Taborn_Ty_Essay1

Taborn_Ty_Essay1 - Ty Taborn Philosophy100 1/10/2008 Essay...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ty Taborn Philosophy100 1/10/2008 Essay One: Evidence and Emotion Introduction Challenging a population to believe in only that which can be proven through factual evidence, rather than emotion, is a challenge to limit their understanding of the world. While demanding that an opinion be rooted in evidence is theoretically sound, in practice it can be shown to be limiting. It presumes that sufficient evidence can be made available to prove or disprove a belief, when in practice this is not necessarily the case. Religion is the prime example, for there is little factual evidence to prove or disprove it, but emotionally it can be found to be very real. Hume and Clifford The philosophers Hume and Clifford both developed a standard for the judgment of beliefs, which calls for the presence of evidentiary support in order for a belief to be deemed substantive. By doing so it disregards the validity of emotion, tradition, and speculation as means of justifying a belief. Clifford wrote, “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” Such a theory appears to be sound, for it questions the practice of treating emotions as evidence in the way only physical evidence should. This theory thus serves as instructions to examine the world in a strictly rational manner.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Hume and Clifford in the Realm of Science While Hume and Clifford’s standard is theoretically sound, in practice it fails to account for all which both exists and is unknown. A belief which can neither be proved nor disproved must be considered plausible lest we limit our worldly understanding. Had the Hume and Clifford standard extended to science, imagine the limitations upon innovation. In 1847, there was no reason to believe that electricity could revolutionize our way of life by providing light for our houses, but Thomas Edison nevertheless felt that it was worth examining. For the same reasons that Hume and Clifford’s standard of judgment would
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 6

Taborn_Ty_Essay1 - Ty Taborn Philosophy100 1/10/2008 Essay...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online