The Ethics Of Belief

by A.J. Burger (Editor), William James

The classic discussion between William Kingdon Clifford (The Ethics of Belief) and William James (The Will to Believe), with added explanatory footnotes, and further commentary by A.J. Burger (An Examination of "The Will to Believe"). Never before have these essays appeared together in their complete and unabridged forms, with added footnotes, in an inexpensive edition. The recent essay by A.J. Burger, published for the first time, provides a thorough and unflinching examination of James' The Will to Believe. "People have long been interested in the circumstances under which it is appropriate to believe. Often, the source of this interest is the desire to believe something for which one has insufficient evidence. Extensive excerpts ... are often reprinted in anthologies. This is sufficient proof of the enduring interest in this subject, and of the importance of these particular essays." -from the Preface

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Nonfiction

112 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 2001

Reviews

[Kristofer Carlson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fascinating enigma of a book that highlights the modern problem of how we can know what is true and what is false, and whether truth ultimately exists. The original essay by William Kingdon Clifford is a thinly-veiled attack on the Christians who opposed Darwin's theory of evolution. Clifford's thesis is as follows: "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." The argument is against a false understanding of faith, which is often defined (explicitly so in the later essay by A.J. Burger) as belief in the absence of evidence. The essay by William James answers Clifford by pointing out that their are different standards of truth in different domains. For example, morality is not subject to scientific enquiry. We can use the tools of science to make and test various hypothesis about morality, but the domain of morality is outside the realm of science. The standard for truth is much different in the realm of law than it is for science. Many times the tools of science are used inappropriately to determine guilt and innocence, even though the standards of truth and falsehood are quite different from those of guilt and innocence. A.J. Burger response to William James by pointing out relatively minor errors in his argument, then treating those as though they disprove James' thesis. Ultimately, none of the essays really answers the question. Clifford is correct in saying that belief in the absence of evidence is wrong. James is correct in stating that different domains have different standards of evidence. Burger is incorrect in defining faith as belief without evidence. The Bible states: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Heb 11:1) When viewed from the outside, it may appear that religious faith has no evidentiary basis; when viewed from the inside, faith is an evidence-based system of belief. The real problem in Clifford's time is that religious leaders were treating the Bible as if it were a scientific document and treating the creation accounts as if they were stating scientific facts. Sadly, this is something many religious leaders do today, which is why Churches are closing across the western world.

[Brian Gee · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the most important piece of writing that most people haven't read. One could argue that our present circumstances of living in a post-truth world could be entirely attributed to us missing out on the importance of this 1879 essay. To attempt to rectify that matter I'll include here some of my favourite quotes:

"It is the sense of power attached to a sense of knowledge that makes men desirous of believing, and afraid of doubting. This sense of power is the highest and best of pleasures when the belief on which it is founded is a true belief, and has been fairly earned by investigation. For then we may feel that it is common property, and holds good for others as well as for ourselves. But if the belief has been accepted on insufficient evidence, the pleasure is a stolen one. Not only does it deceive ourselves by giving us a sense of power which we do not really possess, but it is sinful, because it is stolen in defiance of our duty to mankind. That duty is to guard ourselves from such beliefs as from a pestilence, which may shortly master our own body and then spread to the rest of the town. What would be thought of one who, for the sake of a sweet fruit, should deliberately run the risk of bringing a plague upon his family and neighbours?"

"No real belief, however trifling and fragmentary it may seem, is ever truly insignificant; it prepares us to receive more of its like, confirms those which resembled it before, and weakens others; and so gradually it lays a stealthy train to our inmost thoughts, which may some day explode into overt action, and leave its stamp upon our character for ever."

"We all suffer severely enough from the maintenance and support of false beliefs and the fatally wrong actions which they lead to, and the evil born when one such belief is entertained is great and wide. But a greater and wider evil arises when the credulous character is maintained and supported, when a habit of believing for unworthy reasons is fostered and made permanent."

[Ross · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.