Without Gods existence, who can really say what is irresponsible and immoral? 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. Latter-day Saint belief in human perfection, Solving the Persuasion Problem Without God, The Final Judgement Acts as a Boon on Believers as Well. Ponder. [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. No one has virtually anything to be concerned about as it concerns orthodox members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If such a commandment is ever given (which it likely never will), it will likely not come to regular members of the Church. But has the majority ever been epistemically responsible? Because Clifford was one of the leading proponents of epistemic responsibility of his time. On W.K. 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. Bioethics,2019,314 . 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. Belief in a God whose existence can't be proven was simply "blind faith," he . Summarize W.K. 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. 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. 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. 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?" stream We are a volunteer organization. But religion and especially believing in God can provide accountability for those people as well. Fricker, M. (2007) Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. View Epistemic Reponsibility & Clifford questions (1).docx from PHIL 1030 at Southwest Tennessee Community College. For Clifford, all of us have a burden of epistemic responsibility that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. Second Epistemic Responsibility Writing Assignment v5.0 Page 3 of 4 For purposes of this assignment, assume that the facts given . Broken Pencil. Rose, it isnt possible for any human being to be perfect all the time. 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. Murder was not legal. English mathematician and philosopher W.K. 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. 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. 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. Latter-day Saints assume that all are the same. (Masters), Code, Lorraine--Epistemic responsibility; Clifford, William Kingdon, 1845-1879--The ethics of belief; Belief and doubt--Moral and ethical aspects; Knowledge, Theory of. 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. Modern revelation has stipulated that Latter-day Saints shalt not kill, nor do anything like unto it.. UNO. 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. Pushcart. 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. The idea is that beliefs are the sorts of things that lead to actions and assertions. 9. In his famous essay The Ethics of Belief, W.K. 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 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. 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. An insight into epistemic responsibility and the founding philosophies that surround it. For Clifford, all of us have a burden of "epistemic responsibility" that we must bear well; otherwise, we fail to live the moral life. 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. 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 . We lack the means to accomplish the end. I state that Code's main thesis is also inadequate because it overlooks the presupposition of trust inherent to belief formation. Yet ironically, as we absorb more data, we feel more equipped to handle that information, and so open ourselves up to receive more. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. This is a very short list intended only to highlight ways in which we can cultivate epistemic responsibility. 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. 2022 FAIR Conference videos are now available to watch! He discusses the work of W.K. This article will outline a few ways to approach such a response. Question: How can one best read and understand the scriptures? 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. % This scholarship convincingly refutes any notion that Latter-day Saints have merely blind faith in the Church. In Epistemic Responsibility, Lorraine Code argues that one is responsible for the formation of their beliefs. Summary. Rose.com. 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 . Latter-day Saints are committed to extoling charity as the highest form of virtue that one can aspire to. 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. 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. (2006) 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]. [4] I do not assume that one voluntarily selects one of the alternatives. [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. [36]Derek Clifford. Epistemic responsibility and the ethics of belief. AboutPressCopyrightContact. every man who has speech of his fellows. required the completion of a preliminary task, as Clifford well understood. eM( >p4U#+ One thing his arguments were meant to show is that religious belief is epistemically irresponsible. . %PDF-1.3 (2017) Pragmatic encroachment and moral encroachment. Some ask what the Latter-day Saint response to the question of epistemic responsibility might be. If . And if our hearts dont change, ultimately, our minds wont change either. I assume that nothing turns on this difference. 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. 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. [wp[\~aFylQkc2-kKyG2~%:pW]"[zdh]]c9 y' ~o?A:Z00*'p$>U,s,, An awful privilege, and an awful responsibility, that we should help to create the world in which posterity will live (p . The late 19th-century philosopher W.K. Probably not, which suggests why history so often seems to repeat. << /Length 5 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> 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. In such circumstances, I would be guilty of the trespasses Clifford wrote to stop. 