...a topic of controversy for quite some time. Two prominent figures in this respect are William Clifford whose support of doxastic conservatism is outlined in The Ethics of Belief and William James, who defend doxastic liberalism in his work The Will to Believe. Personally, I find Clifford’s position resonates better with my own process of accepting and discarding beliefs, however it is important to note that by saying this I am not rejecting the virtues of doxastic liberalism. Quite the contrary, I do believe that in some instances a liberal attitude can prove worthwhile, I simply find James’ reasons for applying a liberal attitude to be rather problematic. A discussion on whether or not James’ reasons for applying doxastic liberalism may go beyond the scope of this paper, so any such inquiry into this matter will be kept to a minimum. In his defense of doxastic conservatism Clifford offers the following argument: Before accepting a belief, we must ensure that there is sufficient evidence which supports said belief (1,5,10). If after examining the available evidence, we find that it does not support the belief, than that belief must be discarded (2-4). Additionally, there are instances where a belief “goes beyond our experience” and can be accepted based on inferences of similar experiences, assuming that the inference is drawn logically from reliable experience (8-10). Finally, Clifford gives weight to sources of authority, such as writings of history or the words of another...
Words: 1796 - Pages: 8
...Beliefs William A. Bruno Southern New Hampshire University William.Bruno@snhu.edu Either people believe there is a God, don’t believe in God or they are on the fence about whether or not God exists. It doesn’t matter what your position because no matter where you go there will always be somebody to tell you you’re wrong for what you believe in. During the next few paragraphs I will discuss a few different philosopher’s ideas by talking about the side of the fence, if either, they fall into and their views about the other side. The three philosophers I will talk about are Blaise Pascal, W.K. Clifford, and William James and their views on the whole believing in God thing. Blaise Pascal was for the idea of believing in God. Pascal’s thought were that “having a belief in God was useful even if not supported by the available evidence (Pascal).” His theory basically stated that if “someone fully devoted their life to the ways of Christianity they would soon believe what Christians believe” (Pascal). I personally don’t like this idea because I feel that this is, basically, brainwashing yourself. The next philosopher William James had theory that was along the same line as Pascal’s. He thought if people had the options between two really appealing choices the people have the right to act as their passion decides (James, 1896).” James thought it was pointless for us to permit the fear of holding a false belief to prevent us from losing the benefits of believing what...
Words: 530 - Pages: 3
...Summary of The ethics of belief William K. Clifford’s essay “The Ethics of Belief`” is divided into three separate subsections. These subsections are: The Duty of Inquiry, The Weight of Authority and The Limits of Interference. Throughout the essay Clifford uses various illustrations to help prove his argument and for the reader to have a better understanding of beliefs. After giving an illustration, Clifford gives us his argument on his view of the ethics of belief. Clifford’s thesis that he seems to follow is that forming a new belief without proper evidence, or to support an existing belief by intentionally ignoring your doubts and avoiding a thorough investigation would be immoral. In the first section entitled ‘The Duty of Inquiry,’ Clifford provides us with two stories as illustrations on the question of beliefs. The first story tells of a ship owner with an old, not very well built ship, whom is considering sending this ship on a voyage full of immigrants. Doubts had been raised by the ship owner and also other people about how worthy the ship was to set sail. Despite these doubts the ship owner decided to send the vessel on its voyage with all the people aboard believing that there was nothing wrong with the ship. Around the midpoint of the journey the ship sank and killed all the people on board. Clifford leads us to believe that the ship owner was guilty of all the deaths of the people aboard his ship. The reason he is guilty of this is due to the ship owner having...
