thoughts regarding Clifford’s argument in “the Ethics of Belief‚" as well as presenting my opposition as to why I disagree with Clifford’s view. According to Clifford‚ he holds that it is best to always act according to rationality and logical evidence‚ rather than relying on baseless assumptions and emotional support since those things can only cloud one’s judgment‚ which thereby resulting in an erroneous consequence. However‚ in contradiction to Clifford’s belief‚ I do not think that it is always the case
Premium Critical thinking Philosophy Epistemology
#2 Clifford offers several different reasons why he thinks our beliefs are not merely our own private business. Explain two of those reasons. Which of the two do you think is a more compelling reason to think our beliefs are not our private business? Does the more compelling reason convince you that your beliefs are everyone’s business? Why or why not? William Kingdon Clifford was an English Mathematician and Philosopher who lived from 1845 to 1879. In 1877‚ he wrote “The Ethics of Belief”; which
Premium Belief Critical thinking Epistemology
like a small decision at the time. In Clifford’s essay “The ethics of Belief” he gives a now well-known example about a shipowner. The story is of a shipowner and his decision to not go through the expenses of repairing his ship before sending it out in the sea. The ship goes down and everyone drowns‚ and through this example Clifford asserts that it is a “sin” to hold a belief without sufficient evidence. Many times‚ our decisions and beliefs should definitely have sufficient evidence but sometimes
Premium Morality Religion Ethics
In this text‚ William K. Clifford is discussing the answer to the question of whether or not we are morally responsible for our beliefs. Clifford explains the immoral act of believing things based on insufficient evidence when he states‚ “Not only does it deceive ourselves by giving us a sense of power which we do not really possess‚ but it is sinful‚ because it is stolen in defiance of our duty to mankind” (4). In other words‚ Clifford suggests that we do have a moral duty or responsibility to mankind
Premium Morality Religion Ethics
In the most basic sense evidentialism focuses on the justifications‚ beliefs‚ conclusions‚ and the evidence for each of these for any given person. William Clifford’s work‚ The Ethics of Beliefs‚ presents his principle of evidentialism and how one must judge the beliefs and justifications rather than consequences. Given Clifford’s definition‚ counter arguments regarding the necessity of consequences towards an individual’s action arise to invalidate Clifford’s claim. I will argue that despite the
Premium Morality Ethics Immanuel Kant
If a person values self-preservation‚ and does things without any regards to the affect that their actions have on others‚ then you can expect their business to be run in the same manner. As far as a person’s belief system‚ however‚ it seems that‚ though a person may have a certain belief system that they claim to follow (i.e. Christianity)‚ it has little to no effect on their ethical choices when it comes to business. Take those leaders of churches who end up on the front page as the culprit behind
Premium Ford Motor Company
An Argument into Clifford’s The Ethics of Belief I disagree with Clifford’s statement‚ “It is wrong always‚ everywhere‚ and for anyone‚ to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." I believe that this is a false statement because the world’s population relies on most of their decisions on faith and trust. It is basic human nature to allow trust and vast decision-making. Many religions and people make daily assumptions and decisions with insufficient evidence. People believe in politicians based
Premium Religion Decision making Human nature
Clifford and James Summaries of W.K. Clifford and William James’s arguments for belief | In this paper‚ I hope to effectively summarize W.K Clifford’s (1879) argument on the ethics of belief‚ followed by a summary of William James’ (1897) argument on the right to believe‚ and finally‚ provide an argument for why W.K Clifford’s (1879) argument is stronger by highlighting its strengths while simultaneously arguing against William James’ (1897) argument. According to Clifford (1879)‚ there
Premium Truth Religion
W. K. Clifford (1845-1879) was a British philosopher and mathematician. He made a compelling argument regarding ethics of belief. In module two reading‚ he stated that it is always wrong to make a claim without sufficient evidence. William James (1842-1910)‚ on the other hand‚ a philosopher and psychologist‚ took a different approach‚ in which he shared a different view concerning religious belief. Notably‚ both evidentialism and nonevidentialism approach have some merit and validity. I will assess
Premium God Religion Faith
What I’m here to discuss is some of the flaws in Clifford’s principal in The Ethics of Belief. Clifford argues that it is always wrong to believe on insufficient evidence. He brings up a couple of premises. Premise 1 is that believing anything on insufficient evidence is always harmful to others. Premise 2 is that it is always wrong for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence. With the example of a shipowner‚ the shipowner believed strongly in his ship without sufficient evidence that
Premium Logic Philosophy Epistemology