The Ethics of Belief

Abstract
Most people think there are things we ought to believe, and things we ought not to believe, otherwise means-ends rationality wouldn‟t be possible. But are there things that we ought to believe, or ought not to believe, irrespective of our ends? Clifford (1879) and James (1896) have different views about how this question should be answered. Clifford has an absolutist view, that it is always morally wrong for one to believe something upon insufficient evidence or reasoning. James argues that there are special cases in which one is entitled to believe upon insufficient evidence or reasoning. After examining their arguments, I argue for an alternative position, in which we are morally obliged to change our beliefs in response to certain situations we are faced with in our everyday lives. The view that Clifford and I share is that a belief itself (but not only belief itself) can be morally wrong, independently of any wrong actions the belief in question causes. While it could be objected that we have no control over what we believe, and hence can‟t be held morally responsible for our beliefs, I contend that moral realisation causes the necessary change in the morally deficient belief we realise we have. Since Clifford and James both intended their views to be applied to religious belief, I will also discuss one important application for the ideas discussed in this essay, namely the implication these arguments have for religious belief.
Keywords William Clifford  William James  belief
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 29,567
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A Re-Evaluation of Clifford and His Critics.Brian Zamulinski - 2002 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 40 (3):437-457.
Wide-Scope Requirements and the Ethics of Belief.Berit Brogaard - forthcoming - In Jonathan Matheson & Rico Vitz (eds.), The Ethics of Belief.
The Virtues of Belief: Toward a Non-Evidentialist Ethics of Belief-Formation. [REVIEW]Richard Amesbury - 2008 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 63 (1/3):25 - 37.
W.K. Clifford and 'the Ethics of Belief'.Tim Madigan - 2008 - Cambridge Scholars Press.
The Ethics of Belief.Andrew Chignell - 2016 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Ethics of Belief: Conservative Belief Management.Melissa Bergeron - 2006 - Social Epistemology 20 (1):67 – 78.
Can Religious Arguments "Persuade"?Jennifer Faust - 2008 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 63 (1/3):71-86.
William James's "the Will to Believe" and the Ethics of Self-Experimentation.Jennifer Welchman - 2006 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 42 (2):229-241.
Clifford's Principle and James's Options.Richard Feldman - 2006 - Social Epistemology 20 (1):19 – 33.
Added to PP index
2011-04-06

Total downloads
4 ( #652,293 of 2,180,803 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #299,591 of 2,180,803 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums