William K. Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief” is an essay about justification and how we are morally required to prove our beliefs. Clifford’s theory throughout the essay was “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” Clifford thinks that it is a moral obligation for you to confirm each of your beliefs with sufficient proof, no matter how questionable or insignificant the beliefs may be. I believe he thinks this because beliefs have serious effects and consequences on others. Clifford’s views are clear when he presents his two examples, a ship owner and about an island. He begins his essay with the story of a ship-owner doubting the safety of his ship, but he convinces himself that the ship is intact. He does this by rationalizing his thoughts by claiming that the ship “had [has] gone through so many …show more content…
I agree with Clifford and his statement which expresses the fact that you need proof to believe in your beliefs. In life there are thousands of things to believe in. For example, the statement "I won’t die tomorrow". Just because I said it, doesn’t make it true. I would need concrete evidence to prove it. Clifford believes you need enough evidence to believe in something because belief is a false sense of hope that causes doubtful actions which could cause a spiral of projected situations that can lead to either good or bad outcomes. These outcomes could have officially been avoided if such “belief” never existed and the first projection was actually proved. I believe he is right because without solid evidence, a belief could cause a domino effect of situations which could easily been avoided. It is just unreasonable to have a belief and not have confirmation to back it up. Obviously it would require some serious energy to really evaluate these cases, but in the end of the day you will have
Eric Schlosser - Fat Food Nation Eric Schlosser begins "Global Realization" with a visit to Plauen, which he writes, "has been alternately punished, rewarded, devastated, and transformed by the great unifying system of the twentieth century... Plauen has been a battlefield for these competing ideologies, with their proudly displayed and archetypal symbols: the smokestack, the swastika, the hammer and sickle, the golden arches. " What are the "competeing ideologies" to which Schlosser refers? What do the "archetypal symbols" he mentions represent? Each person learns to develop their own distinct set of beliefs based on the fact that they have their own subjective reality.
Ronald White, a professor at the college of St. Joseph in Cincinnati wrote a writing piece Moral Inquiry to explained his logical reasons about ethical decision making. White also observed and talked about the Markkula framework opinions about human behavior. Not only did he explain the logic of these theories, but he also revealed some examples to his audience. Throughout the different writing pieces that were displayed, White used three theories to support his main theories; teleological theories, deontological theories, and virtue-based system theories. Each of these theories consist of the act of human behavior.
Christy Marshall stated" To believe something I have to see it myself". This quote means tat Christy Marshall wouldn't believe something until she see's it. You have to see it yourself to know its the truth. You get to see what you thought wasn't true. I strongly agree with Christy Marshall because I have to see something before i can really believe you.
The power of belief shapes events into hardline certainties and creates situations where opinions will define the term success. In John Patrick Shanley’s story Doubt: A Parable, Sister Aloysius forms doubts about Father Flynn’s actions and diligently tries to expose Father Flynn based off of negligible evidence. A Catholic school in the Bronx is stuck at the crossroads as a rigid disciplinarian nun and the liberal parish priest share different views pertaining not only to their religion. The principal, Sister Aloysius, accuses Father Flynn of having inappropriate relations with the school’s first black student. She goes on a personal crusade to expunge Father Flynn from St. Nicholas without a fragment of validation expect her moral certitude.
Mackie’s Arguments Against Ethical Objectivism According to the book The Fundamentals of Ethics, it is stated that ethical objectivism “is the view that moral standards are objectively correct and that some moral claims are objectively true” (Shafer-Landau, p. 294). It is the belief that each individual or person has their own set of moral principles. J.L Mackie explains two arguments against ethical objectivism, which include the argument from relativity and the argument from queerness. In addition he explains and defends his error theory.
In Julie Beck’s informative article, “This Article Won 't Change Your Mind,” she explores and challenges the phenomenon that belief and choices are often influenced by a person’s moral characteristics and their environment. Beck first uses a short anecdote explaining how people often chooses to only believe the things that they want to believe. If a subject matter is too uncomfortable to discuss, people often become dismissive and choose not to acknowledge the unbearable truth. Beck then continues to pursue her argument by applying reliable studies in order to strengthen the ethicality of her beliefs. She uses sources such as T Leon Festinger’s study and Stanley Schachter’s book, When Prophecy Fails, in order to imbed undeniable facts into
The bible informs us that faith is the thing we wish for. We do not need a good reason to believe in something we cannot see. Reason is an essential tool that God provides us with to make conclusions and readings from his word. It is an important to defend our faith.
Under these options, one is free to follow his/her passionate nature and believe whatever one would like to believe. Concerning the existence of God, James thinks that belief in God’s existence is a valuable sort of
In the 1963 philosophy paper titled “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, Edmund Gettier attempts to deconstruct and disprove the philosophical argument that justified true belief is knowledge. Justified true belief, also commonly referred to as JTB, is used as a certain set of conditions that are used to explain someone s knowing some sort of proposition p. More specifically, JTB is used to say that s has knowledge of p if and only if p is true, s believes that p is true, and s is justified in believing that p is true. Gettier offers main points as the conclusion of his argument against this claim. First, he states that s can be justified in believing that p is true while p is actually false.
Argument Against the Argument of Pascal’s Wager In Pascal’s Wager, Pascal pioneered new thoughts and opinions amongst his peers in probability theories by attempting to justify that believing in God is advantageous to one’s personal interest. In this paper, I will argue that Pascal’s argument rationalizing why one should believe in God fails and I will suggest that even if one was to accept Pascal’s wager theory, this will not be a suffice resolution to reap the rewards that God has promised to Christian believers like myself who has chosen to believe in God due to my early childhood teachings, familial and inherited beliefs. Pascal offers a logical reason for believing in God: just as the hypothesis that God's existence is improbable, the
In Lara Buchak’s essay, Can It Be Rational to Have Faith? , she asserts that everyday faith statements and religious faith statements share the same attributes. She later states that in order to truly have faith, a person ceases to search for more evidence for their claim, and that having faith can be rational. Although she makes compelling arguments in favor of faith in God, this essay is more hearsay and assumption than actual fact. In this paper, you will see that looking for further evidence would constitute not having faith, but that having faith, at least in the religious sense, is irrational.
Some feel very strongly about what they know to be certain. Some feel certain about religion, others about love. In Oscar Wilde’s book The Picture of Dorian Gray a character, Lord Henry Wotton, says this, : “The things one feels absolutely certain about are never true. That is the fatality of Faith, and the lesson of romance” (181). The truth one knows does not always prove to be certain.
By choosing the believing game,I was able to overcome this struggle and was given a deeper understanding on how to deal with future issues. In order to examine how the believing game can bring a positive outcome compared to the doubting game, Elbow’s essay needs to be examined. My personal experience will be shared, and I will discuss why believing had a positive impact and left me with a deeper understanding. Throughout Elbow ’s essay, the reader is given the definition and rules for each of the two games, being believing and doubting.
Whately adopted the conservative position that there is a presumption in favor of prevailing opinions in existing institutions, like the Church. The reasons why he adopted this conservative attitude may not be entirely clear, but his account of the connection between burden of proof and presumption is clear. According to his account, the burden of proof is initially placed on one side or the other at the outset of an argument. This initial placement has an effect on subsequent argumentation. The party who bears this burden has the responsibility