Belief S Own Ethics

The fundamental question of the ethics of belief is "What ought one to believe?" According to the traditional view of evidentialism, the strength of one's beliefs should be proportionate to the evidence. Conventional ways of defending and challenging evidentialism rely on the idea that what one ought to believe is a matter of what it is rational, prudent, ethical, or personally fulfilling to believe. Common to all these approaches is that they look outside of belief itself to determine what one ought to believe. In this book Jonathan Adler offers a strengthened version of evidentialism, arguing that the ethics of belief should be rooted in the concept of belief—that evidentialism is belief's own ethics. A key observation is that it is not merely that one ought not, but that one cannot, believe, for example, that the number of stars is even. The "cannot" represents a conceptual barrier, not just an inability. Therefore belief in defiance of one's evidence (or evidentialism) is impossible. Adler addresses such questions as irrational beliefs, reasonableness, control over beliefs, and whether justifying beliefs requires a foundation. Although he treats the ethics of belief as a central topic in epistemology, his ideas also bear on rationality, argument and pragmatics, philosophy of religion, ethics, and social cognitive psychology.

This book combines the two essays which comprise the famous philosophical exchange between the mathematician William Kingdon Clifford and William James, a psychologist and philosopher. Famous for articulating their arguments and discussing morality surrounding belief, these two papers are united in a single edition.

A new approach to the ethics of belief (what one ought to believe) based on the concept of belief itself rather than on the rationality of one’s beliefs.

What we believe and what we do not believe has a great impact on what we do and fail to do. Hence, if we want to act responsibly, we should believe responsibly. However, do we have the kind of control over our beliefs that such responsibility for our beliefs seems to require? Do we have certain obligations to control or influence our beliefs on particular occasions? And do we sometimes believe responsibly despite violating such obligations, namely because we are excused by, say, indoctrination or ignorance? By answering each of these questions, Rik Peels provides a theory of what it is to believe responsibly. He argues that we lack control over our beliefs, but that we can nonetheless influence our beliefs by performing actions that make a difference to what we believe. We have a wide variety of moral, prudential, and epistemic obligations to perform such belief-influencing actions. We can be held responsible for our beliefs in virtue of such influence on our beliefs. Sometimes, we believe responsibly despite having violated such obligations, namely if we are excused, by force, ignorance, or luck. A careful consideration of these excuses teaches us, respectively, that responsible belief entails that we could have failed to have that belief, that responsible belief is in a specific sense radically subjective, and that responsible belief is compatible with its being a matter of luck that we hold that belief.

Do you think of atheists as immoral pessimists who live their lives without meaning, purpose, or values? Think again! Atheism: A Very Short Introduction sets out to dispel the myths that surround atheism and show how a life without religious belief can be positive, meaningful, and moral.

Eugene Thomas Long Originally published in the International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Volume 63, Nos 1–3. DOI: 10. 1007/s11153-007-9155-4 © Springer Science+Business Media B. V. 2007 This volume is presented as a tribute to the life and work of D. Z. Phillips. Six of the articles were originally presented at the annual conference on the philosophy of religion organized by Phillips and held at Claremont Graduate University, February 9–10, 2007. Unfortunately, Phillipsdidnotlivetoparticipateintheconferenceitself. HediedunexpectedlyJuly25,2006 in the library of his beloved University of Wales, Swansea. Previously published volumes of essays,basedonconferencesorganizedbyPhillipsinClaremont,includedachapterentitled, “Voices in Discussion,” in which Phillips provided his own reactions to the discussions wr- ten almost immediately after the conference. Sadly, this volume appears without the addition of his voice. Born in Morriston, near Swansea, Phillips was a Welsh speaker, a strong supporter of Welsh speaking schools and the author of many works in philosophy and literature in Welsh and English. Known widely as the leading representative of the movement in the philo- phy of religion called Wittgensteinianism, Phillips spent much of his effort challenging the tendency of philosophers to elevate one kind of discourse to the point where it becomes the norm by which other forms of discourse are to be judged.