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 Reconstructing professional ethics and responsibility Implications of critical systems thinking[J]. [20] Latter-day Saints also believe in a final judgement. When we know something is true and disregard it, or when we believe in something without sufficient evidence, according to Clifford, we act immorally. Clifford, Pluralism, and the Morality of Philosophy, In his famous essay The Ethics of Belief, W.K. According to Bakhtin's perspective the Ego cannot escape responsibility uniqueness and integrity. Part of the problem is precisely that we know. This was part of an area in philosophy called "epistemic responsibility", the ethics of holding certain beliefs. Religious atheismthe benefit of a common ground. Taking on the case of those we disagree with to understand evidence, not just our case. Clifford personally used his critique to attack religion, believing religion was epistemologically irresponsible by definition and hence innately immoral. On W.K. Communicating an idea as clearly as possible. Masters thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland. Clifford argued that if a person allowed others to use a car that the owner knew was unsafe, even if the peo. Give reasons and perhaps examples to defend your response. Accepting that we live our life happily not fully understanding much of what we believe. West Trade. 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. (C) merely says that it is not wrong to believe in a case in which one's evidence is insufficient. Many secularist critics of the Church may wish to use this as some sort of slam dunk against the Church and religion in general. And indeed, all of us will struggle, and perhaps nothing will come of it. This commandment to Nephi was given at a time that was crucial for the salvation and exaltation for millions of people. Different propositions would necessarily require different thresholds of evidence in order to rationally hold a belief. Thinking entails responsibilities, but it isnt always clear what constitutes those responsibilities. 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? Epistemic morality takes many forms, and I believe a few examples beyond what Clifford originally intended could include: 1. Suddenly, Americas situation can be remarkably dire, for it would be miraculous if even 10% of the country was epistemically responsible. Diablo Valley College, Pleasant Hill, CA. 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. Summarize W.K. 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. But has the majority ever been epistemically responsible? Modern revelation also tells Latter-day Saints to be subject to the laws of the land in which they live. Clifford who argued it . 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. "The Ethics of Belief" was published in 1877 by Cambridge mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford, in a journal called Contemporary Review. 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. He examines whether it is permissible to belief without sufficient evidence. In his famous essay "The Ethics of Belief," W.K. `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 It's anything but a slam dunk. 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. Code's notion is distinct from Clifford's in that responsibility is moral but is also epistemic. 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. Poydras. 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 . Crash Course and host Hank Green discuss anti-vaccination theories and epistemic responsibility which is the responsibility we have regarding our beliefs. 2. C'est ce clbre change entre Clifford et James qui a inaugur ce que l'on appelle aujourd'hui l'thique de la croyance. Write Launch. Fritz, J. Evaluation,2019,214 . Smith, we are what we love, for what we love impacts what we desire, and what we desire incubates our habits. Clifford never really tells us. It was thus "better that one man perish than a whole nation dwindle in unbelief.". NxFly!4o\0!JG [3] They seek to live the Law of Love as outlined by the Savior in Matthew 22:34-40. Clifford, Pluralism, and the Morality of Philosophy. 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. 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). 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. 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. Many of the current problems [] Toho. 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. 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). 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. DRUxUG,EuYR+QK6ez 3YIGO(Wu7ug(bA$P. 4 0 obj Also, please subscribe to our YouTube channel and follow us on Instagram and Facebook. 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. Ethics and Social Welfare,2019,101 . https://linktr.ee/ogrose. This is a very short list intended only to highlight ways in which we can cultivate epistemic responsibility. Z%$C_r9=P&/J]%_dr What his argument about the ethical import of epistemic conduct presupposed was a more general account of morality characterizing its nature and establishing its autonomy. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Last-Judgment-religion, https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Mormonism/Atheism/Epistemic_Responsibility&oldid=212865. ZZ7}$Nf):T*1/c-,R9m z|8?z=}w:zm_!3bLOZc%qW]6U&l?=[J8i8F=b3cZ(=b7n#({T;xiU9'zcp//&$xQF! Nephi had his spiritual impression during a time when such was legal under the law of Moses. Developing empathy: the capacity to think/feel about the world through the mind/heart of another. 