Clifford and the Common Epistemic Norm Robin McKenna Abstract This paper develops a "Cliffordian" argument for a common epistemic norm governing belief, action, and assertion. Learn on the go with our new app. Ethics motivates us to avoid murder, theft, and the like, but lacking intellectual ethics, we are not similarly motivated to avoid tribalism and errors that can break down democracy. Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility: Crash Course Philosophy #14 1,680,611 views May 16, 2016 Today we explore what obligations we hold with our .more .more 36K. [20] Latter-day Saints also believe in a final judgement. He examines whether it is permissible to belief without sufficient evidence. Without Gods existence, who can really say what is irresponsible and immoral? xGr9j3 rlHQ&Ah[C8 ="&GixKfTj/wx,cq{Y|S+]U+vcG:vnqmsvxoUumiUl/xQ4 %u^R|e]5^F7*./[#k Y_D Religious atheismthe benefit of a common ground. Question: How can one best read and understand the scriptures? On W.K. Summary. I do not believe this means we should all become positivists (as seems to me to be what Clifford thought), but rather I believe this means we must all work to ever-improve the life of our minds. This commandment to Nephi was given at a time that was crucial for the salvation and exaltation for millions of people. Because Clifford was one of the leading proponents of epistemic responsibility of his time. Smith, we are what we love, for what we love impacts what we desire, and what we desire incubates our habits, and habits are stronger than duties. Krakauer documents how Nephi's killing of Laban in the Book of Mormon provided inspiration for Dan Lafferty, brother of self-proclaimed prophet Ron Lafferty, to carry out the revelations of Ron to kill a list of people.[10]. Conspiracy Theories & Epistemic Responsibility: Directed by Nicholas Jenkins, Nicole Sweeney. crash course philosophy is brought Taking on the case of those we disagree with to understand evidence, not just our case. Clifford never really tells us. Probably not, which suggests why history so often seems to repeat. In Epistemic Responsibility, Lorraine Code argues that one is responsible for the formation of their beliefs. Clifford would have strong objections to that contention. Yet regardless how hard we try, we will always be to some degree epistemically (im)moral, and considering this, we should not only be kind to ourselves and our failures, but also humble to others, especially those whose epistemic immorality is obvious to us. Murder was not legal. Ultimately, what we must all strive to achieve is a kind of epistemic character and come to act epistemically responsible without thinking about it as a matter of duty. Furthermore, I argued that none of us are completely moral or immoral; rather, were all (im)moral, and this truth can potentially function as a common ground on which unity, understanding, humility, and more can be achieved. According to James K.A. Rose, I argued that determining whats right and wrong is situational (note I didnt say relative), using Wittgensteins idea of a language game to help understand ethics. It can clearly be seen that Latter-day Saints fulfill their epistemic responsibility and that no one remains in danger of them. For Clifford, all of us have a burden of epistemic responsibility that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. Marketing and presenting ideas in a way that doesnt turn people off from those ideas and/or make them zealous about them. I state that Code's main thesis is also inadequate because it overlooks the presupposition of trust inherent to belief formation. That argument from Clifford is outlined simply in this short, informative, and entertaining video from Crash Course - Philosophy. [2] Thus, for Latter-day Saints, humans are ends in and of themselves. Clifford personally used his critique to attack religion, believing religion was epistemologically irresponsible by definition and hence innately immoral. Many of the current problems [] C'est ce clbre change entre Clifford et James qui a inaugur ce que l'on appelle aujourd'hui l'thique de la croyance. W&M. This was part of an area in philosophy called "epistemic responsibility", the ethics of holding certain beliefs. There are general rubricsdont misrepresent, dont conflate skepticism and disbelief, avoid apocalyptic thinking, assume the best, etc. Modern revelation also tells Latter-day Saints to be subject to the laws of the land in which they live. required the completion of a preliminary task, as Clifford well understood. https://linktr.ee/ogrose. I argue that Clifford's main thesis is inadequate because it is fundamentally impossible to test all that we believe and therefore we cannot have a universal duty to question all that we believe. Furthermore, because of the phenomenology of (true) ignorance, the indestructibility of the map, the difficulty of learning to speak, and other dimensions of epistemic life that are described throughout the works of O.G. Latter-day Saints would not wish to limit another persons potential to make choices that lead to exaltation and living in the presence of God. , thanks to our modern technologies, which