{"Affiliation":[{"label":"Affiliation","value":"Arts, Faculty of","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#departmentOrSchool","classmap":"vivo:EducationalProcess","property":"vivo:departmentOrSchool"},"iri":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#departmentOrSchool","explain":"VIVO-ISF Ontology V1.6 Property; The department or school name within institution; Not intended to be an institution name."},{"label":"Affiliation","value":"Philosophy, Department of","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#departmentOrSchool","classmap":"vivo:EducationalProcess","property":"vivo:departmentOrSchool"},"iri":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#departmentOrSchool","explain":"VIVO-ISF Ontology V1.6 Property; The department or school name within institution; Not intended to be an institution name."}],"AggregatedSourceRepository":[{"label":"Aggregated Source Repository","value":"DSpace","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/dataProvider","classmap":"ore:Aggregation","property":"edm:dataProvider"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/dataProvider","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; The name or identifier of the organization who contributes data indirectly to an aggregation service (e.g. Europeana)"}],"Campus":[{"label":"Campus","value":"UBCV","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeCampus","classmap":"oc:ThesisDescription","property":"oc:degreeCampus"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeCampus","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Identifies the name of the campus from which the graduate completed their degree."}],"Creator":[{"label":"Creator","value":"Ornstein, Jack Hervey","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/creator","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:creator"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/creator","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; An entity primarily responsible for making the resource.; Examples of a Contributor include a person, an organization, or a service."}],"DateAvailable":[{"label":"Date Available","value":"2011-10-14T17:23:06Z","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","classmap":"edm:WebResource","property":"dcterms:issued"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; Date of formal issuance (e.g., publication) of the resource."}],"DateIssued":[{"label":"Date Issued","value":"1964","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","classmap":"oc:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:issued"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; Date of formal issuance (e.g., publication) of the resource."}],"Degree":[{"label":"Degree (Theses)","value":"Master of Arts - MA","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#relatedDegree","classmap":"vivo:ThesisDegree","property":"vivo:relatedDegree"},"iri":"http:\/\/vivoweb.org\/ontology\/core#relatedDegree","explain":"VIVO-ISF Ontology V1.6 Property; The thesis degree; Extended Property specified by UBC, as per https:\/\/wiki.duraspace.org\/display\/VIVO\/Ontology+Editor%27s+Guide"}],"DegreeGrantor":[{"label":"Degree Grantor","value":"University of British Columbia","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeGrantor","classmap":"oc:ThesisDescription","property":"oc:degreeGrantor"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeGrantor","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Indicates the institution where thesis was granted."}],"Description":[{"label":"Description","value":"The problem considered in this thesis is whether or not there is an ethics of belief. The notion that it could be right or wrong to believe something is examined.\r\nWilliam James, in The Will To Believe, advocated the right to believe, in certain cases, whatever most tempts one's will. William Kingdon Clifford had earlier argued in The Ethics Of Belief that it is always wrong to believe anything for which the evidence is insufficient.\r\nI have argued that belief is not an action that can be executed or refrained from at will but is the acceptance of something as being true. As such, it is not possible for us to believe what most appeals to us unless we deem it true. If 'belief\u2019 is used in any other sense than 'deem true', the true-false distinction is vitiated.\r\nSince belief is not an action and is therefore not voluntary, the ethics of belief cannot apply to what is believed. The right or wrong of belief applies to the attitude we adopt to a certain proposition or to the manner in which we acquire our beliefs. The distinction is made between belief-cultivation and inquiry.\r\nA detailed analysis of The Will To Believe is then undertaken. The claim that religion is a hypothesis which we can verify is questioned. It seems that before one can 'test' the hypothesis, one must believe it already \u2014 thus there is really no test at all. The contrasts between science and religion are presented -- explanation being the main concern of the former and consolation that of the latter. The following six claims are called into question:\r\n1) the decision regarding the truth or falsity of religion is forced and momentous,\r\n2) no test of what is really true has ever been agreed upon,\r\n3) there is a striking similarity between the potential religious believer and the scientific investigator,\r\n4) the universe must have a purpose,\r\n5) in religion, faith creates its own verification,\r\n6) to believe in religion requires hope and courage while to doubt or disbelieve indicates fear and cowardice.\r\nIt is concluded that even if religious belief influences or changes our actions and reactions, this is proof not of the truth of religion but of its utility, which may be helpful or harmful to the individual and to society.\r\nMy thesis, in short, is that insofar as we attempt to proportion belief to our desires and not to the evidence, we risk losing the true-false distinction altogether. We thus risk loss of communication with others. And effective communication, I submit, is essential to the acquisition and transmission of knowledge \u2014 the raison d'etre of philosophy.","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/description","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:description"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/description","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; An account of the resource.; Description may include but is not limited to: an abstract, a table of contents, a graphical representation, or a free-text account of the resource."}],"DigitalResourceOriginalRecord":[{"label":"Digital Resource Original Record","value":"https:\/\/circle.library.ubc.ca\/rest\/handle\/2429\/37972?expand=metadata","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/aggregatedCHO","classmap":"ore:Aggregation","property":"edm:aggregatedCHO"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/aggregatedCHO","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; The identifier of the source object, e.g. the Mona Lisa itself. This could be a full linked open date URI or an internal identifier"}],"FullText":[{"label":"Full Text","value":"WILLIAM JAMS AND THE WILL TO BELIEVE by JACK HERVEY ORNSTEIN B.A. Un i i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1961 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF M.A. i n the Department of PHILOSOPHY We accept t h i s t h e s i s .as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1964 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study\u00bb- I further agree that per-mission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that;. copying or publi-cation of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permissions Department of fH\/EoSofHy The University of British Columbia, Vancouver 8, Canada i The problem considered i n t h i s t h e s i s i s whether or not there i s an e t h i c s of b e l i e f . The not i o n that i t could be r i g h t or wrong to b e l i e v e something i s examined. W i l l i a m James, i n The W i l l To B e l i e v e , advocated the r i g h t to b e l i e v e , i n c e r t a i n cases, whatever most tempts one's w i l l . W i l l i a m Kingdon C l i f f o r d had e a r l i e r argued i n The E t h i c s Of B e l i e f that i t i s always wrong to b e l i e v e anything f o r which the evidence i s i n s u f f i c i e n t . I have argued that b e l i e f i s not an a c t i o n t h a t can be executed or r e f r a i n e d from at w i l l but i s the acceptance of something as being t r u e . As such, i t i s not p o s s i b l e f o r us to b e l i e v e what most appeals to us unless we deem i t t r u e . I f ' b e l i e f i s used i n any other sense tha'n 'deem t r u e ' , the t r u e - f a l s e d i s t i n c t i o n i s v i t i a t e d . Since b e l i e f i s not an a c t i o n and i s th e r e f o r e not vol u n t a r y , the e t h i c s of b e l i e f cannot apply to what i s b e l i e v e d . The r i g h t or wrong o f b e l i e f a p p l i e s t o the a t t i t u d e we adopt t o a c e r t a i n p r o p o s i t i o n or to the manner i n which we acquire our b e l i e f s . The d i s t i n c t i o n is made between b e l i e f - c u l t i v a t i o n and i n q u i r y . A d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of The W i l l To B e l i e v e i s then under-taken. The c l a i m that r e l i g i o n i s a hypothesis which we can v e r i f y i s questioned. I t seems that before one can ' t e s t ' the hypothesis, one must b e l i e v e i t already \u2014 thus there i s r e a l l y no t e s t at a l l . The con t r a s t s between science and r e -l i g i o n are presented -- explanation being the main concern of the former and c o n s o l a t i o n that of the l a t t e r . i i The f o l l o w i n g s i x claims are c a l l e d i n t o question: 1) the d e c i s i o n regarding the t r u t h or f a l s i t y of r e l i g i o n i s f o r c e d and momentous, 2) no t e s t of what i s r e a l l y true has ever been agreed upon, 3) there i s a s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t y between the p o t e n t i a l r e l i g i o u s b e l i e v e r and the s c i e n t i f i c i n v e s t i g a t o r , 4) the universe must have a purpose, 5) i n r e l i g i o n , f a i t h creates i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n , 6) t o b e l i e v e i n r e l i g i o n r e q u i r e s hope and courage while t o doubt or d i s b e l i e v e i n d i c a t e s f e a r and cowardice. I t i s concluded that even i f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i n f l u e n c e s or changes our a c t i o n s and r e a c t i o n s , t h i s i s proof not of the t r u t h of r e l i g i o n but of i t s u t i l i t y , which may be help-f u l or harmful to the i n d i v i d u a l and to s o c i e t y . My t h e s i s , i n short, i s that i n s o f a r as we attempt to p r o p o r t i o n b e l i e f to our d e s i r e s and not to the evidence, we r i s k l o s i n g the t r u e - f a l s e d i s t i n c t i o n a l t o g e t h e r . We thus r i s k l o s s of communication w i t h others. And e f f e c t i v e communication, I submit, i s e s s e n t i a l to the a c q u i s i t i o n and t r a n s m i s s i o n of knowledge \u2014 t h e ' r a i s o n d'etre of philosophy. i v I wish to express my deepest a p p r e c i a t i o n to Dr. D. G. Brown whose patience was phenomenal and whose a s s i s t a n c e and c r i t i c i s m s were i n v a l u a b l e . I a l s o wish to thank my wife Toby f o r her i n s p i r a t i o n and a i d i n completing t h i s t h e s i s . i i i CONTENTS 1. BELIEF AND ACTION 3 2. BELIEF AND DESIRE....... 