Essay on Exploring Arguments & Evidence in Philosophy: Proving Propositions With a Diagram

• Body paragraph 1: Arguments encountered in philosophy and its evidence. The first argument is based on observation and clarification.
• Body paragraph 2: Question arising from the above challenge and its significant truth in and false evidence.
• Body paragraph 3: Ways of proving evidence by philosophers.
• Body paragraph 4: Propositions that should be proved to respond to the question. A diagram is showing discussions about the premises, arguments, and conclusion.
• Body paragraph 5: Discussion that shows the premise is true and valid evidence.
• Body paragraph 6: The premise argument, its impacts on people, and its valid reason.
• Body paragraph 7: Arguments show the second argument is correct and the reasons that show they are not valid.
• Body paragraph 8: Strongest objections that shows beliefs should have sufficient evidence. One of the objections is truth and credibility. Discussion about false beliefs and their impacts
• Conclusion: Summary of main points.

Clifford View of Philosophy

Introduction

The debate of philosophy began in 1877 when Clifford published the book "The Ethics of Beliefs (Clifford, 176). The book widely talked about the philosophy principles and the story of a shipowner. The first argument was based on a shipowner who believed that the ship was experiencing some technical problems; therefore, it needed some maintenance before leaving the port (Clifford,176). The shipowner doubted that ship might experience difficulties while sailing, but he believed that the ship has sailed for many years; therefore, no challenges were to be experienced. Clifford thought that the shipowner would be responsible for the death of those on the board (Clifford, 177). Clifford viewed this behavior has cruel because the shipowner was not supposed to base his evidence on this belief. The ship finally arrived safely in its destination, and Clifford doubts were not cleared yet. Clifford believed that even though the shipowner was relieved from the problem, he was to be equally blamed for thinking in evidence that was not sufficient (Clifford, 177)

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Arguments in Philosophy and its clarification

According to Clifford, there are three arguments that discuss the issues encountered in philosophy evidence. Before engaging in any debates, we should have a moral responsibility and obligations before basing any evidence on our beliefs. The first argument was based on our everyday observation that influences most of our actions (Clifford, 178). False beliefs had impacts on every person who was on that ship. To have clear clarification about this aspect, the following should be considered. It is wrong to believe in the evidence that is not sufficient enough. This is because false evidence may cause consequences for people (Clifford, 178).

Question Arising from this Challenge and its Significances

The question arising from this challenge is the significant role belief has played to acquire the truth evidence. Philosophers agree that having truthful evidence that avoids false allegations should be the best aim of basing your opinion (Clifford,179). The philosopher argues that when finding the truth, some norms should be followed, such as knowledge (Clifford,179). Despite these arguments by philosophers, disagreements were encountered while trying to find the truth (Clifford,179). Most of the philosophers argue that we do not have control over our beliefs. Philosophers say that when choosing a belief, it should be in a position to bring truthful information rather than false evidence.

A Way of Proving Evidence by philosophers

Philosophers need evidence to prove their beliefs to people before they find themselves in significant problems. Knowledge is applicable here to avoid false beliefs in any indication. Views support evidence; according to Clifford, he believed that shipowners would be answerable to their death if the ship sunk, but unfortunately, they arrived safely (Clifford, 178). Clifford's belief was not evident enough when he judged the shipowner. Therefore, the challenge to Clifford's view was not successful because the evidence does not show the truth (Clifford, 178). According to Clifford, we have a right to believe in what we think, even when the evidence is not available.

Proposition Response to be proved in this question

I claim that the correct answer to the above question is reliable evidence that is supportive of the philosopher's views (Clifford,179). Moral evidence differentiates between the wrong and right, and it helps to determine if there is any harm with any evidence (Sider, 2). The premise is a term used to support the arguments and conclusions in a paragraph. The following diagram shows the discussion between the evidence and its outcome.

Conclusion

Sufficient evidence helps in the ethical decision-making process. For example, the shipowner did not have much evidence the ship was safe; therefore, his decision making was not good enough.

Discussion between the premise and its validity

Clifford's argument about the premise is true due to the following reasons. The first premise was based on insufficient evidence. Clifford, understanding of this belief had to with the social functions of the people (Sider, 2). This belief is based on human understanding; therefore, people make their decisions according to what others believe(Sider,2). If a personal belief is not right, it may have consequences on those who are relying on them (Sider, 2). The owner of the ship was not evident enough that the ship was safe. According to his belief, he knew that the ship required some repairs, and it was dangerous for passengers on board because they could have died (Sider, 2). Clifford argues that it was wrong to believe in anything without any good evidence.

The premise impact and its validity

Another premise that Clifford discussed was that beliefs have an impact on various people. Belief has a major significance to people because it is not limited to one person(Sider,3). Every person has friends; therefore, influencing others with your beliefs is very easy. This discussion shows that this argument is not valid. In the first premise, the argument is not true because the evidence is not sufficient because it harms the people who rely on our decision(Sider,3). The argument for this premise is that insufficient evidence does not always harm us, but it sometimes benefits us. An example that shows the premise is not valid is that people believe that their loved ones are good even without evident reasons to prove their thinking (Sider, 3).

Premise arguments and their validity

The second premise argument is true, but it is not valid due to the following reasons. Clifford does not give valid reasons as to how beliefs affect other people (Sider, 3). Another reason why this premise was not valid is that sometimes we tend to keep our beliefs to ourselves rather telling our friends about them (Sider, 3). Clifford viewed this belief as true according to his own way of thinking, but it is not true because people were created in different ways. For example, some people may keep secrets, while others may not. Clifford's arguments have failed to prove that his beliefs are wrong without evidence (Sider, 4). These premises are true but not valid because more reasoning is needed in order to come up with the best objections

Objection discussion about beliefs

The strongest objection is that beliefs should give sufficient evidence to avoid encountering problems. The author believes that the premises have various impacts on people because it lacks limitations. This premise shows doubtfulness through its discussion on validation. The premise has both negative and positive impacts on people, depending on their beliefs. Therefore, objections should promote truth and credibility. When people have insufficient evidence, bad things may happen, as in the case of the shipowner. Sufficient evidence has the best implications for people since the belief is well thought; therefore, there will be minimal challenges (Sider,4). When there is enough evidence, a person may feel very confident while presenting his belief (Sider4). Sufficient evidence will also bring us together and strengthen our actions.

Conclusion

To sum up, Clifford's view of philosophy has really helped our reasoning. He has argued well in the three philosophical arguments about our beliefs and actions, and insufficient evidence without beliefs is wrong. This argument is based on our obligations; therefore, we should accomplish them before arguing anything. Other philosophers have argued that beliefs should be only be based on the truth. Every belief should have sufficient evidence to avoid false beliefs.

Works Cited

Clifford, William K. "The ethics of belief." Readings in the Philosophy of Religion (1901): 246.Retrieved from: https://www.google.com/search?q=Clifford%2C+W.+K.+(1901).+The+ethics+of+belief.+Readings+in+the+Philosophy+of+Religion%2C+246.&rlz=1C1CHBD_enKE885KE885&oq=Clifford%2C+W.+K.+(1901).+The+ethics+of+belief.+Readings+in+the+Philosophy+of+Religion%2C+246.&aqs=chrome.69i57.6297j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Sider Ted. (2010). Introduction to Philosophy. Retrieved from: https://www.tedsider.org/teaching/intro/sample-paper-1pdf