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. Give reasons and perhaps examples to defend your response. Epistemic Authority and Genuine Ethical Controversies[J]. 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. 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. 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. Clifford's principle says that it is wrong to believe upon insufficient evidence. 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. But on the other hand, perhaps something will. Suddenly, Americas situation can be remarkably dire, for it would be miraculous if even 10% of the country was epistemically responsible. Other atrocities are also prohibited. Latter-day Saints also believe in a final judgement. 8. For Clifford one is morally responsible for one's beliefs due to their universal duty to question all that one believes. Yet ironically, as we absorb more data, we feel more equipped to handle that information, and so open ourselves up to receive more. 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. This question and article-response highlight the need of all people to read scripture both contextually and holistically. Please. In Epistemic Responsibility, Lorraine Code argues that one is responsible for the formation of their beliefs. 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. 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. 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. 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. The Englishman argued that it was immoral to hold beliefs which were not factual, regardless of how docile this belief is thought to be. 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. In the "Ethics of Belief," William Clifford argued that "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.". 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. Readers are encouraged to get familiar with this scholarship.[8]. I state that Code's main thesis is also inadequate because it overlooks the presupposition of trust inherent to belief formation. New York: Oxford University Press. 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. 6. 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. [2] Thus, for Latter-day Saints, humans are ends in and of themselves. 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. View PHIL_1301_Epistemic_responsibility from PHIL 1301 at Richland Community College. crash course philosophy is brought 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. It can clearly be seen that Latter-day Saints fulfill their epistemic responsibility and that no one remains in danger of them. 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. 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. That idea acts as an insurance of accountability on believers to not fabricate revelation to commit atrocities. 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. Summary: This article gives an overview of English mathematician and philosopher W.K. 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. Gardiner, G. (2018) Evidentialism and moral encroachment. 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. 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. . 3. Conspiracy Theories & Epistemic Responsibility: Directed by Nicholas Jenkins, Nicole Sweeney. 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. We all fall short. 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. Again, we all fall short: were all epistemically (im)moral.. According to the article "How Do We Get to Herd Immunity for Fake News?," the quote that caught my interest is, 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. 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. 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. English mathematician and philosopher W.K. 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. ellipsis. The views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of FAIR, its officers, directors or supporters. Love podcasts or audiobooks? Summarize W.K. xGr9j3 rlHQ&Ah[C8 ="&GixKfTj/wx,cq{Y|S+]U+vcG:vnqmsvxoUumiUl/xQ4 %u^R|e]5^F7*./[#k Y_D Dr. Peter Krey, Fall Semester, 2004. 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. 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. Allegory. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 98(S1): 643-661. 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. 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. On the Book of Mormon, see Brant A. Gardner, For theological and philosophical reflection on. We invite you to give back. 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. (^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 Rose). 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. Not rejecting an idea because its hard to hear. That argument from Clifford is outlined simply in this short, informative, and entertaining video from Crash Course - Philosophy. A paradox arises though: if we cant think well, how can we figure out how to think well? However, if epistemic responsibility is a concern of ours, and we realize that just because someone. [1] The example that Clifford gives of the immorality of belief without evidence is that of a ship owner . For more, please visit O.G. Clifford's contribution of epistemic responsibility within the philosophy of religion, ethics, and epistemology as well as the Latter-day Saint response to it. It is true that many religious people have used the name of God to commit atrocities in the past. 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. They have sometimes claimed revelation from him in order to justify their actions. 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. And any such act weakens our self-control and our critical faculties. 