. Religious belief is a forced and momentous option for James because it is like getting married: to delay it indefinitely because one could not be perfectly sure that it would not lead to a divorce, would forfeit the good of the marriage. So, this examples show the limitations of Cliffords ideas. This kind of social capital called trust is mostly unconscious. Certainly, one cannot entirely overlook his argument because he warns people about the dangers of unsupported beliefs and their effects on people. In other words, the actions and decisions of these people are based on preliminary and unsupported beliefs. Well avoid admitting were wrong by discounting evidence that we dont like. Jason and I have wanted to put this article into our Scholardarity website and discussed how to summarize the argument. must. and that we are better off even now with the affirmation of religion. Now when Clifford negates all belief without evidence in order to avoid error, he does not recognize that some decisions are forced and momentous. This means Clifford was an evidentialist. That is, James here seems to reject doxastic voluntarism, "the philosophical doctrine according to which people have voluntary control over their beliefs. You had no right to come to the conclusion that your friend had cheated on the test. William Cliffords famous essay The Ethics of Belief is aimed at showing that it is immoral to believe something without sufficient evidence because unjustified opinions can pose a significant threat to others. One can remember the famous example of a ship-owner who convinces himself that his ship is safe and takes no effort to determine whether this assumption is true. One can avoid making a decision to go on a trip until it is too late to go. William Jamess counter-arguments are ingenious and thought-provoking, but I dont find them ultimately convincing. He does not, of course, advocate ignoring or denying real evidence. (2022, November 30). Clifford's principle holds that it is immoral for individuals, no matter of circumstances, to believe anything without sufficient evidence. In his work, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, (New York: Harper Torchbook, Harper & Row, Publishers, 1964), on page xi, he speaks of knowing by indwelling., Formerly posted by peterkrey on October 15, 2010 at 6:35 am. Bertrand Russell in "Free Thought and Official Propaganda" argued that one must always adhere to fallibilism, recognizing of all human knowledge that "None of our beliefs are quite true; all have at least a penumbra of vagueness and error", and that the only means of progressing ever-closer to the truth is to never assume certainty, but always examine all sides and try to reach a conclusion objectively. Language links are at the top of the page across from the title. First that the best things are the more eternal things, overlapping things, the things in the universe that throw the last stone, so to speak[5] and that we are better off even now with the affirmation of religion.[6]. Would that bit of good luck diminish the guilt of the shipowner? But the second sense of the word belief is closer to trust, which is the human capital that makes society itself possible, let alone the good faith that under-girds morality. WebCliffords view holds that all rational beliefs must be proved fromevidence. And so, according to James, religious belief is not about God, Jesus, Heaven, Hell, angels, immortality, souls, or miracles. He then answers: "I sincerely believe that the latter course is the only one we can follow as reflective men. It keeps me above the deadly flotsam and jetsam, it []. They disagree on the question of whether religious belief, given the lack of evidence for it, is ever intellectually responsible. In particular, James is concerned in this lecture about defending the rationality of religious faith even lacking sufficient evidence of religious truth. Should I first ask for the article and then pay you because of a lack of trust? WebAccording to James, the following are genuine options not settled by the evidence: Moral questions (viz., the decision whether or not to have moral beliefs). WebClifford is thought to be wrong that evidence is always needed for belief for there are times you have to do without evidence (eg if you are told the hotel you are in is about to blow up) but his example of the devout ship-owner shows that it is always wrong to trust in religion and faith without evidence. Lets say your friend did cheat, and you feel vindicated because you were correct. James considers the following scenario. One is for the credulity of a proposition or the evidence for a hypothesis making a theory scientifically acceptable. WebDefinition 1 / 85 Falsification principle - anything that you believe if you can't state the grounds of what you believe then it is just based on emotions - Converted from theism to deism before dying, in a desire to "go where the evidence leads" - Parable of the Garden Click the card to flip Flashcards Learn Test Created by ZakkTrigger IvyPanda. This is one of the main points that one can make in response to William Cliffords essay The Ethics of Belief. Our errors are surely not such awfully solemn things. Copyright 2023 - IvyPanda is operated by, God is responsible for the continuation of evil, The Clifford And James Philosophies On Beliefs, Cliffords vs. Jamess Knowledge Theories, "The Ethics of Belief" by Clifford and "The Will to Believe" by James, "The Ethics of Belief" by William K. Clifford, Voluntaristic Faith: Readings by Clifford and James, Clifford's Evidentialism vs. Wager & Kierkegaards Non-Evidentialism, Peoples Refuse as a Source of Information, Max Weber and Clifford Geertz Views on Religion, An Individuals Belief is a Private Matter, Hicks Theory of the Attitude Towards God and Sin, Clifford/James on Whether and When It Is Ok to Believe without Sufficient Evidence, The Ethics of Belief: Based on Evidence or Inquiry. Request 1983 Luther Lectures! And so the iconic opposition between Clifford and James admits of reconciliation. However, the example provided by William James indicates that this process can be reversed. [citation needed]. While this principle has existed for centuries, it only became prominent in the minds of the common people after the ethics of belief debate in the 19th century between W.K. Arguably, Jamesian reconstructed religious belief is not religious belief at all. Such beliefs bring the realities their assertions refer to into existence. Often, just asking this question alone can help us see that a belief does not serve us, and we can work on letting it go. On the contrary, Clifford holds that religious belief brings with it a host of other intellectual vices of credulity. For instance, in his lecture, William James mentions a chemist who conducts a series of experiments in order to demonstrate that a certain hypothesis is true (James unpaged). For my own part, I have also a horror of being duped; but I can believe that worse things than being duped may happen to a man in this world: so Clifford's exhortation has to my ears a thoroughly fantastic sound. One of the four virtues of stoicism is Wisdom. For example, people can put trust in the competence of medical workers, even knowing that sometimes they can commit errors. Such a In particular, he could have pointed out that many researchers can easily twist facts so that they could fit their theories. This philosophy-related article is a stub. EVIDENTIALISM- Claims that it is irrational to believe anything without evidence; the only good reason to believe anything is sufficient evidence. The Jamesian argument seems an overt bait-and-switch; he seems to have defended religious belief by distorting it into something else. We get in trouble for not simply obeying the rules, and often shamed for asking questions about things we dont understand. We dont suffer from a lack of information in this world. Theyll have a lucky break that may not have anything to do with them. This continuous disinformation campaign from politicians, pundits, talk show host, and others with a hidden agenda has eroded trust in the institutions that are in place to help us a society weather such events. "Belief without Prior Evidence." WebThe consequences for religion should be clear: if Clifford is right, then believing in God without sufficient evidence --holding the belief as a matter of faith, as some people put it - For example, researchers often try to substantiate a certain theory or conjecture, but their efforts are guided by the assumption that this conjecture can be true. This essay "Belief without Prior Evidence" was written and submitted by your fellow 2022. In light of new information, Ive changed my mind., From the evidence provided, it looks like I need to rethink my position., You make good argument. This is probably the hardest part. Something is not truly a belief if it has no influence upon the believers actions b. In some cases, an individual may have no other options. [1] From Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger, editors, Philosophy of Religion, Third Edition, (Oxford University Press, 2007), page 109. At the end of his introductory remarks, James leads into his first section by stating that he "must begin by setting up some technical distinctions.". WebWilliam K. Clifford was an English mathematician and philosopher in the late 1800s. But if I stand aloof, and refuse to budge an inch until I have objective evidence, until you shall have done something apt ten to one your liking never comes. [7] Michael Polanyi, The Study of Man, (University of Chicago Press, 1959), page 38: The moment the ideal of detached knowledge is abandoned. Polanyi argues for personal participation in knowledge. Clifford makes an analogy between stealing something and believing something without evidence, making both equally evil. Such beliefs bring the realities their assertions refer to into existence. Shun error!these, we see, are two materially different laws; and by choosing between them we may end by coloring differently our whole intellectual life. 5. Of course, whether or not one takes an umbrella along in the morning is not a forced option: one could stay home; it is more trivial than momentous. First appearing as "the duty to believe", then "the subjective method", then "the will to believe", it was finally recast by James as "the right to believe." Clifford uses a category of knowledge in a moral relational situation, where responsibility and trust-worthiness are required. St. Paul puts it this way: faith becomes active in love. Without them researchers may not be able to achieve any progress in their work. merely shows his own preponderant private horror of becoming a dupe. James' "The Will to Believe" consists of introductory remarks followed by ten numbered but not titled sections. In particular, there are circumstances when people can derive evidence only when they act on some preliminary and often unsupported beliefs about something. James' doctrine has taken a lot of criticism. WebThe late Christopher Hitchens one of the infamous new atheists made this claim: That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. If We must remember that these feelings of our duty about either truth or error are in any case only expressions of our passional life. Michael Polanyi argues that personal knowledge is very different from detached and indifferent ways of knowing. Clifford and William James, with Clifford articulating the principle in his now-famous work The Ethics of Belief, where he argued in favor of evidentialism. Where we run into trouble, is that most of us are brought up not to question the world around us. "Belief without Prior Evidence." William Cliffords famous essay The Ethics of Belief is aimed at showing that it is immoral to believe something without sufficient evidence because unjustified In his work, the author demonstrates that in some cases, a persons conviction can imperil the lives of many people; therefore, one has to ensure his/her decisions are based on facts or reliable observations, rather than wishful thinking (Clifford unpaged). 2008. If one starts without the assumption that God exists (or that Providence or the ultimate is a significant reality, or a significant part of reality) then the ship owner is guilty of over-belief, of believing something on insufficient evidence. Clifford. William James argues that sometimes it is When we get comfortable knowing that were going to be wrong a lot, we can avoid a lot of anxiety and stress. My gas gauge is on empty, and I keep on driving passing gas stations because I trust in God that I will not run out of gas. First, Clifford argues that because the evidence is not sufficient to show that belief in God is true, one should not believe. The database is updated daily, so anyone can easily find a relevant essay example. Stoic Coffee Break 2023. IvyPanda. Believe nothing, he tells us, keep your mind in suspense forever, rather than by closing it on insufficient evidence incur the awful risk of believing lies. [1] The example that Clifford gives of the immorality of belief without evidence is that of a ship owner, who forgoes an overhaul of his ship, overcoming his These beliefs become substantiated only in the course of their day-to-day interactions and experiences. They were telling me to ignore my own sense of reasoning, logic, and to just take their word for it. In November 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/belief-without-prior-evidence-2/. WebClifford argues that if beliefs are accepted on the basis of insufficient evidence, then two very bad results will follow: (1) One will "keep alive fatal superstitions"; (2) Beliefs that tear society apart will be maintained. Because if you come to a belief based upon faulty evidence, then you cant be sure that next time you use the same thinking that youll get to the correct outcome. Belief in this arena refers to trusting and committing oneself completely to the One who requires our ultimate concern, to use Tillichs phrase. Whether we believe philosophically that mind is a substance or not, is not a live, forced, and momentous decision for most of us. Thanks again for listening. As Clifford emphasizes, having an exaggerated degree of confidence in ones beliefs is most often a vice, not a virtue. Web. And how do try to avoid this? Shall we espouse and endorse it?" How could I believe that you would hand me an article after I gave you the money for it? Thanks. I believe his position is far too monolithic and would stop life in its tracks, especially when you realize that belief can be taken in two senses. So here: the verification of the theory which you may hold as to the objectively moral character of the world can consist only in thisthat if you proceed to act upon your theory it will be reversed by nothing that later turns up as your action's fruits; it will harmonize so well with the entire drift of experience that the latter will, as it were, adopt it. Where did I learn this?