7 3. BELIEF-ATTITUDE-ADOPTION 1 9 4 . BELIEF-CULTIVATION 24 5. THE WILL TO BELIEVE ; 33 6. THE OPTION 4 7 7 . BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE 57 8. CERTAINTY 63 9. BELIEF AND TRUTH 7 1 10. RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND SCIENCE 85 11. PURPOSE, GOD AND MORALITY 94 12. FAITH AND VERIFICATION 104 13. BELIEF AND FEAR 115 BIBLIOGRAPHY 133 A l l page references to W i l l i a m James, unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d , are from The W i l l to Be-l i e v e and other essays i n popular philosophy, a l s o r e f e r r e d to as TWTB. A l l page references to other authors are from t h e i r book(s) as given i n the b i b l i o g r a p h y , page 133-V I t i s only when people have given up the hope of proving that r e l i g i o n i s true i n a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d sense that they set out to prove that i t i s \" t r u e \" i n some.newfangled sense. Bertrand R u s s e l l The statement that one i s more l i k e l y to b e l i e v e t r u l y i f one b e l i e v e s reasonably (that i s , i n accordance with the evidence) i s an a n a l y t i c statement which follows.from the meaning of the expressions \"evidence f o r \" and \" l i k e l y to be t r u e \" . H. H. P r i c e As a r u l e we b e l i e v e as much as we can. We would b e l i e v e everything i f we only could. W i l l i a m James What i s wanted i s not the w i l l to b e l i e v e , but the wish to f i n d out, which i s the exact opposite. Bertrand R.ussell My p o s i t i o n i s t h a t , other things equal, emotional s a t i s f a c t i o n s count f o r t r u t h . W i l l i a m James I t i s notorious that the tempor a r i l y s a t i s f a c t o r y i s often f a l s e . W i l l i a m James I n h i s e s s a y The W i l l To B e l i e v e , W i l l i a m James a r g u e s t h a t we have t h e \" r i g h t t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e i n r e l i g i o u s m a t t e r s . \" ( p . l ) . He c l a i m s ( p . 2 9 ) t h a t \"we have t h e r i g h t t o b e l i e v e a t our own r i s k any h y p o t h e s i s t h a t i s l i v e enough t o tempt o u r w i l l . \" He recommends b e l i e f i n r e l i g i o n ' s two a f f i r m a t i o n s , v i z . , (p.25) 1: \" t h e b e s t t h i n g s a r e t h e more e t e r n a l t h i n g s \" and (p.27) t h i s e t e r n a l a s p e c t o f t h e u n i v e r s e has p e r s o n a l f o r m ; and (p.26) 2 : \"we a r e b e t t e r o f f even now i f we b e l i e v e h e r f i r s t a f f i r m a t i o n t o be t r u e . \" W i l l i a m K i n g d o n C l i f f o r d , i n h i s e s s a y The E t h i c s Of B e l i e f , had a r g u e d e a r l i e r t h a t \" i t i s wrong a l w a y s , e v e r y -w h e r e , and f o r a n y o n e , t o b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g upon i n s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e . \" ( p .175)\u2022 B o t h C l i f f o r d and James t a l k as t h o u g h we c o u l d e x e r c i s e o u r w i l l i n t h e e f f o r t t o b e l i e v e o r d i s b e l i e v e a p r o p o s i t i o n . I f what James s a y s makes s e n s e and i s t r u e , t h e n we c o u l d b e l i e v e t o d a y what we d i d n o t ( o r \"could n o t ) b e l i e v e y e s t e r d a y , as soon as we r e a l i z e d t h a t i t w o u l d be t o o u r a d v a n t a g e t o do s o . I f what C l i f f o r d s a y s makes s e n s e and i s t r u e , t h e n we c o u l d blame and p e r h a p s even p u n i s h p e o p l e f o r b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g on what WE c o n s i d e r t o be i n s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e . ' Y o u have a r i g h t t o b e l i e v e ' , s a y s J a m e s . ' I t i s a l -ways wrong t o b e l i e v e on i n s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e ' , s a y s C l i f f o r d . Does e i t h e r o f t h e s e c o u n s e l s make s e n s e ? Does i t make s e n s e 2 t o speak of b e l i e f as a kind of a c t i o n which, i f we are tempted enough, we are fr e e (have the r i g h t ) to perform? Or -- i f the evidence i s i n s u f f i c i e n t -- from which we are fr e e to abstain? I n s o f a r as C l i f f o r d and James r e q u i r e b e l i e f t o be an a c t i o n , f o r t h e i r p o s i t i o n s to be tenable, I s h a l l argue t h a t they are misguided. I s h a l l argue that b e l i e f i s not an a c t i o n ; hence i s not the s o r t of t h i n g that can be e x e r c i s e d or w i t h -h e l d at w i l l ; or f o r which one could be blamed or punished, p r a i s e d or rewarded. 3 1. BELIEF AND ACTION Stu a r t Hampshire, i n Thought and A c t i o n , c h a r a c t e r i z e s an a c t i o n as something that i s done at w i l l and at some par-t i c u l a r time. He argues at len g t h to show, I t h i n k success-f u l l y , t h a t b e l i e f i s not an a c t i o n . That i s , b e l i e f i s not something done at w i l l , such as r a i s i n g an arm. I t i s more l i k e f a l l i n g down the s t a i r s than cli m b i n g them. Hampshire says t h a t \" t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between what a man does and what happens to him might be explained through the d i s t i n c t i o n be-tween t r y i n g and not t r y i n g on the one hand and f a i l i n g and\u2022 succeeding on the other.\" (p.112). Would i t make sense to say th a t someone i s t r y i n g to be-l i e v e something \u2014 as opposed t o , say, study or read something? e.g. \"Would you please cut down the noise.\" \"Why?\" \"Harry i s t r y i n g to b e l i e v e so-and-so (e.g. that the place i s quiet) and he f i n d s i t d i f f i c u l t what with a l l t h i s noise going on.\" OR \"Harry i s pooped.\" \"Why?\" \"He t r i e d f o r two hours yesterday t o b e l i e v e that so-and-so and he j u s t couldn't do i t . \" (or, \"He t r i e d f o r two hours yesterday to b e l i e v e so-and-so and he f i n a l l y made i t . \" ) 4 A c t i o n s a r e done a t p a r t i c u l a r t i m e s . They can be p r e c i s e l y t i m e d . I t may t a k e t h r e e h o u r s t o w a l k f r o m V a n -c o u v e r t o B u r n a b y . How.. long does i t t a k e t o b e l i e v e t h i s s e n t e n c e c o n t a i n s t e n words? ( I t c o n t a i n s 1 2 words by any e f f o r t o f w i l l can y o u b e l i e v e o t h e r w i s e ? ) C o u l d you s t a t e a t what p a r t i c u l a r t i m e y e s t e r d a y y o u b e l i e v e d p r e s i d e n t J o h n s o n was a l i v e ? W h i l e i t may be t r u e t h a t we COME t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g a t a f a i r l y p r e c i s e t i m e , and w h i l e i t may. be t r u e t h a t we can be s a i d . t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g ALL t h e t i m e , we s t i l l c a n n o t be s a i d t o be engaged i n b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g f o r a c e r t a i n l e n g t h o f t i m e . I f one answered t h e q u e s t i o n \"What were y o u d o i n g a t 2 o T c l o c k y e s t e r d a y ? \" o r \"What d i d you do a t 2 o ' c l o c k y e s t e r d a y ? \" by s a y i n g \" I was b e l i e v i n g s o - a n d - s o \" o r \"I b e l i e v e d s o - a n d - s o \" , one w o u l d not make s e n s e . To b e l i e v e i s n o t t o DO s o m e t h i n g . I t h i n k i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t b e l i e f c a n n o t be s e n s i b l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d as an a c t i o n . I t makes s e n s e t o . d e c i d e t o a c t i n a c e r t a i n way but does i t make s e n s e t o decide- -to b e l i e v e a c e r t a i n p r o p o s i t i o n ? I n a c e r t a i n way? I t makes sense t o r e g r e t d o i n g s o m e t h i n g , even w h i l e y o u do i t ( e . g . spank y o u r c h i l d ) , b u t does i t make s e n s e t o say t h a t someone r e g r e t s b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g , even w h i l e he b e l i e v e s i t ? Suppose a f a t h e r i s c o n f r o n t e d by h i s 1 4 y e a r o l d u n m a r r i e d d a u g h t e r who announces t h a t she i s p r e g n a n t and has no i d e a whom t o t h a n k f o r h e r c o n d i t i o n . L e t us suppose t h a t h e r f a t h e r b e l i e v e s h e r when she t e l l s h i m t h i s . He may i n d e e d r e g r e t WHAT he now b e l i e v e s , b u t c o u l d he be s a i d t o r e g r e t b e l i e v i n g i t ? I f b e l i e f were \" a s o r t o f f e e l i n g 5 more a l l i e d to the emotions than t o anything e l s e \" as James thought ( l ^ ^ O , p.283), then the f a t h e r would be s a i d to reg r e t having a c e r t a i n f e e l i n g . In other words, to say that the f a t h e r regrets b e l i e v i n g h i s daughter i s pregnant amounts to saying that he regr e t s having a c e r t a i n f e e l i n g . But that i s n ' t at a l l what someone would mean who s a i d that he regr e t s b e l i e v i n g i t . His- re g r e t i s l e s s l i k e l y to concern him than her. One can reg r e t or applaud WHAT one b e l i e v e s but one can n e i t h e r be glad or sad THAT one b e l i e v e s something. Emotions may accompany a b e l i e f but they cannot c o n s t i t u t e a b e l i e f . To regret b e l i e v i n g something would be to regret that one ac-cepts i t as t r u e . To be able to d i s t i n g u i s h the tru e from the f a l s e i s a f u n c t i o n of the i n t e l l e c t , not of the emotions. To regret t h a t one b e l i e v e s something i s to reg r e t t h a t one i s able to d i s t i n g u i s h between what seems true to one and what seems f a l s e to one. To regret that one i s able t o t e l l the true from the f a l s e i s to regret that one i s able to t h i n k at  a l l . Nobody would c l a i m that the f a t h e r i n our example re g r e t s that he can t e l l . t h e t r u e from the f a l s e . I f he were unable to do t h i s , he wouldn't know that the g i r l was h i s daughter, l e t alone that she were pregnant or even that she was a GIRL. Thus, to say that he r e g r e t s that he b e l i e v e s something, i s to say that he regr e t s that he can t e l l the tru e from the f a l s e . I t should be obvious that t h i s i s not what we mean when we say \" I ' d hate to t h i n k that ( i . e . believe) so-and-so\" or \" I t would k i l l him to t h i n k (or bel i e v e ) that she got her-6 s e l f pregnant.\" To b e l i e v e something i s to accept i t as t r u e . As Hampshire says, (p.150), \"The whole point and purpose ( I would p r e f e r ' f u n c t i o n ' to 'purpose' - J.O.) of a b e l i e f and of the kind of thought that leads up t o i t , i s that i t should be t r u e . . . \" When asked of a given p r o p o s i t i o n whether or not one b e l i e v e s i t , one may r e p l y , 'Yes, I b e l i e v e i t ' . . Does t h i s mean that one has decided to accept the p r o p o s i t i o n as true? I t represents a d e c i s i o n , says Hampshire, but not a d e c i s i o n to DO anything. He adds (p.158\") \"...nor can these words c o n s t i t u t e an announcement that I have attempted to achieve anything. I have not decided to b e l i e v e ; I have de-cided that the statement i n question i s t r u e . This d e c i d i n g , which i s a deciding t h a t , i s not n a t u r a l l y represented as an a c t i o n , since there i s no sense i n which I could i n t e n d , or decide, to decide that a statement i s t r u e . \" We can intend or decide to act but not to b e l i e v e something \u2014 to accept i t as t r u e . And where we would say, \" I decided to b e l i e v e her\" we would mean that we found what she s a i d p l a u s i b l e or that we now deemed her trustworthy, e t c . We would not mean that we a c t u a l l y decided to deem true what she s a i d \u2014 we mean that we DID deem t r u e ( i . e . b e l i e v e ) what she s a i d . 7 2. B E L I E F AND DESIRE Would i t make s e n s e t o say t h a t one w i l l s -or wants t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g ? I t makes good s e n s e t o s a y t h a t we w i s h t h i n g s were d i f f e r e n t , but i s i t s e n s i b l e t o w i s h t h a t we b e l i e v e d d i f f e r e n t l y ? I t i s odd t o say t h a t \" A \" wants t o b e -l i e v e \" B \" \u2014 as opposed t o , e . g . , \" A \" wants i t t o be t h e c a s e t h a t \"B\" b e c a u s e b e l i e f i s n o t t h e s o r t o f t h i n g we d e s i r e . We may w i s h t h a t a c e r t a i n s t a t e m e n t were t r u e \u2014 e . g . B a r r y G o l d w a t e r may w i s h t h a t t h e s t a t e m e n t \" B a r r y G o l d w a t e r w i l l be P r e s i d e n t o f t h e U . S . A . \" were t r u e . But he w i l l w i s h i t t r u e o n l y i n v i r t u e o f t h e f a c t t h a t what i t r e p o r t s i s t r u e . He wants t o be P r e s i d e n t - - he d o e s n ' t want m e r e l y t o B E L I E V E t h a t h e ' s P r e s i d e n t . teen Suppose someone t e l l s us t h a t a g i r l w e ' v e \/ \\ d a t i n g ' l a t e l y i s f o n d o f u s . \" I w i s h I c o u l d b e l i e v e t h a t \" i s o u r r e p l y . What we mean h e r e i s c l e a r l y t h a t vie w i s h t h a t i t were t r u e - -i . e . \u2014 we hope t h a t she IS f o n d o f u s . - We d o n ' t want m e r e l y t o b e l i e v e t h a t she i s . I f we i n t e n d t o do a n y t h i n g a b o u t i t , i f t h e b e l i e f c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y l e a d t o any a c t i o n , we r e a l i z e t h a t m e r e l y b e l i e v i n g i s n o t enough. I n a c r u c i a l t e s t we m i g h t be \" t l \u00b1 s i l l u s i o n e d . We a s k h e r t o m a r r y us and she l a u g h s i n our f a c e . We t r y t o make l o v e t o h e r and she s l a p s o u r f a c e . Anyone who c o n t i n u e d b e l i e v i n g i n t h e f a c e o f a l l t h i s w o u l d be s a i d t o have l e t h i s d e s i r e o v e r r i d e h i s r e a s o n . To \" w i l l t o b e l i e v e \" s o m e t h i n g i s t o w i l l t o have t h a t t h i n g be t h e c a s e , be t r u e , be f a c t , be r e a l \u2014 i t ' s n o t t o w i l l jjo m e r e l y b e l i e v e i t . B e l i e f s can be o f what i s t r u e o r f a l s e . Anyone who c o u l d be s a i d t o d e s i r e m e r e l y b e l i e f \u2014 3 w h e t h e r t h a t b e l i e f was o f what was t r u e OR f a l s e \u2014. does n o t u n d e r s t a n d what b e l i e f i s . To b e l i e v e i s t o a c c e p t as t r u e and t o w i l l t o b e l i e v e i s t o w i l l t o a c c e p t ( o r t o w i l l t h a t one, c o u l d a c c e p t ) as t r u e . And t h i s i s t o w i l l , d e -s i r e , want e t c . t h a t i t BE t r u e . How e l s e c o u l d qne a c c e p t i t o r b e l i e v e i t e x c e p t as one deems i t t r u e ? I f someone a d m i t s t h a t he wants t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g , t h e n he does n o t a l r e a d y b e l i e v e i t . One may 1 , 1want what one b e l i e v e s ' ( i . e . want i t t o be t h e c a s e , r e m a i n t h e case) b u t one cannot b e l i e v e what one w a n t s . Can one t r y t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g ? Says H a m p s h i r e ( p . 1 5 7 ) , \" a s t a t e m e n t o f a d i f f i -c u l t y i n t h e ' a t t e m p t ' ( t o b e l i e v e , J . O . ) i s a l r e a d y a s t a t e -ment t h a t I do n o t b e l i e v e and i s n o t s e r i o u s l y m e a n t . \" But James seems q u i t e s e r i o u s when he u r g e s us t o a l l o w our p a s s i o n a l n a t u r e s t o i n f l u e n c e ( n a y , d e t e r m i n e ) o u r c h o i c e between o p i n i o n s ( p . 1 9 ) . He s e r i o u s l y s u g g e s t s t h a t we c a n and s h o u l d choose t o b e l i e v e w h i c h e v e r o f two c o n t r a d i c t o r y p r o p o s i t i o n s most a p p e a l s t o u s , when o u r i n t e l l e c t a l o n e c a n n o t d e c i d e t h e i s s u e . But i f b e l i e f i s n o t an a c t i o n , i t makes no s e n s e t o t a l k o f c h o o s i n g t o b e l i e v e . A l s o , i t seems t o make l i t t l e s e n s e t o u r g e someone t o l e t h i s p a s s i o n a l  n a t u r e o r h i s e m o t i o n s d e t e r m i n e w h i c h p r o p o s i t i o n t o b e l i e v e . I f b e l i e f were a f u n c t i o n o f e m o t i o n a l o n e , o r i f i t were l e f t t o e m o t i o n a l o n e i n any g i v e n c a s e , i t w o u l d n o t s e r v e i t s p r o p e r f u n c t i o n - - v i z . , t o be o f what i s TRUE. To s a y t h a t we c a n , and s h o u l d , choose t o b e l i e v e a p r o p o s i t i o n , i s t o say t h a t we c a n , and s h o u l d choose t o a c -c e p t a p o s s i b l e s t a t e o f a f f a i r s as b e i n g e x i s t e n t o r a g i v e n 9 s t a t e m e n t as t r u e . T r u t h must come i n t o t h e p i c t u r e some-where b e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e MEANS t o a c c e p t as b e i n g t r u e . The q u e s t i o n i s , can we d e c i d e what we s h a l l a c c e p t as b e i n g t r u e o r do we FIND o u r s e l v e s a c c e p t i n g s o m e t h i n g as t r u e ? The v o l i t i o n a l t h e o r y o f b e l i e f i s t h a t we CAN d e c i d e t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g and t h e T e m p t a t i o n T h e o r y (a l a James)- i s t h a t we can and s h o u l d b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g , i f i t ' s l i v e enough t o tempt o u r w i l l . I have c l a i m e d t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n . o f b e l i e f i s t o e n a b l e us t o ' r a n g e i n ' , so t o s p e a k , on r e a l i t y . The words ' t o be t r u e ' i n t h e s t a t e m e n t 'He b e l i e v e s X t o be t r u e ' a r e r e -d u n d a n t . To say t h a t he b e l i e v e s X I S t o say t h a t he t a k e s i t t o be t h e c a s e o r t h e a c t u a l s t a t e of a f f a i r s . Of c o u r s e one may b e l i e v e m i s t a k e n l y - - deem s o m e t h i n g t r u e t h a t i s f a l s e \u2014 b u t by d e f i n i t i o n , t h e b e l i e v e r h i m s e l f c a n n o t be aware o f t h i s . E l s e he s h o u l d b e l i e v e d i f f e r e n t l y . The p e r s o n who b e l i e v e s s o m e t h i n g t a k e s i t t o be t r u e . T h i s i s t h e meaning o f b e l i e f . The q u e s t i o n was posed above w h e t h e r w e ' c a n d e c i d e t o deem s o m e t h i n g t r u e - - i . e . , d e c i d e o r choose t o b e l i e v e i t . I f o u r d e s c r i p t i o n o f b e l i e f i s c o r r e c t , we must answer \" N o \" t o t h i s q u e s t i o n . I f b e l i e f were s u b j e c t t o d e c i s i o n , t h e n we c o u l d choose t o b e l i e v e one t h i n g t o d a y and a n o t h e r ( i . e . i t s d e n i a l ) t o m o r r o w . T h i s w o u l d mean t h a t we deem t r u e t o d a y what we deem f a l s e tomorrow,. But we w o u l d do t h i s \u2014 we w o u l d d e c i d e THAT what was t r u e one day had become f a l s e t h e n e x t \u2014 o n l y i f we b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n had changed f r o m one day t o t h e n e x t . And i t i s p a t e n t l y a b s u r d t o s a y 10 t h a t we can choose t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n has r e v e r s e d i t s e l f \u2014 -we e i t h e r b e l i e v e t h i s o r we d o n ' t . I t i s a b s u r d t o ' suppose t h a t we c o u l d wake up one m o r n i n g and d e c i d e t o a l t e r one o f o u r b e l i e f s f o r no r e a s o n a t a l l . I f w a n t i n g t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g i s a s e n s i b l e n o t i o n , and i f w a n t i n g t o b e l i e v e i t c o u l d be c o u n t e d as a R E A S O N f o r b e l i e v i n g i t , and i f b e l i e f were v o l i t i o n a l ; i n t h i s case we c o u l d , and perhaps s h o u l d d e c i d e t o b e l i e v e what most t e m p t e d o u r w i l l ( i . e . what most t e m p t e d u s ) . B u t b e l i e f i s n o t v o l i t i o n a l a n d w a n t i n g t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g ( w h i c h r e a l l y means w a n t i n g s o m e t h i n g TO BE T R U E ) may be a c a u s a l f a c t o r b u t n e v e r a . j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n r e g a r d t o b e l i e f . To b e l i e v e what one most wants t o b e l i e v e i s t o a c c e p t as b e i n g t r u e what one most wants to . a c c e p t as b e i n g t r u e . T h i s w o u l d make t r u t h a s u b j e c t i v e t h i n g \u2014 s u b j e c t t o t h e d e e p e s t d e s i r e s o f any g i v e n p e r s o n . S t r a n g e t h i n g s f o l l o w f r o m t h e n o t i o n t h a t we s h o u l d ( o r c o u l d ) b e l i e v e (deem t r u e ) what most t e m p t s o u r w i l l . To b e l i e v e means t o acc-ept as t r u e - - i t does n o t mean t o d i c t a t e as t r u e . Our b e l i e f s a r e o u r major h o l d on r e a l i t y and hence on t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h o t h e r s . I f we c o u l d d i c t a t e as t r u e what most t e m p t e d o u r w i l l , t h e n r e a l i t y v a n i s h e s i n t o ' r e a l f o r m e . ' C o m m u n i c a t i o n between p e o p l e m i g h t become i m p o s s i b l e i f t h e i r d e e p e s t d e s i r e s were n o t i d e n t i c a l . What o t h e r s a c c e p t as t r u e may be u t t e r l y u n l i k e what I a c c e p t \u2014 y e t on t h e T e m p t a t i o n T h e o r y t h e y have e v e r y r i g h t t o c o n t r a d i c t me as I have e v e r y r i g h t t o c o n t r a d i c t t h e m . James s a y s t h a t each o f us can a c c e p t t h i s 11 f a c t w i t h o u t s t r a i n i n g o u r i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n s c i e n c e s . \" T r u e \" f o r James meant no more t h a n t r u e f o r me o r t r u e f o r u s , t h e r e -f o r e w h a t ' s t r u e ( f o r me) may be f a l s e ( f o r you) a t t h e same t i m e . But t h e words ' t r u e ' and ' r e a l ' l o s e a l l meaning i f A i s j u s t i f i e d i n a s s e r t i n g X i n any c i r c u m s t a n c e s and B i s j u s t i f i e d i n a s s e r t i n g n o t - X i n any c i r c u m s t a n c e s . I f X can be s a i d t o be t r u e ( o r t r u e f o r A) and a t t h e same t i m e n o t -X c a n be s a i d t o be t r u e ( o r t r u e f o r . B ) , t h e n t h e t r u e - f a l s e d i s t i n c t i o n i s v i t i a t e d . T h i s i s so b e c a u s e t o be . j u s t i f i e d i n a s s e r t i n g X means t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o a l l t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t one has a t t h e t i m e o f a s s e r t i o n , X i s t r u e . A s t a t e m e n t may be d o u b t f u l - - e i t h e r t r u e o r f a l s e - - b u t i t cannot a t t h e same t i m e be t r u e and f a l s e i n e x a c t l y t h e same r e s p e c t s . T h i s i s a l o g i c a l i m p o s s i b i l i t y . James does n o t c o n s i d e r o t h e r p e o p l e i n The' W i l l t o B e l i e v e - - he a d d r e s s e s t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t r e a t s h i m as t h o u g h he were a l o n e i n t h e u n i v e r s e . I f t h e t r u e - f a l s e d i s t i n c t i o n i s t o . be s a v e d , i f t h e s e words a r e t o have any m e a n i n g , t h e n we must b r i n g i n t h e ' n o t i o n o f e v i d e n c e . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e T e m p t a t i o n T h e o r y o f b e l i e f , one c o u l d b e l i e v e X t o d a y and n o t - X t o m o r r o w w i t h o u t o n e ' s e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e h a v i n g changed a t a l l . O n e ' s w i l l o r d e e p e s t needs o r w i s h e s may have c h a n g e d , t h u s ' j u s t i f y i n g ' t h e change i n b e l i e f . B u t why r e s t r i c t i t t o a day? Why c o u l d n ' t we s i n c e r e l y a s s e r t X a t 8\" o ' c l o c k and s i n c e r e l } ^ a s s e r t n o t - X a t 9 o ' c l o c k ? And t h e n p e r h a p s , s w i t c h a g a i n a t 10 and 11? \"Make up y o u r m i n d ' . \" , you may i m p a t i e n t l y demand. But y o u r demand i m p l i e s t h a t I am 12 i n d e c i s i v e , whereas I am most d e c i s i v e . I am so d e c i s i v e , i n f a c t , t h a t I can deem X t r u e o r f a l s e a l m o s t a t w i l l . \"My w i l l be done i n heaven as i t i s on e a r t h \" . Not o n l y have we l o s t t h e t r u e - f a l s e d i s t i n c t i o n , on t h e v o l i t i o n a l and t e m p t a t i o n t h e o r i e s o f b e l i e f , b u t a l s o we have l o s t t h e v e r y meaning o f B E L I E F i t s e l f . And t h i s i s d i s a s t r o u s f o r t h e o r i e s w h i c h a r e s u p p o s e d t o be about b e l i e f . As A . P . G r i f f i t h s s a y s ( p . 1$4) , \" . . . t h e c o n c e p t o f b e l i e f i s o n l y p o s s i b l e a t a l l \u2014 s i n c e i t i s a c o n c e p t i n t h e p u b -l i c l a n g u a g e - - i f we p r e s u p p o s e s t a n d a r d s o f a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s w h i c h l i n k b e l i e f w i t h what i s b e l i e v e d . \" He a d d s , (p . l$5-6), \" . . . o n e can speak o f p e o p l e as b e l i e v i n g o n l y so f a r as t h e y c a n be c o n c e i v e d as t h i n k i n g t h i n g s t r u e , and as a c c e p t i n g c r i t e r i a w h i c h e n a b l e thern t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e f a l s e f r o m t h e t r u e . But one c o u l d speak o f p e o p l e as a c c e p t i n g t h e s e c r i t e r i a o f t r u t h o n l y i n s o f a r as i n g e n e r a l t h e y a r e w i l l i n g t o a s s e r t . . w h a t t h e s e c r i t e r i a demand, on o c c a s i o n s when a s s e r t i o n i s i n p l a c e . . And t h i s means t h a t t h e r e c o u l d n o t be s a i d t o be s u c h a t h i n g as b e l i e f , u n l e s s t h e r e were p u b l i c l y i n t e l l i g i b l e s t a n d a r d s o f e v i d e n c e and an a c t u a l t e n d e n c y t o use t h e m : s o m e t h i n g l i k e common s e n s e so t o s p e a k . \" As G r i f f i t h s s a y s , T e r t u l l i a n may have b e l i e v e d because i t was a b s u r d \u2014 b u t he c o u l d do t h i s o n l y b e c a u s e t h e s t a n d a r d case o f b e l i e f was j u s t t h e o p p o s i t e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i f p e o p l e g e n e r a l l y b e l i e v e d t h i n g s because t h e y seemed a b s u r d , b e l i e f w o u l d be a f a r d i f f e r e n t t h i n g f r o m ' w h a t I deem t r u e ' . I t w o u l d mean ' w h a t I deem a b s u r d . ' As F i n d l a y s a y s (p.104) \" I t i s o n l y b e c a u s e I have p r a c t i s e d t h e a r t o f b u i l d i n g b e l i e f on a g e n u i n e b a s i s and i n a r e g u l a r manner t h a t . - . , p e r v e r s e p e r f o r m a n c e s a r e p o s s i b l e . \" I f p e o p l e g e n e r a l l y b e l i e v e d t h i n g s t o f u l f i l l t h e f u n c t i o n o f b e i n g n e e d e d , wanted o r w i l l e d , t h e n b e l i e f w o u l d MEAN 'what I deem s a t i s f y i n g . ' o r 'what I deem r e q u i r e d f o r my peace o f mind' e t c . r a t h e r t h a n 'what I deem t r u e ' . T h e r e must be some s t a b i l i t y t o b e l i e f o r i t c e a s e s t o be b e l i e f a t a l l . I f p e o p l e e x h i b i t no c o n s i s t e n c y i n t h e i r a s s e r t i o n s o r a c t i o n s . ' w e c o n s i d e r them d e r a n g e d . I n a s e n s e , t h e y a r e u n a b l e t o ' r a n g e i n ' on r e a l i t y . P e r h a p s my p h r a s e ' r a n g e i n ' was most a p t \u2014 one who c a n n o t ' r a n g e i n ' i s D E r a n g e d . The p o o r c r e a t u r e s o b v i o u s l y do n o t know what t o b e l i e v e (what t h e y b e l i e v e ) . I f one c l a i m s t o b e l i e v e e v e r y t h i n g (and James s a y s t h a t we w o u l d L I K E t o ) (l$90, p.297), t h e n one r e a l l y b e l i e v e s n o t h i n g - - s i n c e f o r e v e r y s t a t e -ment ' X ' t h e r e i s a s t a t e m e n t ' n o t - X ' . I f i t were p o s s i b l e t o b e l i e v e b o t h X and i t s n e g a t i o n a t t h e same t i m e ( w h i c h i t i s n o t ) , t h e n one m i g h t as w e l l be d e s c r i b e d as b e l i e v i n g n e i t h e r as b e l i e v i n g b o t h . B e l i e f I n one a u t o m a t i c a l l y c a n c e l s b e l i e f i n t h e o t h e r . B e l i e v i n g X e n t a i l s d i s b e l i e v i n g n o t - X . I t MEANS d i s b e l i e v i n g n o t - X . We c o n c l u d e w i t h H a m p s h i r e ' s r e m a r k (p .150) t h a t \" . . b e l i e f s g e n e r a l l y ( t h e r e a r e e x c e p t i o n s ) must be t o some d e g r e e s t a b l e i f t h e y a r e t o c o u n t as b e l i e f s a t a l l . \" The f u n c t i o n o f a b e l i e f i s t o be o f what i s t r u e . To b e l i e v e MEANS t o a c c e p t a s , o r deem, t r u e . I f we a r e t o b e l i e v e what i s most l i k e l y t o be t r u e , t h e n we must b e l i e v e i 14 r a t i o n a l l y ( i . e . as r e a s o n d i c t a t e s - - n o t d e s i r e o r need o r w i l l - - o r w i t h r e a s o n s ) . But o f c o u r s e someone may b e l i e v e X on what we deem i n s u f f i c i e n t g r o u n d s o r none a t a l l , y e t X may happen t o be t r u e . T h i s i s j u s t t h e p o i n t . We d o n ' t want t o have t o r e l y on good l u c k t o b e l i e v e what i s t r u e . The odds a r e v e r y s l i g h t t h a t we w o u l d b e l i e v e much t h a t i s t r u e u n l e s s t h e r e were c e r t a i n e s t a b l i s h e d p r o c e d u r e s o r r u l e s t o f o l l o w i n t h e q u e s t f o r t r u t h . The f i r s t r u l e t o obey i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h i s t o make e v e r y a t t e m p t not t o d i s r e g a r d any a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e . A r e l i a b l e way t o g e t a t t h e t r u t h i s t o pay as much a t t e n t i o n as p o s s i b l e t o e v i d e n c e and as l i t t l e , as p o s s i b l e t o what we w o u l d L I K E t o be t h e c a s e . As G r a n t s a y s (p.14-15), \" I t i s p a r t o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f r a t i o n a l b e l i e f t h a t ^ i s d e t e r m i n e d n o t by t h e w i l l b u t by t h e a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e . To t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h we o u r s e l v e s c o n t r o l o u r b e l i e f s , t o t h a t e x t e n t t h e y a r e n o n - r a t i o n a l . I f i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d e c i d e or choose what one b e l i e v e s , t h e n t h a t b e l i e f i s d e t e r m i n e d n o t by t h e e v i d e n c e b u t by t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l . T h i s makes i n e v i t a b l e what i s commonly c a l l e d ' ' w i s h f u l t h i n k i n g * 1 \u2014 and t h i s i s n o t a k i n d o f t h i n k i n g b u t t h e a b d i c a t i o n o f t h o u g h t , i n a s i m i l a r f a s h i o n t o t h a t i n w h i c h a f o r g e d pound n o t e i s n o t a k i n d o f c u r r e n c y b u t i t s t r a v e s t y . \" I n c o n v e r s a t i o n , a p e r s o n ( l e t us c a l l h i m ' A ' ) c l a i m e d t h a t he c o u l d choose t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g . I a s k e d h i m w h e t h e r he c o u l d choose t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e g r e e n shoes I was w e a r i n g were brown ( o r any o t h e r c o l o u r ) . He s a i d t h a t 15 he c o u l d n o t . He e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e only , k i n d o f b e l i e f s w h i c h c o u l d be' c h o s e n were t h o s e c o n c e r n i n g matter* w h i c h a r e i n p r i n c i p l e e m p i r i c a l l y u n v e r i f i a b l e \u2014 e . g . t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . I a s k e d h i m i f he c o u l d choose t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a God, and i f s o , why he d i d n ' t do s o . He r e p l i e d , \" B e c a u s e I f i n d i t ( i . e . t h e a s s e r t i o n ' G o d e x i s t s ' ) i m -p l a u s i b l e . \" A s a i d t h a t t h e r e a s o n he c o u l d n o t choose t o b e l i e v e t h a t my shoes were brown was t h a t he KNEW t h a t t h e y were g r e e n . I t a k e i t t h a t he knew t h i s on t h e b a s i s o f o v e r -w h e l m i n g e v i d e n c e - - v i z . , he c o u l d SEE t h a t my shoes were n o t b r o w n . I t w o u l d seem, t h e n , t h a t when t h e e v i d e n c e i s o v e r w h e l m i n g , i t r e a l l y IS o v e r w h e l m i n g . That i s , we c a n n o t h e l p b u t b e l i e v e what we see ( w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f s u c h c a s e s as t h e ' b e n t ' o a r i n t h e w a t e r \u2014 b u t i n t h i s case we c a n n o t h e l p but b e l i e v e what we t o u c h ) . The o n l y r e a s o n we c o u l d say t h a t A knew t h a t my shoes were g r e e n was t h a t he b e l i e v e d i t w i t h . j u s t i f i e d c o n f i d e n c e . And what j u s t i f i e s c o n f i d e n c e i s e v i d e n c e . A s a i d t h a t he d i d n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e was a God b e c a u s e he f o u n d i t i m p l a u s i b l e . P r e s u m a b l y t h i s means t h a t he d i d n o t f i n d i t r e a s o n a b l e \u2014 i . e . t h e r e w e r e n ' t any ( o r \" enough) r e a s o n s f o r i t . I t seems t h a t o u r f r i e n d A d i d n o t choose t o b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g t h a t he d i d n ' t see enough r e a s o n s t o w a r r a n t b e l i e f . But once he r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e r e were enough r e a s o n s f o r b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g , he w o u l d n ' t need a l s o t o d e c i d e o r choose t o b e l i e v e i t \u2014 he w o u l d a l r e a d y b e l i e v e i t . 16 A c o u l d n o t r e a l l y choose t o b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g a t a l l . He s a i d t h a t he d i d n ' t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a God b e c a u s e he f o u n d i t i m p l a u s i b l e . But t o f i n d s o m e t h i n g p l a u s i b l e i s t o f i n d i t b e l i e v a b l e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , A c o u l d n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a God because he c o u l d n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . W h a t e v e r A meant , he j u s t c o u l d n o t choose t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . But what t h i s came t o , was t h a t he j u s t c o u l d n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . I have c l a i m e d t h a t b e l i e f i s i n v o l u n t a r y . T h i s means t h a t we a r e n o t f r e e t o b e l i e v e w h a t e v e r we want o r w h a t e v e r w o u l d be o f most b e n e f i t t o u s . We cannot b e l i e v e a t w i l l . I do n o t t h i n k t h a t p e o p l e want m e r e l y t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . They want i t t o b e . t h e c a s e t h a t God e x i s t s . I t h i n k t h a t W i l l i a m James i s i n s u c h a p o s i t i o n . He c l a i m s (p.27) t h a t he has a \" p a s s i o n a l n e e d o f t a k i n g t h e w o r l d r e l i g i o u s l y \" . But i n s t e a d o f a r g u i n g t h e case f o r t h e e x -i s t e n c e o f God o r f o r t h e v i e w t h a t t h e b e s t t h i n g s a r e t h e e t e r n a l t h i n g s , he u r g e s us t o b e l i e v e t h e s e t h i n g s . I f James i s u r g i n g us t o b e l i e v e t h e ' r e l i g i o u s h y p o -t h e s i s ' on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t i t w i l l be o f b e n e f i t t o u s , and i f he e x p e c t s us t o be a b l e t o do t h i s a t w i l l , t h e n he i s f o r g e t t i n g what he h i m s e l f s a y s about b e l i e f ; (16*90, p.320) \" . . . w i l l c o n s i s t s i n n o t h i n g b u t a manner o f a t t e n d i n g t o c e r t a i n o b j e c t s , o f c o n s e n t i n g t o t h e i r s t a b l e p r e s e n c e b e -f o r e t h e m i n d . The o b j e c t s , i n t h e case o f w i l l , a r e t h o s e whose e x i s t e n c e depends on o u r t h o u g h t , movements o f our own body f o r e x a m p l e , o r f a c t s w h i c h s u c h movements e x e c u t e d i n 17 t h e f u t u r e may make r e a l . O b j e c t s o f b e l i e f on t h e c o n t r a r y a r e t h o s e w h i c h do n o t change a c c o r d i n g as we t h i n k r e -g a r d i n g t h e m . I w i l l t o g e t up e a r l y t o m o r r o w m o r n i n g ; I b e l i e v e t h a t I g o t up l a t e y e s t e r d a y m o r n i n g . . . \" He adds ( p .321) \" . . . s o t h e g r e a t p r a c t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n between o b -j e c t s w h i c h we may w i l l o r u n w i l l , and o b j e c t s w h i c h we c a n m e r e l y b e l i e v e o r d i s b e l i e v e , grows u p , and i s o f c o u r s e one o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t d i s t i n c t i o n s i n t h e w o r l d . . T r u l y enough, a man cannot b e l i e v e a t w i l l a b r u p t l y . \" As i m p o r t a n t as t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s , James h i m s e l f i n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e seems a t t i m e s t o f o r g e t i t . James says ( p . l ) t h a t h i s e s s a y i s \" a d e f e n c e o f o u r r i g h t t o adopt a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e i n r e l i g i o u s m a t t e r s \" . He adds on t h e n e x t page t h a t he has \" l o n g d e f e n d e d . . . . t h e l a w f u l n e s s o f v o l u n t a r i l y a d o p t e d f a i t h \" . T h i s does n o t sound t h e same as h i s p r e a c h i n g \" t h e l i b e r t y o f b e l i e v i n g \" ( P r e f a c e , 1956, p . x ) w h i c h we have shown t o embody a m i s t a k e n v i e w o f t h e n a t u r e o f b e l i e f . But i f we a r e n o t a t \" l i b e r t y t o b e l i e v e \" , p e r h a p s we a r e a t l i b e r t y t o \" a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e . \" ( I t i s u n c e r t a i n w h e t h e r he w a n t s us t o b e l i e v e t h e r e l i g i o u s a f f i r m a t i o n s ' e v e n now' o r t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e t o w a r d r e l i g i o n . ) I f we i n t e r p r e t t h e argument between James and C l i f f o r d as i n v o l v i n g t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e m o r a l i t y (and t h e r e f o r e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y ) o f b e l i e v i n g a t w i l l , t h e n we have a l r e a d y shown t h a t t h e y a r e b o t h m i s g u i d e d . You c a n n o t condemn or r e w a r d a man f o r what he b e l i e v e s . But we can a t t e n d t o o t h e r t h i n g s James s a y s , s u c h as t h e a d o p t i o n o f a b e l i e v i n g 18 a t t i t u d e , and see w h e t h e r t h e argument m i g h t n o t c e n t e r a b o u t t h e l e g i t i m a c y o f a d o p t i n g a. b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e . James d e f e n d s t h e r i g h t t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e i n r e l i g i o u s m a t t e r s . We s h a l l see w h e t h e r i t i s EVER r i g h t t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e and what t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s w o u l d b e , r e g a r d i n g s u c h t h i n g s as t r u t h and r e a l i t y . James does n o t make i t c l e a r e x a c t l y what he means by t h e p h r a s e ' a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e ' . \u2022 I t may mean 1) g e t i n t o t h e mood o f a c c e p t a n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o a g i v e n p r o p o s i t i o n - - e . g . as we m i g h t do i f we were t o l d u n - ' o f f i c i a l l y by someone t h a t he ' t h i n k s ' he saw o u r g r a d e f o r t h e y e a r i n t h e p r o f e s s o r ' s l i t t l e b l a c k book and we g o t 90%. The p r o p o s i t i o n h e r e i s \" Y o u r e c e i v e d 90% as y o u r mark f o r t h e y e a r \" . Our d e s i r e w o u l d put us i n t o a mood o f a c c e p t a n c e . Or t h e p h r a s e i l a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e ' may mean 2) c u l t i v a t e b e l i e f i n a g i v e n p r o p o s i t i o n - - e . g . by l o o k i n g o n l y f o r s i g n s t h a t we have r e c e i v e d a v e r y h i g h mark and a v o i d i n g - ' o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o c o n s i d e r c l a i m s o f d i s ' c o n f i r m a t i o n ( e . g . w e ' r e t o o a f r a i d t o a s k t h e p r o f e s s o r d i r e c t l y ) . I s u s p e c t t h a t James w o u l d s u b s c r i b e t o t h e s e c o n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n above t h o u g h h i s a c t u a l w o r k i n g w o u l d seem t o s u g g e s t s o m e t h i n g l i k e t h e f i r s t o n e . A l o o k a t two examples o f o u r f i r s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , v i z . , ' b e l i e f - a t t i t u d e - a d o p t i o n ' may h e l p c l a r i f y t h i s i s s u e . L a t e r we s h a l l c o n s i d e r o u r s e c o n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (see p . 2 . f ) . !9 3. BELIEF-ATTITUDE-ADOPTION I : A . Example one: H e r e i s a case where I w o u l d deem i t u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , f o r g i v e a b l e , p e r h a p s even l e g i t i m a t e i n some s e n s e , t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e . Suppose t h a t y o u have a son and t h a t he i s k i d n a p p e d . You a r e i n s t r u c t e d t o l e a v e a sum o f money a t a c e r t a i n p l a c e and y o u a r e t o l d t o e x p e c t y o u r s o n ' s d e l i v e r y 21+ h o u r s a f t e r t h e payment . S u r e l y one w o u l d , u n d e r t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , a d o p t a b e l i e v i n a t t i t u d e i n r e g a r d t o t h e b o y ' s s a f e t y - - a s s u m i n g t h a t one l o v e d o n e ' s son and t h a t one i n t e n d e d t o f o l l o w t h e k i d n a p p e r i n s t r u c t i o n s . I n t h i s c a s e , one m i g h t n o t know a t a l l what t o t h i n k \u2014 one w o u l d l i k e l y be ' a t o n e ' s w i t s ' e n d ' - - b u t one w o u l d want t h e boy t o be a l i v e . One w o u l d n o t want m e r e l y t o B E L I E V E t h a t t h e boy was a l i v e . One w o u l d l i k e l y t a k e any h i n t a t a l l as c o n f i r m a t i o n t h a t he was s a f e - -even t h e k i d n a p p e r ' s a s s u r a n c e . I n s u c h a c a s e , i t w o u l d be u n d e r s t a n d a b l e t h a t d e s i r e t o have s o m e t h i n g be t h e case m i g h t b l i n d one t o t h e t r u t h o f t h e m a t t e r . The t r u t h o f t h e m a t t e r i s t h a t you j u s t d o n ' t KNOW how t h e boy i s f a r i n g . And w o u l d we blame a p a r e n t who l e t d e s i r e o v e r r i d e h i s r e a s o n ? No \u2014 we w o u l d even say t h a t we w o u l d n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h e p a r e n t who d i d NOT l e t d e s i r e c o l o u r h i s o p i n i o n . Here t h e p a r e n t w o u l d seek o n l y c o r r o b o r a t i n g e v i d e n c e . I do n o t t h i n k we w o u l d blame h i m f o r s e e k i n g o n l y p o s i t i v e e v i d e n c e h e r e . We w o u l d be more l i k e l y t o wonder a t , o r even blame_, a p a r e n t who s o u g h t as a r d e n t l y f o r n e g a t i v e as f o r 20 p o s i t i v e e v i d e n c e . And we s u r e l y w o u l d n o t a p p r o v e o f t h e p a r e n t who sought ONLY d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n . We w o u l d n o t blame a p a r e n t f o r w a n t i n g t o f i n d o n l y p o s i t i v e e v i d e n c e b u t we m i g h t blame h i m f o r d i s r e g a r d i n g n e g a t i v e e v i d e n c e . He w o u l d be d i s r e g a r d i n g t h e f i r s t r u l e i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h ( s e e page\/* ) . We w o u l d even t r y t o i n t e r v e n e i f we t h o u g h t t h a t t h e p a r e n t ' s v o l u n t a r y b l i n d -n e s s m i g h t i t s e l f l e a d t o t h e b o y ' s d e a t h . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e p o l i c e m i g h t know t h a t many k i d n a p p e r s k i l l t h e i r v i c t i m a f t e r d e l i v e r y o f t h e ransom money. The p o l i c e may t r y t o c o n v i n c e t h e p a r e n t t o a l l o w them t o w a t c h t h e ransom d e -l i v e r y so t h a t t h e y can c a t c h t h e k i d n a p p e r s r e d h a n d e d when t h e y t r y t o c o l l e c t i t . The p a r e n t may have a d o p t e d a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e so s t r o n g t h a t n o t h i n g c o u l d p e r s u a d e h i m . t o do o t h e r t h a n what t h e k i d n a p p e r o r d e r e d . T h i s w o u l d be an example o f a case where t o a d o p t t o o s t r o n g a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e , o r t o a d o p t one t o o r e a d i l y , may l e a d t o j u s t t h e U N d e s i r e d r e s u l t . B l i n d i n g o n e s e l f t o an u n d e s i r a b l e p o s -s i b l e event i n t h e f u t u r e can a c t u a l l y h e l p b r i n g a b o u t t h a t e v e n t . (On f a i t h and v e r i f i c a t i o n see p . ) . I t h i n k . t h i s k i d n a p p i n g case shows t h a t t h e a d o p t i o n o f a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e - - w a n t i n g one t h i n g t o be t h e case r a t h e r t h a n a n o t h e r (when you d o n ' t know what t h e case i s ) \u2014 i s sometimes u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , f o r g i v e a b l e o r even l e g i t i m a t e . I t i s a t any r a t e e x p e c t e d i n s u c h c a s e s . But where does t h e q u e s t i o n o f TRUTH come i n ? I f we wanted t o know how i n t r u t h t h e boy was f a r i n g , how he was r e a l l y f a r i n g , w o u l d we be w i s e t o a s k t h e p a r e n t ? We w o u l d be u n l i k e l y t o go t o 21 t h e one s o u r c e where d e s i r e o r hope may have u t t e r l y b l i n d e d an i n t e r e s t e d p a r t y . ' . We w o u l d no d o u b t a s k t h e p o l i c e , i f t h e y were i n v o l v e d , r a t h e r t h a n r e l y on t h e p a r e n t who so wants t h e boy t o be s a f e o r t h e k i d n a p p e r who so wants e v e r y -one t o t h i n k t h a t he i s s a f e . Where someone s t a n d s t o g a i n . o r l o s e , i n r e g a r d t o t h e answer t o any g i v e n q u e s t i o n , t h e n one i s n ' t l i k e l y t o be t h e b e s t p o s s i b l e g u i d e t o t h e c o r r e c t a n s w e r . A r e a l i s t i c a p p r a i s a l i n t h i s case i s more l i k e l y t o l e a d t o t h e d e s i r e d r e s u l t t h a n i s b l i n d f a i t h o r mere a d o p t i o n o f a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e . D e s i r e f o r a c e r t a i n t h i n g t o be t r u e o r b l i n d f a i t h i n t h a t t h i n g ' s b e i n g t r u e c a n l e a d t o j u s t t h e o p p o s i t e r e s u l t . James m i g h t s a y t h a t t h e p a r e n t s h o u l d adopt a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e t o t h e b o y ' s s a f e t y i n t h e sense t h a t he s h o u l d b e l i e v e t h a t i s i s POSSIBLE t h a t t h e boy i s s t i l l a l i v e . He - s h o u l d n ' t g i v e up t o o e a r l y , but s h o u l d pay the^ ransom and hope t h a t i t ' l l come out i n -the e n d . And o f c o u r s e we w o u l d n o t want t o a r g u e w i t h James h e r e . B u t i t i s n o t r e a l i s t i c t o say t h a t James w o u l d a r g u e i n t h i s way. I n a l l l i k e l i h o o d , a p a r e n t w o u l d pay t h e r a n s o m , i f he were a b l e t o do s o , o n l y i f he were n o t s u r e t h e b o y . w a s d e a d . That i s , he w o u l d do p r a c t i c a l l y a n y t h i n g t o s e e . t h e boy a l i v e and s a f e a g a i n so w o u l d r e f u s e t o pay t h e ransom o n l y i f he had s u f -f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e o r were s u r e t h a t t h e boy was dead a l r e a d y . One w o u l d a r g u e u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y because o n l y when t h e b o y ' s body i s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e p a r e n t , w i l l he s a y t h a t i t ' s n o t p o s s i b l e f o r h i m t o be a l i v e . We may c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e s o r t 22 o f argument James w o u l d make h e r e i s n o t j u s t t h a t t h e p a r e n t s h o u l d t h i n k i t p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e boy i s a l i v e b u t t h a t he s h o u l d a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e t h a t t h e boy i s a l i v e . And t h i s , as 'we s a i d a b o v e , c o u l d be v e r y d a n g e r o u s f o r t h e b o y . We w o u l d s a y t h a t he s h o u l d want t h e boy t o be a l i v e - - n o t t h a t he s h o u l d b e l i e v e t h a t t h e boy i s a l i v e . I : B . I n our s e c o n d c a s e o f a d o p t i o n o f a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e , i t i s n o t u n d e r s t a n d a b l e o r f o r g i v e a b l e t o do s o . I t i s 'RECOMMENDED or APPROPRIATE t o do s o . I t i s . a w e l l known maxim o f t h e t h e a t e r t h a t one s h o u l d w i l l i n g l y s u s p e n d d i s -b e l i e f - - n a y , be w i l l i n g t o b e l i e v e - - so t h a t one t a k e s what o c c u r s on t h e s t a g e as r e a l l y h a p p e n i n g . N o t i c e t h a t i s j u s t where we DO w i l l i n g l y b e l i e v e , and a r e w e l l a d v i s e d t o , t h a t we KNOW what t r a n s p i r e s on t h e s t a g e o r s c r e e n i s NOT r e a l . I t may have some c o n n e c t i o n w i t h r e a l i t y , e . g . t h e ' e m o t i o n s d i s p l a y e d on s t a g e may be r e a l i s t i c , but t h e y w o n ' t be ( o r a t l e a s t a r e n o t i n t e n d e d t o b e , o r a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y ) r e a l . Hamlet w i l l p e r h a p s be L a u r e n c e O l i v i e r -and C l e o p a t r a may be E l i z a b e t h T a y l o r , but Hamlet n e v e r l i v e d and C l e o p a t r a i s l o n g d e a d . I deem i t most s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t where we a r e w e l l a d v i s e t o a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e , i t i s a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t we a r e a d o p t i n g a d i f f e r e n t w o r l d , so t o speak ' - - t h e p l a y w o r l d o f u n r e a l i t y - - o f drama.. We have sometimes t o make an  e f f o r t t o b e l i e v e because i t IS so u n r e a l - - e . g . , we t r y t o i g n o r e t h e p r o m p t e r ' s w h i s p e r a-t an amateur p r o d u c t i o n . The more u n r e a l o r u n b e l i e v a b l e t h e p r o d u c t i o n i s , t h e more w i l l i n g we must be t o b e l i e v e , i f i t i s t o seem a t a l l r e a l 23 t o u s . I t seems, t h e n , t h a t t h e f u r t h e r we g e t f r o m r e a l i t y , ( t h e l e s s p l a u s i b l e s o m e t h i n g seems t o u s ) , t h e more need t h e r e i s f o r s u s p e n s i o n o f d i s b e l i e f o f a d o p t i o n o f a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e . When we see t h i n g s as t h e y r e a l l y a r e , t h e r e i s no need t o TRY t o see them i n a c e r t a i n way - - e . g . , as we w i s h t h e y were o r as t h e y MIGHT b e . Thus , ' where i t i s e x -p e c t e d , o r u n d e r s t a n d a b l e t h a t one w i l l a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e , we a r e w e l l a d v i s e d t o seek t r u t h e l s e w h e r e t h a n f r o m hirn who a d o p t s t h i s a t t i t u d e . ' Where i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e o r w e l l a d v i s e d t o adopt a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e , i t i s a f o r e -' gone c o n c l u s i o n t h a t what i s b e l i e v e d i s n o t o f t h i s w o r l d b u t o f a m a k e - b e l i e v e w o r l d . (One W i l l s t o Make B e l i e v e . M i l l e r , p. 16*7) . I do n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e C l i f f o r d - J a m e s d i s p u t e i s one a b o u t w h e t h e r o r n o t we s h o u l d g e t o u r s e l v e s i n t o t h e mood o f a c c e p t a n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o a p r o p o s i t i o n . I t h i n k t h a t i t i s a b o u t t h e way we COME BY o u r b e l i e f s . The most l i k e l y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n our v i e w o f ' a d o p t a b e l i e v i n g a t t i t u d e ' i s o u r s e c o n d one (see p . \/ # ) , . v i z . , ' c u l t i v a t e t h e b e l i e f . T h i s i s l i k e l y what James r e f e r s t o when he u s e s t h e p h r a s e ' v o l u n t a r i l y a d o p t e d f a i t h ' (p.2.). 24 4 . B E L I E F - C U L T I V A T I O N I I : As P r i c e s a y s , ( p . 1 6 - 1 7 ) , \" B e l i e f s can be g r a d u a l l y c u l t i v a t e d t h o u g h t h e y c a n n o t be i n s t a n t a n e o u s l y p r o d u c e d , o r a b o l i s h e d , a t w i l l . \" And he a d d s , ' ( p . 1 7 ) , \"The c r u c i a l p o i n t h e r e i s t h a t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f o u r a t t e n t i o n i s t o a l a r g e e x t e n t i n o u r own p o w e r \" . James a r g u e d t h a t i f some-t h i n g t e m p t s o u r w i l l enough - - i f we r e a l l y want ( o r f e e l we need) t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g enough - - we a r e a b l e and s h o u l d COME TO b e l i e v e i t . As we s a i d e a r l i e r , what t h i s amounts t o i s t h i s : i f we r e a l l y want s o m e t h i n g t o be t h e c a s e ( r e a l l y ' w a n t t o b e l i e v e i t ' ) , t h e n we s h o u l d come t o b e l i e v e i t ( i . e . , deem i t t o be t h e c a s e ) . Then f o r US, i t w i l l BE t h e case \u2014 \u2014 b e c a u s e WE WILL B E L I E V E I T . I t i s t r u e t h a t we c a n come t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g l a r g e l y by d i r e c t i n g o u r a t t e n t i o n o n l y i n c e r t a i n d i r e c t i o n s . G r a n t d i s c u s s e s t h e f o r m a t i o n o f b e l i e f s ( p . 1 9 ) \u2022 \" . . . r a t i o n a l b e l i e f i s b a s e d on c o l l e c t i n g and a t t e n d i n g t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e e v i d e n c e . \" Such a c t i v i t i e s ARE w i t h i n o u r c o n t r o l , he r i g h t l y s a y s . And he a d d s \" . . i t i s w i t h i n o u r power n o t t o t r o u b l e t o amass t h e e v i d e n c e . . . N o w s i n c e we a r e a t l i b e r t y t o choose on what b a s i s t o f o r m our b e l i e f s , t h e s e p r o c e d u r e s , b e i n g a c t i o n s , a r e p r o p e r s u b j e c t s o f m o r a l a p p r a i s a l . \" We s h a l l assume h e n c e f o r w a r d t h a t t h e i s s u e between C l i f f o r d and James i s one r e g a r d i n g methods o f b e l i e f c u l t i -v a t i o n , o r o f ' i n q u i r y ' . Would i t e v e r be r i g h t t o say t h a t someone ought t o 25 c u l t i v a t e a p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f ? I t h i n k t h a t i t w o u l d b e . One may a r g u e t h a t t h e r e a r e some S o u t h e r n e r s (and o t h e r s t o o ) i n t h e U . S . A . who ought t o c u l t i v a t e t h e b e l i e f t h a t . N e g r o e s a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n f e r i o r t o them because t h e y a r e o f a d i f f e r e n t hue-. The same c o u l d be s a i d f o r p e o p l e anywhere ( e . g . S o u t h A f r i c a , Canada) whose b e l i e f s a r e n o t d i c t a t e d b y , o r p r o p o r t i o n e d t o , t h e a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e . R e c a l l , t h e case o f t h e f a t h e r w i t h t h e 1 4 . y e a r o l d , u n -m a r r i e d , e x p e c t a n t d a u g h t e r . Suppose t h a t he i s so s h o c k e d when she t e l l s h i m h e r s t o r y , t h a t he c a n n o t b e l i e v e h e r . I n t h i s c a s e , we w o u l d s a y t h a t he s h o u l d c u l t i v a t e b e l i e f i n t h i s news, p r o v i d e d o f c o u r s e t h a t i t i s a c c u r a t e (and l e t us suppose t h a t i t i s a c c u r a t e ) . I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t i n t h e c a s e s where we w o u l d say t h a t one ought d e l i b e r a t e l y t o c u l t i v a t e a p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f , one i s i n a s t a t e o f NOT w a n t i n g ( o r ' w i l l i n g ' ) t o do s o . We t h i n k t h a t p e o p l e ought t o c u l t i v a t e b e l i e f s on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e t h i n g s i n q u e s t i o n a r e TRUE. And we w o u l d p r o b a b l y say t h a t t h e s e p e o p l e s h o u l d c u l t i v a t e b e l i e f i n t h e p r o p o s i t i o n s i n q u e s t i o n FOR THEIR OWN GOOD. But i s t r u t h an ' u l t i m a t e v a l u e ' ? That i s , can we t h i n k o f a case where i t w o u l d be b e t t e r t o (where we s h o u l d ) d e -c e i v e someone? Of c o u r s e we c a n . We a l l know t h e s t a n d a r d - P h i l o s o p h y 100 example o f t h e armed madman who comes t o t h e d o o r l o o k i n g f o r y o u r b r o t h e r (who IS home) and whom y o u ought t o d e c e i v e . A n o t h e r example i s t h e case o f an o l d , d y i n g man who i n h i s f i n a l b r e a t h s i n q u i r e s a f t e r h i s s o n 26 who has f a i l e d t o show up a t h i s d e a t h b e d . Suppose t h e s o n had been k i l l e d on h i s way t o t h e h o s p i t a l - - s h o u l d we t e l l t h e o l d man t h e t r u t h o r s h o u l d we l e t h i m d i e i n peace t h i n k i n g t h a t h i s son i s a l i v e and w e l l ? I t i s q u i t e c l e a r t h a t i n some c a s e s we do r i g h t t o h i d e t h e t r u t h . We excuse o r j u s t i f y l y i n g when ( c a s e 1 above) i t w i l l p r e v e n t u n n e c e s s a r y harm o r when ( c a s e 2) i t c o u l d n o t p o s s i b l y cause any h a r m . We deem i t r i g h t t o d e c e i v e t h e o l d man b e c a u s e he i s i n no p o s i t i o n t o o v e r t l y ACT on h i s b e l i e f and t h e r e b y i n f l u e n c e o r change t h e w o r l d i n any s i g -n i f i c a n t way. S i n c e b e l i e f i s a g u i d e t o a c t i o n , we g e n e r a l l y want t o b e l i e v e o n l y what i s t r u e \u2014 e l s e o u r a c t i o n s w i l l be m i s g u i d e d . I f we deem e f f e c t i v e a c t i o n u n l i k e l y u n l e s s u n d e r t a k e n on t h e b a s i s o f w a r r a n t e d b e l i e f , t h e n we w o u l d s u r e l y r e -s e r v e b e l i e f f o r t h a t w h i c h i s t r u e \u2014 n o t t h a t w h i c h s a t i s f i e s u s . There i s l i t t l e hope o f b e i n g a b l e t o a c t e f f e c t i v e l y \u2014 i . e . , a c c o m p l i s h o u r p u r p o s e s - - i f we a l l o w o u r s e l v e s t o be g u i d e d by b e l i e f s w h i c h m i s c o n s t r u e t h e f a c t s . I f we p r a c t i s e d what G r a n t c a l l e d \" w i s h f u l t h i n k i n g \" (see p . i + ) i n our e v e r y d a y l i v e s , when d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g a c t i o n s mVsX'-- be c o n s t a n t l y made,, t h e r e s u l t s w o u l d be l u d i c r o u s - -o r t r a g i c . We may w i s h we a r e N a p o l e o n and a c t on t h i s b e -l i e f \u2014 and p e o p l e ( t h e o t h e r p e o p l e we m e n t i o n e d on page\/ ' ) w o u l d soon r e s t r i c t o u r a c t i v i t y . We may w i s h t h a t o u r r i v a l i n l o v e i s d y i n g o f some i n c u r a b l e d i s e a s e and ' m e r c i f u l l y ' k i l l h i m . O t h e r s w o u l d soon r e s t r i c t , o r end our a c t i v i t y . I f i t i s nonsense t o a d v o c a t e w i s h f u l t h i n k i n g i n e v e r y -day l i f e , t h e n i t i s n o n s e n s e t o a d v o c a t e i t anywhere where 27 a c t i o n on t h e b a s i s o f s u c h b e l i e f c o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n . Y e t James s a y s (p.29, f o o t n o t e ) t h a t \"The w h o l e d e f e n c e of r e l i g i o u s f a i t h h i n g e s upon a c t i o n . \" We w i l l see l a t e r how vague t h i s \" d e f e n c e \" r e a l l y i s . F o r now, t h e t o p i c i s b e l i e f -c u l t i v a t i o n , and we w i l l see how James t h i n k s we s h o u l d c u l t i v a t e a b e l i e f . On pages - 321-322 o f h i s P r i n c i p l e s o f P s y c h o l o g y , James s a y s t h a t \"we n e e d o n l y i n c o l d b l o o d ACT as i f t h e t h i n g i n q u e s t i o n were r e a l , and i t w i l l i n f a l l i b l y end by g r o w i n g i n t o s u c h a c o n n e c t i o n w i t h o u r l i f e t h a t i t w i l l become r e a l . I t w i l l become so k n i t w i t h h a b i t and e m o t i o n t h a t o u r i n t e r e s t s i n i t w i l l be t h o s e w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e b e l i e f . Those t o whom ' G o d ' and ' D u t y ' a r e now mere names can make them much more t h a n t h a t , i f t h e y make a l i t t l e s a c r i f i c e t o them each d a y . \" I s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s a c r i f i c e h e r e i s o u r r e a s o n . O n l y i f God were an e v i l demon w o u l d He d e s i r e ( o r e x a c t ) s u c h a s a c r i f i c e f r o m u s . We w o u l d a l s o be s a c r i f i c i n g our h o n e s t y - -t o a c t on what we w o u l d l i k e t o b e l i e v e and n o t on what we DO b e l i e v e i s t o s e l f - d e c e i v e . And he who a d v o c a t e s s e l f -d e c e p t i o n a l s o a d v o c a t e s d e c e i v i n g o t h e r s . As C l i f f o r d s a i d , ( p . 1 7 4 ) \"Men speak t h e t r u t h t o one a n o t h e r when each r e v e r e s t h e t r u t h i n h i s own m i n d and i n t h e o t h e r ' s m i n d ; but how s h a l l my f r i e n d r e v e r e t h e t r u t h i n my m i n d when I m y s e l f am c a r e l e s s about i t , when I b e l i e v e t h i n g s because I want t o b e l i e v e t h e m , and because t h e y a r e c o m f o r t i n g and p l e a s a n t ? \" Where w o u l d we be i f everybodyhad l i s t e n e d t o James and had t a k e n h i s a d v i c e t o b e l i e v e what most t e m p t e d t h e i r w i l l \u2014 28 what made them happiest to belie v e ? As A. M. Maclver says (pp.20-21), \" I f our only reason f o r t h i n k i n g anything were that we ourselves found the.thought agreeable, then the odds against our thoughts happening to represent things as they r e a l l y are would be astronomical.... The world of men would be nothing but a vast l u n a t i c asylum i n which a l l the p a t i e n t s s u f f e r e d from t o t a l d e l u s i o n . \" He adds th a t \" I t i s . . . b e -cause b e l i e f s are '\u2022'about'\"' things are designed to represent them -- that we can speak of t h e i r representing or f a i l i n g t o represent....\" Suppose we take steps to come to a b e l i e f about some-t h i n g \u2014 e.g. that there i s a God \u2014 by i g n o r i n g adverse evidence or arguments and seeking only confirming evidan.ee or arguments. .Rather than read Hume, Kant, Kaufmann and R u s s e l l we read P l o t i n u s , the C h r i s t i a n B i b l e , Aquinas, Newman and Pa s c a l . We attend only to what we think w i l l l e a d to a confirmation of the p r o p o s i t i o n that we desi r e confirmed. When we have convinced ourselves (ant i n t e r e s t i n g l o c u t i o n ) that a l l the evidence ( i . e . a l l that WE have looked at) confirms the p r o p o s i t i o n , we n a t u r a l l y w i l l be l e d to b e l i e v e the p r o p o s i t i o n . (Or do we j u s t f e e l l e s s  g u i l t y about embracing the p r o p o s i t i o n ? ) . We have c u l t i v a t e d a ' b e l i e f - f l o w e r ' , or f i e l d of them, by p l a n t i n g only 'confirmation - seeds'. But to our minds, we have been i m p a r t i a l . For we have read widely and have seen our p r o p o s i t i o n confirmed i n various ways and i n d i f -f e r e n t degrees by many d i f f e r e n t (though not opposed) men. This i s the type o f b e l i e f - c u l t i v a t i o n t o which evidence i s . 2 9 r e g a r d e d as r e l e v a n t o r e s s e n t i a l \u2014 t h o u g h as we have s e e n , when y o u a r e c u l t i v a t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f , you must p l a n t o n l y a p a r t i c u l a r s e e d , e l s e you may end up w i t h a d i f f e r e n t ' b e l i e f - f l o w e r ' t h a n you i n t e n d e d t o g r o w . Then t h e r e i s t h e c a s e where one c u l t i v a t e s a b e l i e f w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o e v i d e n c e . ( P r i c e d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h e s e two methods o f b e l i e f c u l t i v a t i o n i n h i s p a p e r B e l i e f and W i l l . ) One does n o t seek even c o r r o b o r a t i n g e v i d e n c e . P r i c e sums t h i s method up by s a y i n g ( p . 1 9 ) , \"one f i x e s o n e ' s a t t e n t i o n r e p e a t e d l y on what i t w o u l d be l i k e i f t h e p r o p o s i t i o n were t r u e \" . He adds t h a t one commits h i m s e l f t o t h e p r o p o s i t i o n one wants t o b e l i e v e ( t o be T R U E ) . One a c t s as t h o u g h one b e l i e v e s i t (as t h o u g h i t were T R U E ) . And soon one a c t u a l l y DOES b e l i e v e i t . T h i s sounds l i k e what James had i n m i n d w i t h r e g a r d t o ' G o d ' and ' D u t y ' . (see page zi ) I w o u l d n o t deny t h a t we c o u l d c u r e a c a s e o f i n s o m n i a by a f o r m o f s e l f - h y p n o s i s \u2014 by c o n v i n c i n g o u r s e l v e s r e p e a t e d l y t h a t we were g o i n g t o have a r e l a x e d s l e e p and wake r e f r e s h e d . However , we have n o t .yet d e v i s e d a method w h e r e b y we c a n h y p n o t i s e t h e w o r l d and t h e r e b y a l t e r i t . N o t i c e i n t h e i n s o m n i a c a s e t h a t one has n o t m e r e l y c u l t i v a t e d a b e l i e f . One has a c t u a l l y changed t h e w o r l d \u2014 i . e . , o n e -s e l f . I t ' s n o t t h a t we want t o b e l i e v e t h a t we a r e c u r e d o f i n s o m n i a - - we want a c t u a l l y t o be c u r e d o f i n s o m n i a . I t i s t h e same i n t h e c a s e o f t h e p e r s o n w h o - w i s h e s t h a t t h e r e were a G o d . We s h a l l see t h a t James goes so f a r as t o say t h a t even i f t h e r e were no God, we w o u l d p o s t u l a t e one because we need Him so b a d l y . ( I t i s d o u b t f u l t h a t anyone who knew t h a t 30 God was m e r e l y a p o s t u l a t e w o u l d f i n d ' H i m ' an a d e q u a t e o b j e c t o f w o r s h i p . ) When we s e t out t o c u l t i v a t e a p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f , we a r e n o t i n q u i r