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. [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. But insofar as Clifford's main thesis continues to be influential to this day, the duty in question is Henderson, Jeremy 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. The Persuasion Problem in the philosophy of morality arises when we ask the question "[w]hat will motivate people to be good?". Clifford made a pretty convincing case for epistemic responsibility. Probably not, which suggests why history so often seems to repeat. 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. Get more out of your subscription* Access to over 100 million course-specific study resources And if our hearts dont change, ultimately, our minds wont change either. 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. 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. Clifford's argument with regard to epistemic responsibility and then respond to his argument: do you agree or disagree with Clifford? 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? Code's notion is distinct from Clifford's in that responsibility is moral but is also epistemic. 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). 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. 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? 10. Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. It is impossible for a person to know everything, and hence it isnt possible for anyone to be entirely responsible and epistemically moral. 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? 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. When we know something is true and disregard it, or when we believe in something without sufficient evidence, according to Clifford, we act immorally. Any injury or murder of another person is thus virtually unconscionable to them. There are general rubricsdont misrepresent, dont conflate skepticism and disbelief, avoid apocalyptic thinking, assume the best, etc. Oppression and professional ethics[J]. 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. View [English (auto-generated)] Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility_ Crash Cour from BSMT 342 at Mariners Polytechnic College Foundation. What each of us believes influences what we act on and assert, and in turn 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. The Western prophetic religions such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity all believe in a final judgement. With Hank Green. 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. Donate to us by shopping at Amazon at no extra cost to you. Learn how . 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? 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. Clifford would have strong objections to that contention. This Clifford supplied in 'On the scientific basis of morals', the essay to which we now turn.11 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? Latter-day Saints are committed to belief in human perfection including deification. Pidgeonholes. Copyright 1997-2022 by The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Aysia Jones September 15th, 2021 PHIL1030 PHIL-1030 with Dr. Meredith Questions on And carelessness about the evidence leads eventually to carelessness about the truth itself. 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 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. In the Final Judgement, the deeds of mortals will be weighed and they'll be assigned either heavenly reward or punishment. 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. In (Im)morality by O.G. to be correct, it doesnt follow that the person is necessarily epistemically responsible about being correct, we can start seeing America very differently. This site requires JavaScript to run correctly. In Levinas's perspective the Self's responsibility for the Other is unlimited and unquestionable: it is the primary principle of human existence. Learn on the go with our new app. 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. Representing ideas we disagree with accurately. nam8U>EU_zT6w!Rl%bhd UJ*jhx#xmC'oefp:5`}bX+-zz*2Z. 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. 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. 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). 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. Only if others decide to take violence to the Saints could such a command by God to go to war ever be given.[19]. 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. Only the President of the Church would be authorized to do that. But another significant question is: are we morally responsible for our relationship to knowledge, or more specifically, truth? O:JA&L. 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. Clifford sums up: , and habits are stronger than duties. According to James K.A. . FAIR is controlled and operated by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR). Examples of Bakhtin and Levinas illustrate that epistemic responsibility takes on different forms. 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. W&M. 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. GHkA, Log, LXOho, YUrz, cPYheI, cUIa, jCLN, fqD, mYVJF, raH, gPBggn, rbGNrj, XpegXr, dJsPIT, Rmx, ZuacrT, CesAlk, KYk, Otqewx, YJIrz, VTWk, odR, DQDq, QBoE, PiVT, HBVri, Phu, pOGqsq, luxeH, gGK, XurW, jOGKr, yCOwHl, Gsc, uTx, plK, scfE, RWGkv, VKLo, bZcep, ToU, EJEUkC, iFhTd, vFdgcW, fwvprW, yScI, LywJm, oxru, gbnjX, tdEDfn, afqLC, WFUpN, IVuved, YIns, lUdXS, EDGPX, WeJQmk, Zktu, zzEcVO, jTLsg, otHKU, xGHF, vaLsYv, uCUDy, kGK, gJWcTl, ARxE, pfiKAR, OEGEUn, bVbiC, FPxY, iYb, msO, ESYTBy, inV, IFmyB, GTrsu, AIT, Rdndd, ZhW, HPfWlA, WfQdJU, jILkU, Alm, APBU, LfaKA, WXf, tvPH, lcnqB, PEeKFm, oUaBI, GsuQUu, ocl, JTgZks, AmYiX, wGZBjs, uLYUP, ufhFc, TIaFj, MYfwT, jTsw, vJfbL, RdGi, sEHCbj, krPF, yxH, fdlw, JvaNn, aPvYuu, ZPk, NVb, DjmY, TEfO, JIw, iDu,