Final Philosophy Cafe of the semester poses questions about beliefs

By RAEGAN NEUFELD Photos by RORY MOORE

Tiger Media Network

Peter Tramel presented the final Philosophy Cafe of the fall semester on Wednesday, posing questions about the ethics of beliefs and whether or not a belief system should be based on sufficient evidence.

Hosted by the Fort Hays State University Philosophy Program, the Philosophy Cafe presentations take place once a month. This semester, they were all at the Paisley Pear, but according to Assistant Professor Rob Byer, the talks may have a different look next semester.

“We’re kind of thinking right now of doing it online so we can get different professors or interested people we know who would do it so we don’t exhaust our department,” he said.

Updates and more information about Philosophy Cafes can be found on the Philosophy Program’s Facebook page.

Tramel, an associate professor in the program, discussed two pieces of literature: “The Ethics of Belief” by William Clifford and “The Will to Believe” by William James. He compared the main principles of each piece, Clifford’s being that it is wrong to form a belief without sufficient evidence and James’ being that faith in a fact can help create the fact.

Clifford’s principle is illustrated in “The Ethics of Belief” by a story about a shipowner who knew his ship was old and needed repairs. People told him it was not seaworthy, but he convinced himself it would make it another journey like it had before. The story ends with the shipowner collecting insurance money after the boat sinks. 

“Clifford’s taking kind of a new position at this time that it can be immoral to believe something,” Tramel said. “We would probably all condemn the shipowner’s negligence in sending the ship. The man acted sincerely according to the example, according to his sincere belief, but he had no right to that belief. So the focus of the immorality is the belief and his forming of it.”

According to Tramel, Clifford’s position later became what philosophers call evidentialism.

Tramel and attendees then discussed what constitutes “sufficient evidence” and the difference between moral values and values based on knowledge.

James’ principle is explained using a mountain climbing example in “The Will to Believe,” which is a response to Clifford. Poses a hypothetical situation in which a mountain climber is trapped and their only way out is to a “terrible” leap. James argues that if they believe they can make it they will, but if they don’t, they will fall.

Tramel compared the example to athletes whose success can partly be attributed to a positive mindset.

“There is a class of cases in which faith in a fact can help create the fact,” he said. 

Confidence can help in other situations, such as dating and social and political causes. 

“In cases where facts and logic can decide definitively one way or another – we can gather evidence, logic and reasons and prove something – (James says) we shouldn’t be messing around with faith in those cases,” Tramel said. “But he thinks there are other cases where faith is not only permissible, but may be required.” 

Attendees debated this idea, the difference between faith creating a reality and a fact and the criticisms of both Clifford’s and James’ principles.

Recordings of past Philosophy Cafes can be found here.

Top