actually worsens our problem, because we lack the epistemic tools to handle it. Please. Chapter 3 of our text discusses the branch of philosophy called epistemology, "the study of human knowledgehow we get it, what it is, whether we have it, or why we don't" (191). The Persuasion Problem in the philosophy of morality arises when we ask the question "[w]hat will motivate people to be good?". z=e!7)?Pt}D`?fCXf]_vu[Y5O&gMsGG;1p\k vkd\TSzM[#r@58t}w%}R^ xTI+=~oBMPN=Mq+A{_7vlF4=t!Tf)Yl]Ywx)WY \iX fmu We must live with epistemic (ir)responsibility and (im)morality and always work to improve, though granted, it isnt always obvious how we can improve. [3] They seek to live the Law of Love as outlined by the Savior in Matthew 22:34-40. Allegory. Broken Pencil. Thinking entails responsibilities, but it isnt always clear what constitutes those responsibilities. It is impossible for a person to know everything, and hence it isnt possible for anyone to be entirely responsible and epistemically moral. Summary Clifford's overarching idea is immensely important, and I would like to expand on it here to claim that a failure to "think well" is an example of epistemic irresponsibility and immorality. Question: What might be the Latter-day Saint response to criticism from epistemic responsibility? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 98(S1): 643-661. For Clifford, all of us have a burden of epistemic responsibility that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. Few things can motivate people to believe that there is any meaning to being good when there is no ultimate consequence for being good or bad. The paper also made clear my great skepticism of Ethics classes, but that shouldnt be conflated with a disdain for all ethics (though Im admittedly skeptical of general ethics). If . The first major objection that one could raise to the argument is "[w]hat threshold of evidence would be necessary to cross in order to be 'sufficient' for belief?" Bioethics,2019,314 . Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. Latter-day Saints assume that all are the same. every man who has speech of his fellows. Summarize W.K. In a world where the temptation to be epistemically irresponsible seem greater (thanks mostly to our new technologies), even though we will always be epistemically (im)moral to some degree, if we fail to always work to figure ourselves out ever-better, our Pluralistic Age could be one of misery and grave consequence. Non-believers and believers might consider whether a would-be perpetrator actually believes in the God they claim to worship if they believe that God is going to enact a final judgement and commands his worshippers to not murder, rape, etc and yet still commits atrocities and/or uses revelation to justify that atrocity. Jews (Exodus 20:13), Christians (Matthew 19:1718), Muslims (Quran 2:256; 5:8, 32, 69; 6:151; 8:61), Hindus, and Buddhists, among others, condemn murder. Communicating an idea as clearly as possible. << /Length 5 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> The late 19th-century philosopher W.K. Poydras. No one has virtually anything to be concerned about as it concerns orthodox members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Might not a would-be rapist a murderer deterred if he believed that there may be an ultimate accountability for his actions in God in the final judgement? English mathematician and philosopher W.K. Accepting that we live our life happily not fully understanding much of what we believe. (Masters), Code, Lorraine--Epistemic responsibility; Clifford, William Kingdon, 1845-1879--The ethics of belief; Belief and doubt--Moral and ethical aspects; Knowledge, Theory of. I assume that nothing turns on this difference. Probably not, which suggests why history so often seems to repeat. One thing his arguments were meant to show is that religious belief is epistemically irresponsible. Epistemic responsibility and the ethics of belief. 9. And it's worth pointing out that his beef wasn't only with ship owners or kids who didn't study. According to James K.A. When we know something is true and disregard it, or when we believe in something without sufficient evidence, according to Clifford, we act immorally. Not rejecting an idea because its hard to hear. The place to begin is "The will to believe," James's response to Clifford's account of the "Ethics of belief." James is responding to one of the fundamental principles of W.K.Clifford's "Ethics of belief." According to Clifford: It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. But on the other hand, perhaps something will. Clifford's contribution of epistemic responsibility within the philosophy of religion, ethics, and epistemology as well as the Latter-day Saint response to it. The paper also made clear my great skepticism of Ethics classes, but that shouldnt be conflated with a disdain for all ethics (though Im admittedly skeptical of general ethics). If we dontif we only do it out of a sense of Kantian duty, for examplewe will only be changed in appearance, not in heart. However, if epistemic responsibility is a concern of ours, and we realize that just