William K. Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief” is an essay about justification and how we are morally required to prove our beliefs. Clifford’s theory throughout the essay was “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” Clifford thinks that it is a moral obligation for you to confirm each of your beliefs with sufficient proof, no matter how questionable or insignificant the beliefs may be. I believe he thinks this because beliefs have serious effects and consequences on others. Clifford’s views are clear when he presents his two examples, a ship owner and about an island. He begins his essay with the story of a ship-owner doubting the safety of his ship, but he convinces himself that the ship is intact. He does this by rationalizing his thoughts by claiming that the ship “had [has] gone through so many …show more content…
I agree with Clifford and his statement which expresses the fact that you need proof to believe in your beliefs. In life there are thousands of things to believe in. For example, the statement "I won’t die tomorrow". Just because I said it, doesn’t make it true. I would need concrete evidence to prove it. Clifford believes you need enough evidence to believe in something because belief is a false sense of hope that causes doubtful actions which could cause a spiral of projected situations that can lead to either good or bad outcomes. These outcomes could have officially been avoided if such “belief” never existed and the first projection was actually proved. I believe he is right because without solid evidence, a belief could cause a domino effect of situations which could easily been avoided. It is just unreasonable to have a belief and not have confirmation to back it up. Obviously it would require some serious energy to really evaluate these cases, but in the end of the day you will have