The Ethics Of Belief Analysis

Improved Essays
3. In Clifford’s paper “The Ethics of Belief” he disapproves of credulity. Clifford claims that it is wrong to belief something without sufficient evidence. He claims that someone who believes things without any proof puts people at risk, since false beliefs can be dangerous. This relates to people who make decisions that directly affect the lives of others. He believes that society has a responsibility not to let our passions, prejudices, or emotions interfere with our evaluation of evidence. In the paper “The Will to believe”, James argues that there are situations in which believing with insufficient evidence is sometimes acceptable. James says that our beliefs have consequences but sometimes there are situations when it is better to act

Related Documents

  • 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

    In “Reasonable Religious Disagreements,” Richard Feldman posits that two reasonable peers cannot come to a reasonable disagreement. The premise of a “reasonable disagreement” has various conditions, in short being that the peers must be epistemic, and they must have shared all of their evidence pertaining to the argument. By this criteria, it is not plausible for two epistemic peers with access to the same body of evidence to ever reach reasonably different conclusions. However, a problem arises with the previously stated criteria when examining the point regarding full disclosure of evidence. When examining Feldman’s article from this perspective, it is possible that it may not be considered fully viable.…

    • 797 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Divided By Faith Analysis

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This is a complex, loaded question, but it is one that must be addressed if the church is to openly and honestly dialogue about the issues of race and about racial reconciliation. The two main contributing factors to the racialized nature of evangelicalism are slavery (and the aftermath thereof) and the disestablishment of religion. The first slave ship arrived on the shores of Jamestown, VA in 1619.…

    • 784 Words
    • 4 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

    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
  • Improved Essays

    The second principle of faith that Maimonides points to is the “truth of prophecy.” The second purpose of the “test” was to teach the prophets to believe in his or her own prophecies and to show no doubt in them. To explain this it is necessary to know that, according to Maimonides, God’s command came to Abraham in a dream or a vision, or in other words, a prophecy. As it is known that Abraham didn’t question this and didn’t doubt the truth of the prophecy, it is meant to be an example to other prophets. A prophet is supposed to see his or her own prophecy as true just as much as anyone would see true anything that they physically saw, felt, or heard with their physical senses.…

    • 601 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Anselm’s Ontological Argument v. Pascal’s Wager In this paper, I will be describing Anselm’s Ontological Argument and Pascal’s Wager and then contrast the differences between the two. These two arguments help to determine the existence of God. There are three norms of belief: ordinary belief, religious belief, and faith seeking understanding. The norms of ordinary belief are based on sufficient evidence to prove it is true.…

    • 730 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Epistemic Vices Analysis

    • 1187 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The epistemic vices in which Jose Medina, a professor at Vanderbilt University, illustrates those of privilege possessing, epistemic arrogance, laziness, and closed-mindedness, are all prevalent throughout today's society. An example in which this is expressed is that of Anita Hill during the confirmation of Bush-nominated supreme court justice, Clarence Thomas. Hill accused Thomas of sexual harassment, but throughout his hearings her allegation was severely scrutinized and ultimately dismissed. Medina explains the three vices of the privileged as well as the causes of, or paths to, each. His explanation, specifically in regard to epistemic laziness and arrogance are relevant within the Clarence Thomas allegations.…

    • 1187 Words
    • 5 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
  • Superior Essays

    In ‘The Subjectivity of Values’, J L Mackie examines error theory and objective morality vs non-cognitivism. Mackie’s report represents moral scepticism using moral error theory. By taking an error theory approach, Mackie confronts morality similarly to the manner in which an atheist confronts religion. Moral error theory could be broken down to a version of the Justified True Belief outline as follows: Moral claims are universally false There is reason to believe that moral claims are universally false There is no justification for believing any deniable claim…

    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    With the developing number of non-American individuals moving to the U.S, it is critical for everybody to learn and regard the convictions estimations of different societies. The learning of various societies and social practice is vital for those working in the medicinal services field. At the point when a patient of an alternate nationality comes into a doctor's facility, it is vital for the medical caretaker to know how to convey, verbally and non-verbally, to the patient to nurture his or her needs as fast as would be prudent. Likewise, the social convictions of the customer may struggle with the convictions of living inside their zone of work and the eagerness to briefly adjust to suit these…

    • 118 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    James and Pascal’s defences of faith in some of their most famous arguments, specifically Pascal’s, devalue faith by making faith selfish, providing an obvious out to faith, and making the decision of faith into a gamble, oddly, his devaluation of faith does not hurt his argument, it makes it easier to convince the skeptics. To prove that Pascal’s argument devalues faith and to understand why it doesn’t negatively affect his argument, it’s necessary to understand the whole argument. His argument can be split into quite a few premises. He starts with the possibility of God, which is the main idea of his argument. Basically, it’s possible that God does exists, and it’s also possible that God does not exist, something nearly everyone agrees on.…

    • 1025 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Plato's Apology Argument

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Every human being has the ability to decide what they believe and what they do not. At a very early age, we develop judgement that allows us to choose whether or not to accept certain claims. These assertions may be tempting, but our reasoning allows us to critically analyze the information with respect to all of our previous knowledge. These claims may be faith based, fact-based, or opinion. Without recognizing it, we take every bit of information we gather, analyze it, and decide whether we accept its validity.…

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays