In this essay Clifford argues against Pascalian wagers and against all pragmatic justification for religious belief. He contends that believing involves ethical principles, so we violate our moral duty if we obtain beliefs where the evidence is insufficient. Such acquisitions of beliefs are tantamount to theft. Clifford begins this essay by relating the story of a shipowner who sends a ship full of emigrants out to sea, knowing that the ship is old and not well built. The shipowner stifles doubts and launches it anyway, sincerely trusting Providence to care for it. When it sinks and all passengers are drowned, he collects his insurance money without a trace of guilt. Clifford argues that sincerity in no way excuses the shipowner because "he had no right to believe on such evidence as was before him." The rest of the essay is a discussion of the ethics of acquiring beliefs on insufficient evidence.
-Clifford contends that no simplicity of mind and no obscurity of station can excuse someone from the universal duty of questioning all that he or she believes.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The summary accurately reflects W.K. Clifford's arguments in his essay "The Ethics of Belief," where he indeed argues against forming beliefs without sufficient evidence, using the shipowner story as a pivotal example to illustrate the moral responsibilities tied to belief formation.

In This Essay Clifford Argues Against Pascalian Wagers and Against