Beyond Evidence Reading One William

¶ … Beyond Evidence

Reading One

William Clifford's epistemological position is evidentialism. Evidentialism states that a person must have evidence to support what he or she believes to be true. Evidence must support all beliefs, whether they be matters of every day life or matters of morality and religion. Clifford states that practical standards are not enough to support beliefs. For instance, it is not enough to believe that my alarm clock will go off in the morning because it has every other morning since I got it. Instead, I must have proof, or evidence, that the alarm clock will sound. The moral component of William Clifford's position has to do with the assignation of blame. If a person cannot believe something to be true unless that person has evidence that supports that belief, then the person can be blamed if a belief that is not backed up with evidence proves faulty. In other words, if a person believes that his house will not catch on fire, but has no evidence to prove otherwise, than if the house does catch on fire and kills the occupants, the person who had no evidence is to blame. Furthermore, James goes so far as to suggest that even if the house does not burn down, the owner is guilty of putting the lives of its inhabitants at risk.

William James' epistemological position, on the other hand, is called pragmatism. This position is based on the "pragmatic theory of truth," which holds that a proposition can only be true of the belief that that proposition is true works. This epistemological position is a bit more difficult to understand because people often have different ideas of how something works, but James suggested that a belief "works" if it is useful, verifiable, and exist in reality. He used a host of other terms to define what it means that a proposition works, but these are the primary. Furthermore, James said that propositions can only be true if they mesh with what a person already believes to be true. For instance, a person cannot believe that she is both twenty-seven and thirty-two. These beliefs do not mesh. In order for a person to believe that she is twenty-seven, she must not believe that she is any other age.

Reading Two

In his essay, "The Ethics of Belief," William Clifford uses illustrations or parables to describe why his epistemological view of belief is true. Through the use of these illustrations, he makes it easier for readers to grasp his ideas than if he were to use abstract language and generalizations. His thesis, though can be found at the end of the piece: "...It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence" (Clifford 280).

Clifford supports his thesis by telling two stories. In the first, he discusses a man who has doubts that his ships is sea worthy, but assumes that it will make the journey because it has done so many times in the past. After the men die at sea because of the poor construction of the ship, Clifford argues that the ship owner is to blame for their deaths. If the ship does not sink and no men die, however, Clifford's position is that the owner is no less guilty. Instead, a wrong has been committed in simply believing that the ship will be sound with no evidence. In the second story, Clifford suggests that some people of power sincerely believe that others are abusing their power in a horrendous way. Because of this, these people make many publications and accusations regarding those who are believed to be abusing their power. Whether these people are found guilty or innocent, though, is not the matter. Since the people who accused them did so before a formal investigation was had, and before evidence was had, they are wrong, whether they have done a public service or not. Thus, Clifford's thesis is that it is always wrong for anyone to believe without evidence. He supports this thesis by two easy to understand stories or parables.

Reading Three