the Constitution.…

    • 440 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    By incorporating biblical characters and explaining their roles in the Bible, Edwards ventriloquizes his ideas into the mouth of the “apostle James”(puritansermons.com). Edwards writes, However, James is clear that although this belief a good thing, it is definitely not proof that a person is saved. What he means is this: "You say you are a Christian and you are in God 's favor. You think God will let you into heaven, and the proof of it is, you believe in God.…

    • 1078 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To fully value faith, he would argue without hesitation or without this escape route that one hundred percent God is real. That isn’t saying that faith cannot be lost or broken when new evidence arises, just that if you have faith that is what you believe…

    • 1025 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    According to Clifford, we should only hold beliefs that we have found sufficient evidence for by conducting an honest and patient investigation. He explains that beliefs are not something private we only hold to ourselves, instead our beliefs influence other people. For example, Clifford tells the story of a ship owner whose ship is going to take immigrants to another country, but his ship is old, so he's worried if it's seaworthy. He thinks he should get it checked, but then he thinks about the repair costs and pushes the doubts aside. The ship owner convinces himself that the ship has made many trips without any troubles, so it's fit for the journey.…

    • 1287 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Also, we wouldn’t need sufficient evidence in every case to believe something. We wouldn’t sit there and take hours on looking for evidence on something we want to be true. In contrast with him is James’s theory; he thinks it is impossible for everyone to think that way and for that to ever happen. He gives examples on situations where you don’t need sufficient evidence believing will cause the belief to become true. However, I will argue that…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clifford and James are two philosophers who have contradicting opinions on whether having sufficient evidence is always necessary to believe in something. Where Clifford believes you cannot believe in anything without sufficient evidence, James believes that if the evidence doesn’t point in one way or another, it is justified to believe something based on our will. I will be arguing that James’ side is indeed correct. In James’ paper, he provides concrete evidence as to why his opinion is correct.…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Foreman expresses three issues with the absolute neutral position that espouses the elimination of even our core beliefs. One issue is that many people would be unable to accomplish an absolute neutral perspective. When it comes to investigating beliefs, Dr. Foreman notes that individuals must start with “some standard or criteria” (94). The second issue he has with absolute neutrality is that it is “unreasonable” since presuppositions held by most people are “deeply ingrained” (Foreman 94). The last problem Dr. Foreman expresses concerning absolute neutrality is that it is unnecessary because critical examination can be undertaken with all commitments and beliefs intact, even those established through Scripture, as long as the individual is cognizant of those beliefs and willingly defers them to examination…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Defense, Critique and Integration of the 4 Apologetic Methods Defense of Fideism To approach apologetics is to seek to fulfill the command of Scripture “always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you” In light of this, the believer ought to approach apologetics as the overflow of their relationship with Jesus. Approaching apologetics from the fideist perspective is to embrace the mystery and paradox of knowing God in faith, rather than through an extended philosophically rooted line of reasoning. Instead of using human means to explain the reality which is far above human understanding, fideist seek to share their encounter with Jesus, the ultimate reality, rather than attempting to…

    • 2020 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Thus I lean more towards believing in Clifford’s rationalization that we should never fully believe something until we have sufficient evidence. The idea of Epistemology…

    • 1048 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief,” Clifford argues the immorality of believing without sufficient evidence. In most situations, Clifford’s point of view would be practical; if we wish to be true seekers of the truth, it would be unethical to ever believe in something without sufficient evidence. This is a valid statement, but there are exceptions to this idea which are dependent on the situation. When it comes to the type of evidence presented, a belief can be justified or found to be wrong. Clifford sets two questions we are to ask ourselves when it comes to believing things that aren’t proven with physical evidence, rather shown by testimony.…

    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clifford Doubt Analysis

    • 231 Words
    • 1 Pages

    I agree with Clifford statement because people who are credulous are so quick to believe something that they don’t know for sure is even completely true. That can harm the credibility of the people that the lies are being spoken about. The men who claimed that their objectors were doing in honorable things and had the townsmen believing there lies on no sufficient evidence prove that being credulous is harmful. Their acts, although they might have had strong reason to have such reasoning, ruined not only their reputation but their objector’s credibility. It is the reason of doubt that is brought about credulous people is what’s harmful to society.…

    • 231 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays