Great synopsis of a great essay! 👍👍 I must confess l am no James scholar (I have read his Varieties of Religious Experience, and find his 'neutral monism' intriguing in areas concerning metaphysics of mind/brain). From the face of it, though, certainly the appeal to 'knowing the truth' in the face of genuine options, is alluding (of course) to his pragmatic criterion: p is true for S if and only if p is reliable or useful to S. Frankly, or naively, l see the James/Clifford issue as hinging primarily on the sufficiency criterion (p is true if p is useful or reliable). I'd side with Clifford's skepticism here...to be sure, James's allowance for epistemic risk would allow for some ceteris paribus conditions as well, as reliability or usefulness are not exhaustive in securing one's beliefs to be true, either. Perhaps the whole thing hinges on whether or not you'd throw out (like l believe Clifford would've done) the sufficiency criterion as viciously circular ('Hey it works for me, so it's gotta be the case') or for James, on the other hand, as endorsing pragmatic truth criteria, at least in cases involving genuine options, as virtuously circular (to block the infinite regress of Cliffordian skepticism.)
@haugenmetaphilosophy
3 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the compliment. I am no James scholar either; I am merely using this for my Intro course. From my memory, James does cite his pragmatic criterion in this essay. It is merely a lecture as opposed to a finished piece; so, I doubt it includes of his relevant ideas. For a genuine option it need only be live, forced, and momentous. Of the three, I imagine “momentous” is most relevant to “pragmatic”; but, these three are not fully fleshed out either. I am glad you enjoyed the video. If you have not started creating videos for your own students, I highly recommend it. My students have found them very useful. Thanks for watching and spread the word.
@dr.williamkallfelz8540
3 жыл бұрын
@@haugenmetaphilosophy Thanks so much!! 🙂 Most helpful! As a matter of fact for over a year I've been teaching entirely online and I record my sessions both synchronized and asynchronized on WebEx. Now that campus has gone back to a full reopenings though I've got students who are quarantining so because of that I make sure I include gratuitous videos as well as recording my f-t-f classes from WebEx. You're right! The videos l make are most appreciated and I have fun making them too, although mine are somewhat rudimentary. Many of my students have better VJ skills than I do needless to say, but they appreciate my efforts nevertheless!
@Noel-sj1fd
Жыл бұрын
It maybe your right to believe but it is your duty to be educated. The amount of knowledge on this planet hardly leaves room for opinion or believe.
@jasoncrume1219
3 жыл бұрын
This is better explained than my philosophy textbook. Thank you for the help
@haugenmetaphilosophy
3 жыл бұрын
Happy to help! I appreciate the compliment. Thanks for watching and spread the word!
@KlearChristal
7 жыл бұрын
You explained this better than my professor. Thank you!
@haugenmetaphilosophy
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for watching.
@karmacounselor
7 жыл бұрын
excellent! also in the wake of the hurricane Harvey incident, it was momentous rain...jus sayin...
@haugenmetaphilosophy
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you for watching. I am not sure I understand the “momentous rain“ comment; but, thank you for watching.
@karmacounselor
7 жыл бұрын
we just had insane rain in the usa called hurricane harvey...not often, but sometimes rain is momentous...
@haugenmetaphilosophy
7 жыл бұрын
I knew about the hurricane. I thought you were drawing a connection between the video and Harvey. I was just confused. No worries.
@georgegordner7795
5 жыл бұрын
.
@haugenmetaphilosophy
5 жыл бұрын
This might be the most brief comment in the history of KZitem.
@wpankey57
7 жыл бұрын
W. K. Clifford states in his essay The Ethics of Belief "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."
@haugenmetaphilosophy
7 жыл бұрын
Yes. I do provide that quote in the content of the video, and at the end. It is a very plausible statement. The controversy, however, is what one proposes as sufficient evidence. Whatever the proposed account of sufficient evidence, one can easily inquire whether there is sufficient evidence for that account. Furthermore, one could also very easily ask, “What is the sufficient evidence for the statement ‘It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence’?” Either way (and, likely others), it is not long before one begins to generate an infinite regress of sufficient evidence.
@wpankey57
7 жыл бұрын
HaugenMetaphilosophy -- I agree with you. What is sufficient evidence? Different people will settle for different "levels" of evidence. I also agree with you that Clifford's statement doesn't meet his own stringent criteria. This is the problem his Logical Positivism as I see it. Epistemology/truth is a tricky business especially when you want to apply it in life rather than in the classroom.
Пікірлер: 17