Abstract
‘Evidentialism’ is the conventional name (given mainly by its opponents) for the view that there is a moral duty to proportion one’s beliefs to evidence, proof or other epistemic justifications for belief. This essay defends evidentialism against objections based on the alleged involuntariness of belief, on the claim that evidentialism assumes a doubtful epistemology, that epistemically unsupported beliefs can be beneficial, that there are significant classes of exceptions to the evidentialist principle, and other shabby evasions and alibis (as I take them to be) for disregarding the duty to believe according to the evidence. Evidentialism is also supported by arguments based on both self-regarding and other-regarding considerations.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Argyle M. (1958) Religious behavior. Routledge, London
Blix H. (2004). Disarming Iraq. Pantheon Books, New York
Clarke R.A. (2004). Against all enemies: The White House’s war on terror—what really happened. Free Press, New York
Clifford W.K. (1999) The ethics of belief. Prometheus Books, New York
Hume D. (1970) Dialogues concerning natural religion, XII. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis
McDermott J. eds. (1967) The writings of William James. Random House, New York
Mill J.S. (1979) Utilitarianism. Hackett, Indianapolis
Singer P. (2004) The president of good and evil. Dutton Books, New York
Taylor S.E., Brown J.D. (1988) Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin 103(2): 193–210
Thoresen C.E., Miller W.R. (2003) Spirituality, religion and health. American Psychologist 58(1): 24–35
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wood, A. The duty to believe according to the evidence. Int J Philos Relig 63, 7–24 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-007-9140-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-007-9140-y