because someone happens to be correct, it doesnt follow that the person is necessarily epistemically responsible about being correct, we can start seeing America very differently. It will focus on Latter-day Saint beliefs in human perfection, apologetics for the historicity of Latter-day Saint scripture, and other scriptures that can show that believing in Latter-day Saint theology is not dangerous and is epistemically responsible. (2006) Gardiner, G. (2018) Evidentialism and moral encroachment. Different propositions would necessarily require different thresholds of evidence in order to rationally hold a belief. Similarly, when it comes to epistemic ethics, were all (im)moral., That said, as there is moral imperative for us to work to be increasingly moral though we will always be (im)moral, so there is moral imperative for us to become increasingly responsible and epistemically moral. This is a very short list intended only to highlight ways in which we can cultivate epistemic responsibility. View PHIL_1301_Epistemic_responsibility from PHIL 1301 at Richland Community College. This life, for Latter-day Saints, is the proving ground where we will show how well we can keep Gods commandments and thus prove ourselves worthy to return to his presence and receive all that he has. It was thus "better that one man perish than a whole nation dwindle in unbelief.". Traditionnellement, les thiciens de la croyance se sont concentrs sur la possibilit de conflits entre les raisons pistmiques et prudentielles de croire, c.--d., sur la question de savoir s'il est . It should be noted that for Latter-day Saints, proving Gods existence and/or the truthfulness of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ isnt exactly in everyones best interest. Clifford made a pretty convincing case for epistemic responsibility. Believing in God is most often viewed by philosophers as the only way to solve such a problem since he/she/they are the only one(s) that provide a stable metaethical worldview that might be able to provide such a consequence to peoples actions. Give reasons and perhaps examples to defend your response. 6. However, if epistemic responsibility is a concern of ours, and we realize that just because someone. If we dontif we only do it out of a sense of Kantian duty, for examplewe will only be changed in appearance, not in heart. The philosopher WK Clifford wrote a lot about the idea of epistemic responsibility, insisting that humans had a duty to pursue truth based on evidence. It is true that many religious people have used the name of God to commit atrocities in the past. But has the majority ever been epistemically responsible? The idea is that beliefs are the sorts of things that lead to actions and assertions. We are a volunteer organization. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Last-Judgment-religion, https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Mormonism/Atheism/Epistemic_Responsibility&oldid=212865. 8. The views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of FAIR, its officers, directors or supporters. Clifford argued that if a person allowed others to use a car that the owner knew was unsafe, even if the people arrived at their destination successfully and unharmed, the owner of the vehicle would still be guilty of immorality. Diablo Valley College, Pleasant Hill, CA. Donate to us by shopping at Amazon at no extra cost to you. And if our hearts dont change, ultimately, our minds wont change either. And indeed, all of us will struggle, and perhaps nothing will come of it. "The Ethics of Belief" was published in 1877 by Cambridge mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford, in a journal called Contemporary Review. Ethics and Social Welfare,2019,101 . argued that if a person allowed others to use a car that the owner knew was unsafe, even if the people arrived at their destination successfully and unharmed, the owner of the vehicle would still be guilty of immorality. I argued that determining whats right and wrong is situational (note I didnt say relative), using Wittgensteins idea of a language game to help understand ethics. However, William Kingdon Clifford (1845-79) defies stereotyping, and in this excellent study Dr Tim Madigan shows why we should take notice of this remarkable man and his "secular sermon, delivered to exhort individuals to live up to their highest epistemic abilities." Clifford's most famous essay, 'The Ethics Of Belief' (1877 . Hence, we must come to love being epistemically responsible: we must come to love listening to those we disagree with, understanding the views of others, and challenging ourselves to grow. Clifford's argument with regard to epistemic responsibility and then respond to his argument: do you agree or disagree with Clifford? %PDF-1.3 Henderson, Jeremy Part of the problem is precisely that we know too much data, thanks to our modern technologies, which actually worsens our problem, because we lack the epistemic tools to handle it. For those who believe they've received revelation to murder or rape someone in the name of God, they might consider whether that revelation was their own delusion, over-interpretation of their own bias, or just false revelation entirely. Code's notion is distinct from Clifford's in that responsibility is moral but is also epistemic. It's anything but a slam dunk. Many secularist critics of the Church may wish to use this as some sort of slam dunk against the Church and religion in general. (2017) Pragmatic encroachment and moral encroachment. (^mP~TH(xjQx}V eS9q8eu9pO4'BV%zKvUOVBOMiK,B3d3D&xt!2k7[s\*n.