Swindal offers four models for the interaction of faith and reason. One of these models is particularly of interest here: the incompatibilist model. This model suggests, “…one can hold faith as transrational, inasmuch as it is higher than reason.” A second tier of this model is that faith can be irrational; hence, it is “not subject to rational evaluation at all” (Swindal, n.d., n.pag). The rationale behind having faith in God is that it binds together the common, or universal values and moral codes that are present in all cultures (Rachels, 1971, p. 621-22). Having said this, though, many who do have faith in God do not think that it requires any reasoning or any proof at all (Clark, n.d., n.pag.). In his discussion, though, Clark refers to…
According to Clifford (1879), there is an ethics to belief that makes it always wrong for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence. Clifford (1879) begins his paper by providing an illustrative analogy – one where a ship-owner is preparing to send to sea a ship filled with innocent men, women, and children. Prior to its departure, doubts had been brought to his attention regarding its condition and the possibility of a failure to complete the voyage. The ship-owner, now in a dilemma, successfully convinces himself that because the ship had weathered so many storms and successfully completed so many voyages, it was fit to believe that the ship was fit to sail. He acquired a sincere belief that the ship would successfully complete the voyage despite its apparent faults. Eventually, the ship sank.…
Clifford argues that actions cannot be separated from belief, therefore any belief held without adequate evidence caries the potential for morally blameworthy consequences.…
In his article “The Ethics of Belief (Clifford, 1877) W.K. Clifford sought to argue that “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence” (as cited on p190). The aim of this essay is to establish whether indeed this view offered by Clifford, when considering religious faith, is convincing. In order to do this I will consider the arguments that Clifford put forward, including that which to believe anything based upon insufficient evidence always does harm and so is wrong. Such a statement is in direct opposition to those religious believers who regard their blind faith as a virtue and for whom evidence is something that is unnecessary in order to believe. Along with discussing Clifford I will detail the responses given by James who disagreed with Clifford and in response attacked his views within his own paper “The Will to Believe”. James believed instead that it is more important to achieve truth than to avoid error. Both men, in my opinion, offer strong and persuasive arguments however I do not believe that either stands without criticism, therefore throughout I will offer my own views on the foundations of their arguments, which I hope will establish, that although many of Clifford’s points are valid in particular and specific circumstances they do not offer, as proposed, a convincing view of religious faith.…
William K. Clifford sets out to show in “The Ethics of Belief” that “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence…” In this paper, I will show that his argument lacks key definitions needed in order to found his inference upon and that it begs the question as to what qualifies as “insufficient” evidence. Furthermore, I will show that the primary issue is not the belief but the results of the belief that is important and that all judgment and interpretation should be based upon said results.…
I do believe that in most cases it is wrong to believe on something without gathering enough information and evidence on the subject matter. For example, if someone was murdered and the police arrested someone who was at the scene of the crime, it would be wrong to accuse him and believing this person committed the crime without investigating and looking for evidence that indicates he was the culprit. So, I agree with Clifford based on this example. However, it's not always the case where it is wrong to believe on insufficient evidence because sometimes you can't find evidence to support either side. We can't always use sufficient logic and evidence to decide an issue even though we may still believe in one thing or the other.…
Does Clifford present a persuasive viewpoint of religious faith? In his article “The Ethics of Belief (Clifford, 1877) W.K. Clifford sought to claim that it is inappropriate always, in all places, and for anyone, to believe anything upon unsatisfactory evidence. The goal of this paper is to determine whether indeed this opinion offered by Clifford, when considering religious faith, is persuasive. To successfully do this, I will weigh up the arguments that Clifford put forward, including that of disbelieving anything based upon scarce evidence, it always does damage and therefore is wrong. Such an assertion is in direct conflict to those pious believers who consider their blind faith as a goodness and for whom proof is something that is needless…
Religion can persuade many people to do many unintelligent things such as dehumanizing people who fail to meet the dictates of the religion, and has the power of persuading people into doing nothing about the situation because it be known as unacceptable to "God". Ignorance, Culture of fear and discrimination are three themes that demonstrate that ignorant adherence to man-made tenets, attributed to religion can dehumanize those who fail to meet those so-called dictates of the religion.…
“The Ethics of Belief” written by W.K. Clifford. Explains the idea of belief and moral righteousness by coming up with the conclusion that it is morally incorrect to believe in a claim with insufficient evidence or to create a claim without sufficient evidence. Clifford brings about various analogies that prove his claim to be true such as the ship-owner and the religious group on the island. Although these ideas helped set out the theory efficiently, William James essay “The Will to Believe” believes in the opposite by stating that anyone can believe in anything without the sufficient evidence provided for a specific claim. James’s, the essay provides counterexamples to Clifford’s work as well as provides strong examples and positions to help…
The representation of female super heroes in the media can be said to have had huge institutional, political and social influences that would suggest those in power are favoured at the expense of those without. Female super heroes tend to promote sexualisation and stereotypical gender roles of women, throughout comic books and super hero movies, but why?…
Slam Dunk: Whole Foods scores BIG for meeting the Hodgson’s Seven Moral Principles Kent Hodgson identifies seven fundamental steps to guide managers in their decision making process. The seven principles are “dignity of human life, autonomy, honesty, loyalty, fairness, humaneness and the common good” (Krietner & Kinicki, 2013, p.24). The overall objective is to assist managers in changing the culture of business and to remove the histrionics of unethical and uncaring behavior. It would appear that Mackey formed his company on these seven principles as the organization meets them all.…
Religion has affected society both positively and negatively throughout life. Most religions promote and educate individuals in social virtues; how to choose right over wrong regardless of personal desire (Fisher, 2005). Many charities feed, cloth, and shelter the homeless all in the name of their God and acting on their faith. Unfortunately, while organized religion promotes faith in positive social virtues it also can instill fear and oppress its follower at times. The followers who see the founder of a religion to be extraordinary or supernatural could be mislead by a dishonest and unethical leader (Fisher, 2005).…
“[Individual] is not made for society, but society is made for the [individual]. No institution can be good which does not tend to improve the individual” (Fuller). The purpose of this quote is to show what society is about. Society has been part of our lives ever since we were born. They helped raise us to become who we are today. They taught us all the things that we learned to help us get by on the adventurous passage called life. They either gave us blessings or taught us lessons to prevent making mistakes; they also taught us to learn from those mistakes to become wiser. There are many social factors that can help the individual become a better person than they were in the past to benefit them now and in the future. One of those factors is religion.…
What is the pre-school child really like? It is not possible to find an adequate answer to this question by relying on any one theory of child development. The main reason for this is that most theorists usually concentrate on only that facet of child development which they consider important. Gesell therefore, concentrates on physical and physiological development since he feels that it is the main pre-requisite for all other forms of development. Freud tells us about the kinds of things that go on in the child's mind; especially at the sub-conscious level; and how they affect the personality, and emotional development of the child. Piaget, on the other hand, is primarily concerned with the emerging intelligence structures in the child's mind, and studies various aspects of cognitive and perceptual development to gather clues about the mind's underlying structures of intelligence. The behaviorists provide us with explanations about the observable of the child in terms of stimulus and response.…
Out of a country's health budget, a large proportion should be diverted from treatment to spending on health education and preventative measure.…