Words: 1104 - Pages: 5
...revolution. Could this belief be an example of lacking evidence? To prove that something is not assimilated to be right or wrong thru the line of feelings and emotions William Clifford contends that a person should not trust or determine something without insufficient evidence. In the writing “The Ethics of Belief,” Clifford applies the example of the ship owner to convince the reader that actions without supported evidence could lead to a wrong outcome. The ship owner believes his longstanding ship can sail just as well as previous times since it had gone safely through so many times that he supposed it would come safely back home from the trip also. Erroneously, he was assured that he was not putting the passengers lives in peril and decided to trusts his irrational beliefs discarding the ideas that the ship needed maintenance and reparations before the ship sailed. Unfortunately, due to zero inspections the ship broke apart mid-ocean and all passengers aboard died. As a consequence, things other than the actual evidence are guided by thoughts and doubts. Afterwards, he goes on to explain once a decision is made the result it would be either right or wrong. In this case, it was not wrong of him holding onto the belief but acting upon it. He declares “It is wrong to believe on insufficient evidence, or to nourish belief by suppressing doubts and avoiding investigation,”(page 353-354). Meaning that believing in God without sufficient evidence and holding the belief, as a matter of faith...
Words: 1613 - Pages: 7
...Knowledge/Ethics In Plato’s The Meno, Socrates successfully convinces two men of politics not only that they have no understanding of virtue, but also that no one does. This conversation leads us to be conscious of the fact that we are living in a state of uncertainty. It raises the question: what should we believe? We need to know whether it is enough for our beliefs to be true on face value, or whether we have to come to believe them for certain reasons. We need to know whether or not we have a choice in what we believe. Finally, we need to know if a person is entitled to believe what they want. William Clifford in his, The Ethics of Belief, argues that “It is wrong, always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” I believe Clifford is correct in stating this because in order for something to be true it requires sufficient evidence. The presence of sufficient evidence entitles us to believe in whatever ideas our evidence supports. Thus it would be wrong to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. Clifford opens up with an anecdote of a shipowner who was to send his ship across the sea. Doubts had been suggested that the ship might not be seaworthy. The owner removed all the doubts and acquired a sincere conviction that the ship would make it across the sea safely as it had many times in the past. Mid-way through the journey the ship sank and the shipowner collected his insurance money. Was the shipowner guilty? Clifford responds, “The...
Words: 1651 - Pages: 7
...loving, all knowing, and all powerful being. People that believe that God exist are theists. On the other hand, people that do not believe in God are atheists; they are denying existence of God. However, agnostics are people who think that there is not enough evidence to believe or not to believe. A philosopher, William K. Clifford, discussed questions about the ethics of belief, emphasizing the importance of the belief of the individual. His evidentalist principle is as follows: “It is wrong, always and everywhere, to believe anything for anyone upon insufficient evidence” (355). In addition to him James challenged Clifford, saying that it is not always possible to use rationality to determine beliefs. According to Clifford, a person can believe only if there is sufficient evidence for that belief. It is not acceptable to believe in something just because a person needs to believe. A person must have a reason. For example, if someone believe just because he or she feels better it is not a good enough reason. The problem when somebody believes in something is that a person stops opposing and testing the belief, and stops seeing real considerations and objections. Clifford gives an example in which a ship owner needed to make a decision if he will take a trip with his old ship or not. The ship owner doubted if the ship could make it or not. There are two outcomes: ship successfully gets to the coast and everyone survives, or ship sinks and everyone dies. The ship owner decided...
Words: 1394 - Pages: 6
...“It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, “mad cow” disease, and many others, but I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. Faith, being belief that isn’t based on evidence, is the principle vice of religion.” - Richard Dawkins Many other philosophers and professionals of academia criticize religion for its reliance on faith. More specifically, they condemn the act of using faith to reason –rationalizing actions based on something other than evidence or proof. My argument does not necessarily confine itself to the focus frame of religion, but more generally, I argue that it is justified to form beliefs that are not grounded in sufficient evidence. I will use my initial motivation for this topic as an appropriate introduction for this argument. Throughout the semester I was genuinely intrigued by the atheistic arguments of astounding philosophers –most notable and influential on my own beliefs were the ideas of Hume, Dawkins, Clifford, and even Nietzsche. In light of this and the logically superior option to argue against the existence of God, … I did. In fact, I was four pages into what was shaping out to be the best paper I’ve written since my secondary school thesis on underwater basket weaving. At some point, however, I could not continue writing. I had no passion, desire, or any sense of purpose while trying to grind out...
Words: 1528 - Pages: 7
...you are going to be defending. It should be possible to present the claim in no more than a sentence or two that tells the reader what it is that you will argue, and why and how. This is what is known as a thesis statement, and your essay outline should begin with this. A good thesis statement should: • Be no longer than a sentence or two • It should be something philosophically controversial (though not necessarily sensationalist), in that it should not merely be a statement of fact, nor of style, nor of context. • It should include a reference to the target idea or text. Examples: “Pascal’s (1632-62) famed defence of religious faith by appeal to the utility of believing in God rather than the truth of the belief is unsatisfactory since, although it professes to start from a position of metaphysical ignorance, in practice it smuggles in unwarranted assumptions about the utility of believing in the existence of God”. “Pascal argues that the practical advantage of believing in God outweighs the disadvantages, although this has been challenged by many critics who contend that the argument only succeeds if one conflates pragmatic reasons for believing with epistemic reasons for believing. In this essay, I shall defend Pascal from this...
Words: 981 - Pages: 4
...A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.[note 1] Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life and/or to explain the origin of life or the Universe. From their beliefs about the cosmos and human nature, people may derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle. According to some estimates, there are roughly 4,200 religions in the world.[1] Edward Burnett Tylor defined religion as "the belief in spiritual beings".[26] He argued, back in 1871, that narrowing the definition to mean the belief in a supreme deity or judgment after death or idolatry and so on, would exclude many peoples from the category of religious, and thus "has the fault of identifying religion rather with particular developments than with the deeper motive which underlies them". He also argued that the belief in spiritual beings exists in all known societies. The anthropologist Clifford Geertz defined religion as a "system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic."[27] Alluding perhaps to Tylor's "deeper motive", Geertz remarked that "we have very little idea of how, in empirical terms, this particular miracle is...
Words: 730 - Pages: 3
...studies of crime and the social control aspects of crime. All of these studies and theories will be compared and examined to understand the standing of criminology today. The first study of why people commit crime revolved around the belief that criminal behavior resulted from a persons� abnormal psychology. These theories suggest that criminal behavior is caused by some underlying physical or mental condition. These conditions separate the societies criminals from the non- criminals (Adler et. al, 2007 p.116). The first people to study this rationale where called Positivist Criminologist and believed that; Human behavior is determined by forces beyond individual control and that is it possible to measure those forces�{They} view criminal behavior as stemming from biological, psychological and social factors. (Adler et. al, 2007 p.60) In the late 1870�s, Cesare Lombroso developed the theory that some people are just �born criminal� and have certain traits called atavistic stigmata that distinguish them from non-criminals. (Adler et. al, 2007 p.68) This theory soon lead to similar theories including the somatotype school of criminology. This theory was based upon a persons� physical build. Psychiatrist such as Ernst Kretschner, William Sheldon and Sheldon...
Words: 3220 - Pages: 13
...Introduction Ethics is the systematic study of the fundamental principles of morality. It is an attempt to explain moral principles. It is concerned with the question of right or wrong in human behavior. It explains how men ought to behave and why it is wrong or right to behave in a certain way. Ethics weighs human actions or inactions on a moral scale to determine whether the action is morally good or morally bad. Thomas Hobbes on ethics explained it as the science of “virtue and vice.”1 Morality and ethics cannot be divorced. Morality is the basis of ethics, the latter is the explicit reflection on, and the systematic study of the former (Joseph Omoregbe 1993 p.3)2. How then do we decide what is morally right? Is it based on universal laws or divine instructions? Are laws truly universal? If they are not, how then can the rightness or wrongness of culturally divergent societies be determined? Philosophers agree and disagree in varied proportions on answers to these questions. It is normal if you disagree too. For the purpose of this paper, an attempt will be made to look into the concept of ethical relativism, its importance and areas of deviation from ethical absolutism. History of Ethical Relativism Though moral relativism did not become a prominent topic in philosophy or elsewhere until the twentieth century, it has ancient origins. In the classical Greek world, both the historian Herodotus and the sophist Protagoras appeared to endorse some form of relativism. The early...
Words: 3962 - Pages: 16
...Metaethics Metaethics is a branch of analytic philosophy that explores the status, foundations, and scope of moral values, properties, and words. Whereas the fields of applied ethics and normative theoryfocus on what is moral, metaethics focuses on what morality itself is. Just as two people may disagree about the ethics of, for example, physician-assisted suicide, while nonetheless agreeing at the more abstract level of a general normative theory such as Utilitarianism, so too may people who disagree at the level of a general normative theory nonetheless agree about the fundamental existence and status of morality itself, or vice versa. In this way, metaethics may be thought of as a highly abstract way of thinking philosophically about morality. For this reason, metaethics is also occasionally referred to as “second-order” moral theorizing, to distinguish it from the “first-order” level of normative theory. Metaethical positions may be divided according to how they respond to questions such as the following: * Ÿ What exactly are people doing when they use moral words such as “good” and “right”? * Ÿ What precisely is a moral value in the first place, and are such values similar to other familiar sorts of entities, such as objects and properties? * Ÿ Where do moral values come from—what is their source and foundation? * Ÿ Are some things morally right or wrong for all people at all times, or does morality instead vary from person to person, context to context...
Words: 21310 - Pages: 86
...values, rituals and customs provide. While people use these values, rituals, and customs to interpret the world around them, it will be our job to discuss the implications and unconscious assumptions that these interpretations provide using a number of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. TEXTS AND READINGS REQUIRED • Sociology of Religion: Contemporary Developments (2nd edition) by Kevin J. Christiano, William H. Swatos Jr., and Peter Kivisto, ISBN 978-0-7425-6111-3 • Additional readings to be posted to Blackboard SUGGESTED • Durkheim, Emile. 1965. Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Free Press. • Marx, Karl and Frederich Engels. 1978. "The Communist Manifesto" and “the German Ideology,” in The Marx-Engels Reader. Ed. Robert Tucker. New York: W.W. Norton. • Weber, Max. 1958. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Charles Scribner. • Weber, Max. 1978. "Religious Groups (The Sociology of Religion)". Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. • Geertz, Clifford. 1973. "Religion as a Cultural System." In The Interpretation of Culture. New York: Basic Books, p. 87-125. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Association of Religion Data Archives: http://www.thearda.com/...
Words: 3279 - Pages: 14
...Bryant-45099 Part I.qxd 10/18/2006 7:42 PM Page 36 5 FEMINIST METHODOLOGIES AND EPISTEMOLOGY ANDREA DOUCET Carleton University, Canada NATASHA S. MAUTHNER University of Aberdeen, Scotland O ver the past 10 years of teaching courses on research methods and feminist approaches to methodologies and epistemologies, a recurring question from our students concerns the distinctiveness of feminist approaches to methods, methodologies, and epistemologies. This key question is posed in different ways: Is there a specifically feminist method? Are there feminist methodologies and epistemologies, or simply feminist approaches to these? Given diversity and debates in feminist theory, how can there be a consensus on what constitutes “feminist” methodologies and epistemologies? Answers to these questions are far from straightforward given the continually evolving nature of feminist reflections on the methodological and epistemological dimensions and dilemmas of research. This chapter on feminist methodologies and epistemologies attempts to address these questions by tracing historical developments in this area, by considering what may be unique about feminist epistemologies and feminist methodologies, by reviewing some of sociology’s key contributions to this area of scholarship and by highlighting some key emergent trends. The chapter begins with a brief overview of the theoretical and historical development of feminist epistemologies, followed by a similar overview...
Words: 12047 - Pages: 49
...Students enrolled in our joint JD/LLM program in international and comparative law receive an in-depth education in both the public and private aspects of international and comparative law, enriched by the ubiquitous presence of foreign students; likewise, the foreign lawyers who enroll in our one-year LLM program in American law enroll in the same courses, attend the same conferences, and engage in the same intellectual and social life as American students. This issue of Duke Law Magazine provides a flavor of the international dimensions of the Law School. It touches on some of our ongoing international programs, including the Institutes in Transnational Law at Geneva and Hong Kong, the Global Capital Markets Center, the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, the...
Words: 58370 - Pages: 234