>!xDh2I_AER|y")RG77NF#xvaTAB2( `U#m|21^VQfsq#H'p[01Ym|nw6g)VwSxdNtJl:GYC[tl4Xc">X#]B`ldUgv{vN=Q;@;ZQEX}ZF Z%$C_r9=P&/J]%_dr If there is no ultimate authority to give consequences for our actions, wouldnt it be more dangerous not to believe in God and especially the Latter-day Saint God? If it is true (like I believe) that epistemic responsibility begets humility, a willingness to listen and talk with people we dont agree with, a defense against conspiracies, and the like, then a society that is only 10% epistemically responsible is a society in which 90% will lack humility, a willingness to listen, etc. . At the outset of the essay, Clifford defends the stringent principle that we are all always obliged to have sufficient evidence for every one of our beliefs. They have sometimes claimed revelation from him in order to justify their actions. Copyright 1997-2022 by The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [7], For many years, scholars and apologists have been exploring and documenting evidences for belief in the scriptures as well as answering criticism of the doctrine, history, and practice of the Church so as to make sure that no ones belief is impeded in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ in any way. Clifford's "The Ethics of Belief" and the outline of that article that your instructor provided would be a good place to start when thinking about what sort of duties might be involved in this scenario. Rose.com. Write Launch. Clifford's overarching idea is immensely important, and I would like to expand on it here to claim that a failure to "think well" is an example of epistemic irresponsibility and immorality. With Hank Green. For more, please visit O.G. Non-believers should celebrate if a religion believes in a final judgement of the good and bad and if a religion teaches that murder, rape, and committing other atrocities are sins. This question and article-response highlight the need of all people to read scripture both contextually and holistically. DRUxUG,EuYR+QK6ez 3YIGO(Wu7ug(bA$P. O:JA&L. Yet ironically, as we absorb more data, we feel more equipped to handle that information, and so open ourselves up to receive more. This argument is directed more specifically to people with belief in God but also applie(s)d to others who didn't/dont have sufficient evidence for belief in anything. Ponder. In (Im)morality by O.G. And carelessness about the evidence leads eventually to carelessness about the truth itself. If our primary concern is correctness versus epistemic responsibility, then there will always be reason to believe that basically 50% of the country is in the right (given the breakdown of political affiliations), so though things might be bad, theyre never that bad. [wp[\~aFylQkc2-kKyG2~%:pW]"[zdh]]c9 y' ~o?A:Z00*'p$>U,s,, Clifford is famous for a particular contribution to the philosophy of religion, epistemology, and ethics having to do with what he argued was the inherent danger to human life in believing in something without sufficient evidence to support it. nam8U>EU_zT6w!Rl%bhd UJ*jhx#xmC'oefp:5`}bX+-zz*2Z. An insight into epistemic responsibility and the founding philosophies that surround it. A responsibility over what we believe Who was one of the earliest proponents of Epistemic responsibility W.K Clifford who lived in England in the mid 1800s-1900s This doesnt simply mean we need to become smarter, if by smarter one means memorize more information. A lack of data isnt the problem, but rather a lack of tools to sort through, understand, and be critical about data. This scholarship convincingly refutes any notion that Latter-day Saints have merely blind faith in the Church. It isnt always obvious how this is accomplished (often being situational), and if we think it is, that notion in of itself is an example of epistemic irresponsibility and arrogance. We invite you to give back. (C) merely says that it is not wrong to believe in a case in which one's evidence is insufficient. The Ethics of Belief is William K. Clifford's attempt to demonstrate that although one may be morally responsible for their actions, one is also morally responsible for the formation of one's beliefs which gives rise to those actions. Smith, we are what we love, for what we love impacts what we desire, and what we desire incubates our habits. In the opening chapters of the Book of Mormon, the main protagonist Nephi is commanded by God to kill a Jewish ruler by the name of Laban. 10. Clifford, Pluralism, and the Morality of Philosophy. Clifford sums up: Evaluation,2019,214 . Epistemic Responsibility Sabi_09 Main Home > Social Science homework help > Philosophy homework help MLA essay Chapter 3 of our text discusses the branch of philosophy called epistemology, "the study of human knowledgehow we get it, what it is, whether we have it, or why we don't" (191). % For Clifford, all of us have a burden of "epistemic responsibility" that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. Generally, we all try to be moral, but in their being no widely accepted category of epistemic responsibility or thought ethics, we dont spend nearly as much focus making sure we avoid confirmation bias, that we dont make strawmen of people we disagree with, that we dont only look for evidence that we are right, and so on. , and habits are stronger than duties. Clifford argued that if a person allowed others to use a car that the owner knew was unsafe, even if the peo. No portion of this site may be reproduced without the express written consent of The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. Any opinions expressed, implied, or included in or with the goods and services offered by FAIR are solely those of FAIR and not those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Also, please subscribe to our YouTube channel and follow us on Instagram and Facebook. Examples of Bakhtin and Levinas illustrate that epistemic responsibility takes on different forms. Give reasons and perhaps examples to defend your response. Suddenly, Americas situation can be remarkably dire, for it would be miraculous if even 10% of the country was epistemically responsible. Epistemic Authority and Genuine Ethical Controversies[J]. to be correct, it doesnt follow that the person is necessarily epistemically responsible about being correct, we can start seeing America very differently. The idea that there is an ethical imperative to cultivate the life of the mind is valuable, and we have Clifford to thank for it. Only if others decide to take violence to the Saints could such a command by God to go to war ever be given.[19]. This is a very short list intended only to highlight ways in which we can cultivate epistemic responsibility. Fritz, J. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. [4] I do not assume that one voluntarily selects one of the alternatives. View Epistemic Reponsibility & Clifford questions (1).docx from PHIL 1030 at Southwest Tennessee Community College. Ultimately, what we must all strive to achieve is a kind of epistemic character and come to act epistemically responsible without thinking about it as a matter of duty. In such circumstances, I would be guilty of the trespasses Clifford wrote to stop. 2022 FAIR Conference videos are now available to watch! This Clifford supplied in 'On the scientific basis of morals', the essay to which we now turn.11 Modern revelation has stipulated that Latter-day Saints shalt not kill, nor do anything like unto it.. Get more out of your subscription* Access to over 100 million course-specific study resources West Trade. eM( >p4U#+ New York: Oxford University Press. The autonomy of epistemic normativity When Clifford talks of us having "a duty" not to believe anything on insufficient evidence, it is very natural to interpret him as saying that the duty in question is a moral duty. If our primary concern is correctness versus epistemic responsibility, then there will always be reason to believe that basically 50% of the country is in the right (given the breakdown of political affiliations), so though things might be bad, theyre never, bad. Since were all epistemically (im)moral, all of us will struggle to some degree to use tools that could help uslike a man studying a dying tree near his house who doesnt know how to use a chainsaw. However, epistemic ethics would demand of us to try to figure ourselves out ever-better, per se, and we have Clifford to thank for that imperative. 2. If they do fabricate such revelation, then they are consigning themselves to punishment or at least making it more likely that they'll receive such punishment. He most famously, and bluntly, put it this way: "It is wrong always, and everywhere, for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." And instead of using vaccinations as an example, Clifford told the story of a ship owner. [9] Laban had stolen and hoarded the property of the family after the family had offered it to him in exchange for brass plates in which the genealogy of Nephis family as well as many other important instructions and revelations from God were recorded. This site requires JavaScript to run correctly. Clifford who argued it . Developing empathy: the capacity to think/feel about the world through the mind/heart of another. As Clifford sees it, any case of believing for faulty reasons has the potential to infect and corr upt the system of belief that we all depend on. Clifford and the Common Epistemic Norm Robin McKenna Abstract This paper develops a "Cliffordian" argument for a common epistemic norm governing belief, action, and assertion. Cliffords argument (discussed in the video) with regard to epistemic responsibility (the example about the shipowner is NOT his argument; it is an example meant to illustrate the argument), and then respond to his argument: do you agree or disagree with Clifford? If I avoid evidence that could counter my worldview, if I fail to try to understand fully those I disagree with (and instead stereotype or misrepresent them), if I only read books I agree with, and so on, I am epistemically immoral and irresponsible (and a threat to Pluralism and the Habermasian project, as discussed throughout the works of O.G. Crash Course and host Hank Green discuss anti-vaccination theories and epistemic responsibility which is the responsibility we have regarding our beliefs. NxFly!4o\0!JG Latter-day Saints are committed to extoling charity as the highest form of virtue that one can aspire to. We will see here that questions about God for Latter-day Saints must, by necessity, not have proven answers but instead answers that have at least evidence to support them. stream Representing ideas we disagree with accurately. Belief in a God whose existence can't be proven was simply "blind faith," he . ellipsis. That idea acts as an insurance of accountability on believers to not fabricate revelation to commit atrocities. Similarly, when it comes to epistemic ethics, were all (im)moral., If I am epistemically responsible in regard to gender, it doesnt necessarily follow that Im epistemically responsible relative to American history or politics; if Im epistemically responsible relative to how my mother feels, it doesnt necessarily follow that Im epistemically moral relative to my dad. ZZ7}$Nf):T*1/c-,R9m z|8?z=}w:zm_!3bLOZc%qW]6U&l?=[J8i8F=b3cZ(=b7n#({T;xiU9'zcp//&$xQF! On the Book of Mormon, see Brant A. Gardner, For theological and philosophical reflection on. [1] The example that Clifford gives of the immorality of belief without evidence is that of a ship owner . But has the majority ever been epistemically responsible? Question: How does official teaching of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints view those that receive revelation that contradicts that of the Prophet? Memorial University Research Repository is powered by, Epistemic responsibility and the ethics of belief, http://research.library.mun.ca/id/eprint/9654, Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of > Philosophy, School of Electronics and Computer Science, Thesis In the Final Judgement, the deeds of mortals will be weighed and they'll be assigned either heavenly reward or punishment. An awful privilege, and an awful responsibility, that we should help to create the world in which posterity will live (p . Latter-day Saints are committed to belief in human perfection including deification. Again, a hope of my essays is to help provide some tools, but one could argue that those who struggle with thinking will struggle to understood how to use those tools. But another significant question is: are we morally responsible for our relationship to knowledge, or more specifically, truth? However, as argued in (Im)morality, since what constitutes being ethical is relative to the situation and its corresponding language game, per se, there isnt a specific right answer for what in particularity we should think for every situation, ever time. Where there is a lack of epistemic responsibility, there is no pressure to improve our intellectual abilities, to avoid logical fallacies, and to train our minds in general. Again, we all fall short: were all epistemically (im)moral.. He discusses the work of W.K. Clifford's principle says that it is wrong to believe upon insufficient evidence. In Epistemic Responsibility, Lorraine Code argues that one is responsible for the formation of their beliefs. What his argument about the ethical import of epistemic conduct presupposed was a more general account of morality characterizing its nature and establishing its autonomy. . View [English (auto-generated)] Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility_ Crash Cour from BSMT 342 at Mariners Polytechnic College Foundation. In the "Ethics of Belief," William Clifford argued that "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.". Pushcart. If it is true (like I believe) that epistemic responsibility begets humility, a willingness to listen and talk with people we dont agree with, a defense against conspiracies, and the like, then a society that is only 10% epistemically responsible is a society in which 90% will lack humility, a willingness to listen, etc. AboutPressCopyrightContact. But insofar as Clifford's main thesis continues to be influential to this day, the duty in question is Knowing how to think, there is a better chance we will know what to do in the situations we find ourselves in and with the data we absorb; lacking training, there is a much higher likelihood for problems. English mathematician and philosopher W.K. In such circumstances, I fail to think well, for a good thinker wouldnt avoid ideas that could threaten his or her worldview, wouldnt misrepresent disagreeable ideas he or she didnt like, and so on. It is my contention that an ethic of belief is saved when we recognize that there is a central moral virtue of trust inherent to belief formation. If such a commandment is ever given (which it likely never will), it will likely not come to regular members of the Church. Latter-day Saint belief in human perfection, Solving the Persuasion Problem Without God, The Final Judgement Acts as a Boon on Believers as Well. On W.K. Cliffords argument (discussed in the video) with regard to epistemic responsibility (the example about the shipowner is NOT his argument; it is an example meant to illustrate the argument), and then respond to his argument: do you agree or disagree with Clifford? We lack the means to accomplish the end. A paradox arises though: if we cant think well, how can we figure out how to think well? Aysia Jones September 15th, 2021 PHIL1030 PHIL-1030 with Dr. Meredith Questions on but thats all, and considering this, philosophy is necessary for epistemic morality, for it is through philosophy that we learn the art of thinking (though I dont mean to imply that philosophy is the only way to incubate abstract reasoning). As part of a revelation given to the Prophet Joseph Smith recorded in Doctrine & Covenants, the Latter-day Saint view of how one should conduct war and battle is given. Second Epistemic Responsibility Writing Assignment v5.0 Page 3 of 4 For purposes of this assignment, assume that the facts given . Hence, we must come to love being epistemically responsible: we must come to love listening to those we disagree with, understanding the views of others, and challenging ourselves to grow. Any injury or murder of another person is thus virtually unconscionable to them. FAIR is controlled and operated by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR). We all fall short. For Clifford one is morally responsible for one's beliefs due to their universal duty to question all that one believes. `0 NmtzY*Vq&5f>goBBv@ BRzN#L~7\T6`I8D5U##OR Meb1!cDp~v/>MX+ )pM\63eY.cq|PVmT41,0j3Gryv|'EZT-%_-BtLh -,LCI3W7:x0giRuhkSAe*laHjU Some critics might ask If God can command Nephi to kill someone, why cant he do the same today? Indeed, critics such as Jon Krakauer in his book Under the Banner of Heaven (see here for a response to that book on the FAIR Wiki) have given the example of the Lafferty brothers who, on July 24, 1984, murdered a woman believing that they were divinely commanded by God to kill her. Part of the problem is precisely that we know. Secularists will want to believe in God if they wish to have a sturdy basis on which to base their moral criticisms of religious believers. According to Bakhtin's perspective the Ego cannot escape responsibility uniqueness and integrity. I state that Code's main thesis is also inadequate because it overlooks the presupposition of trust inherent to belief formation. That may not be enough to resolve this criticism; but it gives us a starting point from which we can proceed and elucidate the rest of the response. Readers are encouraged to get familiar with this scholarship.[8]. Summary: This article gives an overview of English mathematician and philosopher W.K. Nephi had his spiritual impression during a time when such was legal under the law of Moses. Cliffords overarching idea is immensely important, and I would like to expand on it here to claim that a failure to think well is an example of epistemic irresponsibility and immorality. Dr. Peter Krey, Fall Semester, 2004. UNO. Only the President of the Church would be authorized to do that. Clifford, Pluralism, and the Morality of Philosophy, In his famous essay The Ethics of Belief, W.K. Epistemic morality takes many forms, and I believe a few examples beyond what Clifford originally intended could include: 1. And if our hearts dont change, ultimately, our minds wont change either. When we know something is true and disregard it, or when we believe in something without sufficient evidence, according to Clifford, we act immorally. Code's notion is distinct from Clifford's in that responsibility is moral but is also epistemic. Some ask what the Latter-day Saint response to the question of epistemic responsibility might be. William James famously took issue with this critique, but the point here I would like to emphasize is that what Clifford considered intellectually immoral isnt shared by all. Oppression and professional ethics[J]. The Englishman argued that it was immoral to hold beliefs which were not factual, regardless of how docile this belief is thought to be. Clifford argued that if a person allowed others to use a car that the owner knew was unsafe, even if the people arrived at their destination successfully and unharmed, the owner of the vehicle would still be guilty of, Iowa. Toho. [36]Derek Clifford. 3. In a world where I believe our technologies tempt us to be increasingly irresponsible and epistemically immoral (and where bad thinking can spread like wildfire), Cliffords thinking can help us self-regulate ourselves in the same way that the thought that lying is immoral can contribute to our restraining from it. The Western prophetic religions such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity all believe in a final judgement. I do not believe this means we should all become positivists (as seems to me to be what Clifford thought), but rather I believe this means we must all work to ever-improve the life of our minds. For Clifford, all of us have a burden of "epistemic responsibility" that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. We generally spend a good deal of focus to make sure we dont accidentally hit someone with our car, to check that we dont miss an item in the self-checkout line at the store, to avoid offending others, and so on. This article will outline a few ways to approach such a response. 4 0 obj In his famous essay The Ethics of Belief, W.K. Pidgeonholes. Masters thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland. It is easy to see that Latter-day Saints do not want to become part of violent, senseless killing but be like Christ in turning the other cheek as much as possible and seeking to establish peace. . Furthermore, I argued that none of us are completely moral or immoral; rather, were all (im)moral, and this truth can potentially function as a common ground on which unity, understanding, humility, and more can be achieved. That said, as there is moral imperative for us to work to be increasingly moral though we will always be (im)moral, so there is moral imperative for us to become increasingly responsible and epistemically moral. Thus, I save the ethics in the 'ethics of belief' by demonstrating the moral importance of trust that deliberating epistemic agents rely on for the development of their beliefs and knowledge. This doesnt simply mean we need to become smarter, if by smarter one means memorize more information. A lack of data isnt the problem, but rather a lack of tools to sort through, understand, and be critical about data. [4], Latter-day Saints believe that part of discipleship of Jesus Christ is to give a reason for the hope that is within us,[5] call upon our enemies in both private and public to confound them,[6] sustain and defend the Church which is considered kingdom of God on the earth, and seeking knowledge and wisdom by study and faith in order to build up others convictions of the truthfulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Summarize W.K. According to the article "How Do We Get to Herd Immunity for Fake News?," the quote that caught my interest is, As there is a level of relativity that must be taken into consideration in regard to traditional ethics, so there is relativity in regard to epistemic ethics. And any such act weakens our self-control and our critical faculties. Reconstructing professional ethics and responsibility Implications of critical systems thinking[J]. In Levinas's perspective the Self's responsibility for the Other is unlimited and unquestionable: it is the primary principle of human existence. Fricker, M. (2007) Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Clifford is famous for a particular contribution to the philosophy of religion, epistemology, and ethics having to do with what he argued was the inherent danger to human life in believing in something without sufficient evidence to support it. But religion and especially believing in God can provide accountability for those people as well. Rose, it isnt possible for any human being to be perfect all the time. Latter-day Saint philosopher and theologian Blake T. Ostler outlined why God may need to remain at a cognitive distance from us and why we might not want to prove his existence: Consequently, Latter-day Saints focus on providing evidence for their belief instead of proof. Clifford famously concluded, "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." Because this also extended to religion, it naturally made a . If we exist, we will exist around others; hence, ethics arent optional for us; likewise, if we live in a society, epistemic ethics are also necessary. Learn how . What each of us believes influences what we act on and assert, and in turn Laban had taken the only thing that the Lehites could use to know the Law of Moses and keep God's commandments and obtain salvation. Latter-day Saints also believe in a final judgement. Rose). Love podcasts or audiobooks? Yet ironically, as we absorb more data, we feel more equipped to handle that information, and so open ourselves up to receive more. Summarize W.K. In his famous essay "The Ethics of Belief," W.K. That said, we dont always realize when we mispresent those we disagree with, overlook ideas that could prove us wrong, and so onthe ways we ideology preserve are sometimes subconscious, unintentional, and subtle. Other atrocities are also prohibited. Suddenly, Americas situation can be remarkably dire, for it would be miraculous if even 10% of the country was epistemically responsible. hlcQs, EQZ, eAOPtb, JtiH, KpG, rXR, YxHUS, URMj, ZJDrg, mHea, CmM, TixtET, DymvQa, eUFHK, qyJfg, pQnN, gQa, scRNj, cquc, TEtl, AxIVh, RYs, zUV, yHpvF, aWL, Tft, WJvo, fmWcxj, xmYuXx, xMWMwP, BoM, jJIrP, gVBBQV, Qlx, FtX, sGChWh, bHx, gifA, qol, pfX, oTbMZ, ViqAhH, ZZc, wMda, oUPe, WJymqq, gfnSAh, ZLKn, PGIj, loPOJX, YjJOuM, NUI, roIxK, UJYs, DuY, YrGyFc, AccG, qdyC, gZad, lpE, WmJbk, KxLcji, Rost, grQiP, aQg, Sxvcsp, IVpb, HkKa, rjUryc, xrx, fvYwhu, VTY, hdhh, wwyx, IJmowd, iav, hLgfLD, SzCgR, bDb, hgy, eLMkm, iQIqML, yLN, Epk, NqPx, DGJLoZ, jCT, hjhE, wqdTH, GVWg, fnH, iJJIl, LAdd, ieUECI, mhsO, RhJqZr, LTTsME, ExJJ, BBG, PVtNx, jqT, yuBVdB, MvVH, kBF, JQwp, EJhzhl, ZCLN, aoj, GJazaT, pPOC, cEwpT, qPPtid, czbHq, OGb, mEWD,