Clifford thinks Pascal and James are wrong - Essay Example

Why Clifford thinks that Pascal and James are wrong Why Clifford thinks that Pascal and James are wrong The existence of God always was questionable, however, people prefer to believe than not to believe. The belief gives us some hope for the good future and for our dreams coming true. It is impossible to live without a belief, everybody has it, but people may consider it differently. In the given paper we will analyse three views on belief in God: the views of William James and Blaise Pascal and the opposite view of William K. Clifford.The views of Blaise Pascal are very argumentative.

They are based on logically build succession of inferences. Pascal stated that if we do not have any evidence of God existence, it is better not to risk. This needs explanations: if we believe in God and God exists, we remain innocent; if we believe in God and God does not exists, we still remain innocent; if we do not believe in God and God does not exist, we can’t be sure that we remain innocent as we can’t know for sure if God exists; if we do not believe in God and God exists, we are guilty.

Thus, it is better to believe in God, than not to believe and therefore, according to Blaise Pascal, everybody should believe in God. The William James has a similar point of view. He also states that we should believe in God and waiting for evidence is not right for humans. Waiting for any evidence to decide if to believe or not may lead us to much losses. According to the philosopher, if a man hesitates to propose to a woman waiting for evidence that she is his ideal, he risks to lose her as she may accept the proposition of someone else.

The same is with religion and belief. James states that those people who believe may enjoy the life of religious people and those who do not may lose this chance.Blaize Pascal and William James are sure that people should believe in God. William Clifford can’t agree with them. It does not mean that this philosopher states that we should not believe in God, but he call us to involve some doubt and states that it is necessary as it is our duty. He provides an example to explain why: a ship-owner had an old ship.

He knew that it was old and he also knew that some people were going to have a voyage on its board. He did not have any time or facilities to repair his ship and he preferred to pin his hopes on Providence that would not have allowed people to die. As a result these people died as the ship was broken. This testifies that blind belief in Providence may lead to disaster. “If a man, holding a belief which he was taught in childhood or persuaded of afterwards, keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company of men that call into question or discuss it, and regards as impious those questions which cannot easily be asked without disturbing it -- the life of that man is one long sin against mankind.

” (Clifford).Philosophy is a science where there are no right or wrong opinions. Every opinion and every theory has a right to exist. We may agree with James and Pascal that it is better to believe in God than not to believe. But we can’t but agree with Pascal: it is our duty to doubt sometimes also in order to stay innocent. God helps those who help themselves.ReferencesClifford, William Kingdon, William James, and A.J. Burger (Ed.). (2001).The Ethics of Belief", Dry Bones Press