The Ethics Of Belief By William James

Faith, defined as a strong belief in something which cannot be proven, has been argued over countless generations. Still, even without proof, individuals worldwide hold true to their faith each day. After studying faith and religion in texts written by scholars with varying backgrounds, it is easy to see faith is something which is widely disputed. Comparison of Sigmund Freud’s The Future of an Illusion and Paul Tillich’s Dynamics of Faith, fully displays the discrepancies in points of view on the function of faith, as well as the necessity of faith, in society; while the comparison of Viktor E. Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning and Karl Marx’s “on the Future of Religion,” demonstrate both similarities and differences

William James (1897), on the other hand, attempts to define the permissible cases in which it is intellectually respectable to believe without sufficient evidence. James (1897) begins by providing three criterion for judging beliefs: either beliefs are 1) living or dead; 2) forced or avoidable; or 3) momentous or trivial.

In the pages of the bible one can find an early answer to an ancient debate. Jesus appears before Thomas whom had doubted Jesus’s existence and says, “Because you have seen me, have you believed? Blessed are they who do not see, and yet believed.”(John 20:29). Jesus reveres those who were able to accept his existence without proof, while scorning Thomas for his doubt. The struggle between belief and doubt is seen throughout the course of history. The novel A Prayer For Owen Meany by John Irving also attempts to address the battle between these seemingly mutually exclusive principles. The novel centers around a boy named Owen Meany, who believes his future is predetermined for him by God. The protagonist is a man named John Wheelwright, who

In the report, The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel was the main focus of study and discussion on the strongest objections of Christianity, additionally, the book following Lee Strobel as he sought answers intentionally to disprove Christianity. However, there were circumstances which led to him proving the case as to why faith in God is justified. Accordingly, the main task of this report provided answers to the theological objections proposed in the book. Given these points, a conclusion arose on the contents of the book disputing whether the information in the book is valid, as the overall opinions on the book were confirmed.

In science, James declares that our options are for the best part but not momentous, As well as today’s technology, we should do all in our power to let proof guide our choice. Therefore, James does not actually differ with Clifford cases. However, James disagree merely on cases where the intelligence is quiet. James states that “faith in the fact can aid make the fact”. In which the fact in query is something to be wished for, in these case William James believes that faith is clearly sensible. For example, supposing that a person is involved in a significant party-political tussle just like the “civil rights movement” and she/he recognizes from tough experience that tussles of this kind thrive merely if persons have belief that they can and will prosper, no matter what the impartial proof says. In view of this case, James embraces that it is ethically allowable for a person to believe that the tussle will prosper, since this belief makes it more possible that a person will attain something which is greatly

Ethical relativism is not just simply one concept. It can be divided into two categories cultural relativism and ethical subjectivism. Cultural relativism states that what a culture finds correct is what is correct, within its own realm. Ethical subjectivism are what people as individuals find correct, or the values a person stands for and what they support whereas culture relativism is has a certain standard of morality held within a culture or society. These both view people as being in charge of their own morality. However, there are some problems with the view ethical relativism itself. For instance marital rape, machismo in Hispanics culture and premarital sex. In this dissertation I will be discussing problems with ethical relativism, while using the examples above.

This section provides us with two selections from the essays of William K. Clifford (1845-1879) and William James (1842-1910). Clifford's essay, The Ethics of Belief, is based on the concept of evidentialism. This concept 'holds that we should not accept any statement as true unless we have good evidence to support its truth'; (Voices of Wisdom, 346). James wrote his essay, The Will to Believe, as a response to Clifford's essay where he endorsed a philosophy called pragmatism.

As we know many people have a stance on religion just like WK Clifford who has a very strong view about religion, but some do not agree. William James for examples thinks that, Clifford’s principles should be not to be applied to religious beliefs because as he points out moral questions cannot simply be settled by the facts. James argues that we have a right to believe in some cases, when supporting evidence may be lacking. James sees the basic idea of religion as having two parts that the best things are the eternal things, and that you will be better off in the here and now if you believe this. An example of something we almost all believe in without sufficient evidence, is the emotions we feel often every day. The many emotions we feel everyday such as happiness, anger, or even sympathy are very often morally relevant to us. Emotions are not settled by facts we just feel them and for sometimes no reason at all. Like

In life, there is a constant battle ensuing over faith and reason. Those two things are constantly feeding off of each other in someone’s mind when making a decision. Over time in which some say is a great conversation about history this battle is changing. The Great Conversation of history spans over many eras where the questions of faith and reason are always things battling for a spot in our minds, but they shouldn’t be in battle because they are very much dependent on the other. Among the time periods from Ancient Greece, the Enlightenment, and the 19th century, writers such as Socrates, Kant, and Martin Luther King Jr have looked at the issue of faith and reason.

William Clifford argues that we should never “believe anything on insufficient evidence” (Philosophy of Religion, p. 103)1 and if we do decide to believe in God without any evidence it would be considered “wrong,” however, William James’ The Will to Believe essay argues, in response to Cliffords essay, that believing anything without sufficient evidence is “an irrational rule” (James, p. 109)2. James’ essay suggests that there is some level of truth to the fact that no one can decide what it is that you truly believe in because if that were to be true somewhere along the way someone else probably forced those beliefs on you, either directly or indirectly. He suggests that your true beliefs are the ones that you have without any rhyme or reason. James goes to say that it is better to believe in something wholly, even if there is no evidence to prove it because that may be the only way to find your true faith, while Clifford believes that it is safer to believe in nothing until you have clear evidence so you do not have to run the risk of possibly believing in a inauthentic belief.

People have been always interested to know the circumstances under which it is necessary to believe. Believing on facts or not depend by the person. In this paper I look to demonstrate if Is it wrong to hold a belief on insufficient evidence or is it morally right to believe based on the sufficient evidence. In this paper I aim to discuss the other philosopher in contrast with Clifford. My issue is to show what mean to believe and how important is that in our lives. How necessary are the evidence that we have to know for believing on something?

Williams James’s speech The Will to Believe was so intriguing because he presents his case in a way that makes you able to apply his idea in your own life. William James the Harvard professor of physiology, psychology and philosophy was beloved by all his students. He filled the room when he spoke and even those who did not agree with his theories loved to listen to his speeches. William James dedicated 35 years of his life teaching and bringing his theories to life in his speeches and his books. James uses his personnel struggles with depression in his theories making them about how they can help people in everyday life. James use of language and images in his writing and his speeches made people feel involved. William James often changed

Faith and reason were two modes of belief that dominated the history of Western Civilization. Both faith and reason were popularized as tools to understand the universe in Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian eras. By conflicting with each other, these two modes of belief sparked a lot of controversy. Reason or rationality is belief based on concrete evidence and logic. The development of one’s reason relies heavily on observation and questioning. Greco-Roman philosophers believed in the power of the human mind to understand the world. So in order to find ultimate truth, Greco-Roman philosophers dedicated their lives to perfecting their reasoning skills and encouraged those around them to do the same. Contradictory to reason, faith is the

Within the philosophical aspect of belief, credulity is needed for evidence backing a hypothesis, formulating a theory to be accepted scientifically. Perhaps evidence based reasoning is necessary in terms of laws that are broken and to convict the ship-owner. Clifford and James agree in such cases. But “belief” also plays closely with trust, the human capital that allows society to be possible. Trust allows for the most basic economic transactions to occur. Post September eleven, billions of dollars and productive hours have been squandered revamping national security because we cannot trust each other. Clifford undermines human responsibility by using belief in the wrong sense, creating a categorical error. In a moral relational situation where trust-worthiness and responsibility are required, Clifford uses a category of knowledge. It is wrong that he associates faith, a source of morality, with an immoral act. Trust, being a type of social capital, is mostly unconscious. I believe when William James presents his three kinds of decisions living, forced, and momentous, he is also getting at the fact that trust is the social capital that makes life, love, and even thought

This concept differs from James’ characterization of belief. James is a Relativist; therefore, he believes that we will never really know the “truth”. James believes that each individual should think for themselves and do whatever they personally think is right. He believes that religion is something that is a live, forced, and momentous option. Religion is something that will require a leap of faith, but the knowledge process allows for this. James suggests that one should take a leap of faith and then wait and see what happens next and then reevaluate. In the end if everyone does this our quality of life will generally improve and as a group everyone will tend to move toward the