He did, however, publish two short tracts on the Torricelli vacuum, and, between andhe circulated anonymously a series of letters about moral casuistry and grace that came to be known as the Lettres provinciales [The Provincial Letters]. Although illness and his premature death prevented the implementation of that plan, the notes were edited and published posthumously by his family and admirers in Some of his other unpublished draft manuscripts were likewise published posthumously. Pascal is acknowledged as a trenchant critic of the lax morality called probabilism, as a defender of the theory of grace and justification associated with Jansenism, and as an acute commentator on the significance or otherwise of a human life when seen in the context of an infinite universe and the retributive justice of an angry God who punishes humankind for its universal state of sinfulness inherited from Adam.
He questioned the existence of some sort of criteria that describe how a belief can be held and defended. According to Clifford, it was senseless to choose what to believe in without any form of formulation or guide, leading to the belief.
He concludes that it is morally wrong to hold, defend, and believe in anything without sufficient evidence, thus coining the notion of evidentialism Clifford In summary, what Clifford seeks to drive home is the idea that there cannot be any belief without sufficient evidence.
We can say that his principles are closely related to skepticism. Blaise Pascal, on the other hand, describes that some truth cannot just be explained by reason or evidence and, therefore, one has to rely on faith.
He defends religious knowledge and beliefs such as the existence of God, which, he acknowledges, cannot be demonstrated. His notion can be defined as fideism or atheism, which is reliance on faith and not reason or evidence in order to hold and defend a belief.
Evidentialism, as described above, refutes fideism principles and encourages people to gather or seek sufficient evidence before holding a belief. The paper below seeks to highlight the importance of reason and evidence, as opposed to holding a belief based on faith without reason i.
To him and other critics of atheism, it made no sense at all. In explaining the principles, Clifford uses an example of a man who had a ship which was faulty.
The man chose to completely ignore the fact that the ship was faulty and was not safe for passengers on board and, instead, led himself to believe that it would be fine for one trip, and then he would fix it later.
His idea was to avoid wasting time on fixing the faults at that time since it would delay departure and also cost him.
The ship did not make it to the destination. The owner of the ship acted on unethical belief instead of relying on evidence. He should have checked for sufficient evidence on whether the ship was safe as he assumed it would be. Clifford goes further to insist that an action is either right or wrong, irrespective of the consequent outcome.
Through this journal, Clifford intends to raise the bar on ethics and morals. According to him, the ship owner was wrong to act upon faith and no evidence even if the ship would have made it safely to its destination.
Clifford also explains that for evidence to be considered sufficient, it must be proportional and of the same nature as the belief.
This kind of strictness is better suited to the formation of a belief, compared to possession of moderate evidence, which holds ground, subject to various situations and scenarios. Evidence that is moderate or one that has some exceptions on when and how it counts is relatively similar to no evidence at all.
Clifford describes strict evidence as one that holds anywhere, for anyone, and at all time. This nature of strictness is mostly admired for liberating people from various dogmatic beliefs and to erase credulity.
Evidentialism encourages people to seek for a reason and evidence before believing or conforming to certain traditions. Various traditions may encourage certain wrongly justified beliefs, which can be defined as degrading and dogmatic.
These kinds of beliefs or institutions should be approached with skepticism as well as a thirst to secure sufficient evidence and reason to abide Clifford Science can be said to be Evidentialist because it insists on a pragmatic approach to various beliefs.
These beliefs can be practically demonstrated and evidenced, hence making them difficult to refute as opposed to religious knowledge. He argues that they can be justified through religion and faith i. With this in mind, he concluded that some truth cannot be demonstrated and, therefore, justified through faith only.
Faith does not need to be accompanied by any reasonable explanation and, consequently, the Evidentialist dismissed the non Evidentialist as irresponsible and irrational.Introduction of dissertation proposal.
Dairy Kosher Cuisine. The illuminati research paper research paper on child protective services loren eiseley essays about life blaise pascal maquina analytical essay language analysis essay vce player sociological research paper expression cause and effect college essay zone same sex marriage argument.
Blaise Pascal thesis writing service to assist in custom writing a university Blaise Pascal thesis for an MBA dissertation graduation. My dissertation focuses on the moral philosophy of Descartes, Pascal, and Spinoza in the context of the revival of Stoicism within the seventeenth century.
There are many. Name Instructor Course Date Clifford’s Evidentialist Argument in Contrast to Blaise Pascal’s Non Evidentialist Position Introduction William Kingdon Clifford was a philosopher as well as a mathematician at Cambridge University, although he drifted more towards .
Our "Blaise Pascal" experts can research and write a NEW, ONE-OF-A-KIND, ORIGINAL dissertation, thesis, or research proposal—JUST FOR YOU—on the precise "Blaise Pascal" topic of your choice.
Our final document will match the EXACT specifications that YOU provide, guaranteed.
Essay: Pascal’s Wager Pascal’s Wager, written by Blaise Pascal, in essence states that it is prudent to believe in God’s existence because it is the best bet. Even if one assumes, that God’s existence is extremely unlikely, betting on it makes sense, for its results far outweighs the results from not betting on God’s existence.