i n g i n t o t h e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y . We a r e n o t d i s c o v e r i n g t h i n g s a b o u t t h e w o r l d - - we a r e s e t t i n g out t o b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s c o n s t i t u t e d i n some p a r t i c u l a r way. A s u c c e s s f u l i n q u i r y w i l l r e s u l t i n we know n o t e x a c t l y what b e l i e f s - - i f we knew a l r e a d y , t h e r e w o u l d be no need f o r i n q u i r y . To i n q u i r e i s t o a s k a q u e s t i o n o r q u e s t i o n s . To c u l t i v a t e a b e l i e f i s t o impose y o u r own c h o i c e o f an ' a n s w e r ' - - i t i s r e a l l y t o a s k no q u e s t i o n a t a l l . ' S c i e n t i f -i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t p r o p o s e d s o l u t i o n s o r answers be s u b j e c t e d t o t e s t s . . . T h i s i s how we d i s c o v e r t h a t we have. a s o l u t i o n o r answer a t a l l . I n t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n s , we have a t t e m p t e d t o show t h a t b e l i e f i s n o t an a c t i o n w h i c h can be engaged i n o r r e -f r a i n e d f r o m a t w i l l . I f we a r e c o r r e c t , t h e n any i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n o f t h e C l i f f o r d - J a m e s d i s p u t e w h i c h r e q u i r e s b e l i e f t o be an a c t i o n w i l l r e n d e r b o t h p o s i t i o n s - u n t e n a b l e . We have a l s o seen t h a t t h e p h r a s e - ' - w i l l t o b e l i e v e ' i s m i s l e a d i n g . I t t u r n s out t h a t p e o p l e do n o t d e s i r e b e l i e f \u2014 t h e y d e s i r e some p a r t i c u l a r t h i n g t o be b e l i e v e d i n o r some p a r t i c u l a r s t a t e o f a f f a i r s t o come i n t o e x i s t e n c e . We a l s o saw t h a t i f p e o p l e g e n e r a l l y b e l i e v e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r d e e p e s t d e s i r e s , b e l i e f w o u l d n o t be what i t now i s , v i z . , a c c e p t a n c e o f what seems t r u e t o o n e . I t w o u l d be p e r h a p s ' a c c e p t a n c e o f what seems most d e s i r a b l e t o m e ' . A l s o , t h e 31 t r u e - f a l s e and real-imaginary d i s t i n c t i o n s would be completely v i t i a t e d i f b e l i e f were attendant upon the d e s i r e s of i n d i -v i d u a l s . I t became obvious that i f ' b e l i e f i s i n t e r p r e t e d as anything other than 'acceptance of something as t r u e ' , then James, or anyone else who so m i s i n t e r p r e t s b e l i e f , i s not t a l k i n g about b e l i e f i n the only way we can understand i t . Nowhere does James t e l l us that he i s using the word ' b e l i e f in...ah abnormal way. In f a c t , he knew very w e l l what ' b e l i e f meant when he defined i t i n The P r i n c i p l e s of  Psychology (p.26*3) as being \"the sense of r e a l i t y \" . To sum up: the concept of b e l i e f i s l i n k e d to the concept of t r u t h or r e a l i t y \u2014 concepts which we have seen to be a l t e r e d com-p l e t e l y i f ' \" b e l i e f i s used to mean anything other than \"acceptance of something as t r u e (or r e a l ) \" . We then showed i n two examples how adopting a b e l i e f -a t t i t u d e may be j u s t i f i e d or even recommended. I t was evident, however, that though adopting a b e l i e f - a t t i t u d e i n some circumstances may be s a t i s f y i n g to the i n d i v i d u a l , i t e i t h e r tends to mislead one as to the t r u t h or i t presupposes that what i s accepted as f a c t i s accepted only t e m p o r a r i l y as such. (Only i n childhood does one leave the theater w i t h hands on one's guns, searching a l l the while f o r the 'bad guys'). I t seems that the more we must TRY to b e l i e v e (or t WILL to b e l i e v e ) , the l e s s contact we w i l l have with r e a l i t y . We then saw that c u l t i v a t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f i s not the same t h i n g as i n q u i r i n g i n t o the a c t u a l nature of the world. When there i s NO p o s s i b i l i t y of being s u r p r i s e d at the r e s u l t s one gets when i n v e s t i g a t i n g nature, then some-32 t h i n g o t h e r t h a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n o r i n q u i r y i s g o i n g o n . We s h a l l now a n a l y z e i n more d e t a i l t h e a c t u a l e s s a y The W i l l t o B e l i e v e . 33 5 . THE WILL TO B E L I E V E James s a y s t h a t he assumes an a t t i t u d e w h i c h he c a l l s ' r a d i c a l e m p i r i c i s m . ' He s a y s ' e m p i r i c i s m ' b e c a u s e \" i t i s c o n t e n t e d t o r e g a r d i t s most a s s u r e d c o n c l u s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g m a t t e r s o f f a c t as h y p o t h e s e s l i a b l e t o m o d i f i c a t i o n i n t h e c o u r s e o f f u t u r e e x p e r i e n c e . \" ( P r e f a c e t o TWTB, p . v i i ) . He s a y s f u r t h e r t h a t ( P r e f a c e , p . x i - x i i ) \" I f r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s e s about t h e u n i v e r s e be i n o r d e r a t a l l , t h e n t h e a c t i v e f a i t h s o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n them, f r e e l y e x p r e s s i n g t h e m s e l v e s i n l i f e , a r e t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l t e s t s by w h i c h t h e y a r e v e r i f i e d , and t h e o n l y means by w h i c h t h e i r t r u t h o r f a l s e h o o d can be wrought o u t . The t r u e s t s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s i s i s t h a t w h i c h . . . ' w o r k s ' b e s t ; and i t can be no' o t h e r w i s e w i t h r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s e s . \" When James c a l l s r e l i g i o n a h y p o t h e s i s , one, may be t e m p t e d t o i n q u i r e w h i c h r e l i g i o n i s u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . James knows t h a t t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o n s making d i f f e r e n t c l a i m s . I f r e l i g i o n s a r e g e n u i n e hypotheses . , t h e n t h e r e s h o u l d be some way t o d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e m , some way t o see w h i c h one ' w o r k s ' b e s t . But a c c o r d i n g t o James a l l r e -l i g i o n s a r e on an e q u a l f o o t i n g and t h e r e i s no way t o t e l l w h i c h one i s b e t t e r ( o r I F one i s b e t t e r t h a n t h e r e s t ) , b e c a u s e \"no two o f us have i d e n t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , n o r s h o u l d we be e x p e c t e d t o work out i d e n t i c a l s o l u t i o n s . \" (James , 1 9 2 9 , p . 4 7 7 ) He adds \"The d i v i n e . . . must mean a g r o u p o f q u a l i t i e s , by b e i n g champions o f w h i c h i n a l t e r n a t i o n , d i f f e r e n t men may a l l f i n d w o r t h y m i s s i o n s . \" And '-a god o f 34 b a t t l e s * must be a l l o w e d t o be t h e god f o r one k i n d o f p e r s o n , a god o f peace and h e a v e n , and home, t h e god f o r a n o t h e r . ' - ' (Heaven h e l p t h e b e l i e v e r s i n t h e peace god s h o u l d t h e y e v e r war w i t h t h e b e l i e v e r s o f t h e war g o d . ) I t . seems t h a t o n e ' s r e l i g i o n s h y p o t h e s i s i s d e t e r m i n e d by t h e ' k i n d o f p e r s o n ' one i s . T h i s sounds v e r y u n l i k e what o c c u r s i n t h e c a s e o f s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s e s . I f t h e s e h y p o t h e s e s a r e r e g a r d e d as ' g o d s o f b a t t l e ' , t h e y a r e . m a d e t o war upon EACH OTHER, t h e v i c t o r a s s u m i n g , u n t i l f u r t h e r n o t i c e , t h e m a n t l e o f t r u t h . I n s c i e n c e , t h e a t t e m p t i s made t o d i s c o v e r w h i c h h y p o t h e s i s i s t h e b e s t one - - t h e y a r e n o t on an e q u a l f o o t i n g by any means. ' Not so i n r e l i g i o n , a c c o r d i n g t o J a m e s . B u t , as M a c i n t y r e s a y s (p.196), \"where t h e r e a r e p o s s i b l e a number o f h y p o t h e s e s between w h i c h t h e r e can be no way o f d e c i d i n g , we a r e n o t i n f a c t d e a l i n g w i t h g e n u i n e h y p o t h e s e s . \" R e -l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s e s a r e n o t g e n u i n e o n e s , i f any o f them w i l l d o . I t i s our c o n t e n t i o n t h a t no r e l i g i o n q u a l i f i e s , , o r i s even i n t e n d e d t o q u a l i f y , as a g e n u i n e h y p o t h e s i s about t h e w o r l d . R e l i g i o n s a r e , among o t h e r t h i n g s , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f t h e u n i v e r s e as a WHOLE. They do n o t s u b j e c t t h e i r c l a i m s a b o u t p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t s o r t h i n g s t o t e s t s . R a t h e r , as M a c i n t y r e s a y s , (p.202), \"we j u s t i f y a r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f by r e f e r r i n g t o a u t h o r i t y . \" I n c a l l i n g r e l i g i o n a h y p o t h e s i s , James m i s c o n s t r u e s t h e f u n c t i o n o f r e l i g i o n o r o f a h y p o t h e s i s . As he h i m s e l f s a y s (1929, p.508), o n l y when \" r e m o t e o b j e c t i v e c o n s e q u e n c e s a r e p r e d i c t e d , does r e l i g i o n . . . b r i n g a r e a l h y p o t h e s i s i n t o p l a y . . . . T h e w o r l d i n t e r p r e t e d r e l i g i o u s l y must be s u c h 35 t h a t d i f f e r e n t e v e n t s c a n be e x p e c t e d i n i t . . . . \" But we may have t o w a i t u n t i l we DIE b e f o r e we c a n ' t e s t ' t h e r e -l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' t o - s e e i f i t w o r k s ( o r has w o r k e d ) . I t i s a s t r a n g e ' s c i e n c e ' w h o s e - o n l y l a b o r a t o r y i s t h e c o f f i n What a r e t h e ' e v e n t s ' w h i c h may be e x p e c t e d i f we i n t e r -p r e t t h e w o r l d r e l i g i o u s l y ? . Nowhere do I f i n d r e f e r e n c e t o . any p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t w h i c h James c o u l d p r e d i c t on t h e b a s i s o f a r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s . A g a i n and a g a i n , however , James s a y s t h a t one w i l l f e e l d i f f e r e n t l y upon b e l i e v i n g t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s . He t e l l s us ( 1 9 2 9 , p p . 4 7 6 - 4 7 7 ) t h a t r e l i g i o n g i v e s ' one a new z e s t , an a s s u r a n c e o f s a f e t y , a t e m p e r o f peace and a p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f l o v i n g a f f e c t i o n s f o r o t h e r s . On page 4 9 6 he adds t h a t \" T h e i r s t i m u l a n t and a n a e s t h e t i c e f f e c t i s . . . . g r e a t . . . . \" To b e l i e v e i n God i s t o l e t \" h i g h e r e n e r g i e s f i l t e r i n \" ( p . 5 0 9 ) . The ' e v e n t s ' w h i c h James s a y s we can f o r e c a s t by a d o p t i n t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s a r e p s y c h o l o g i c a l o r s u b j e c t i v e i n c h a r a c t e r . The ' v i t a l g o o d ' we a r e t o g a i n f r o m b e l i e v i n g t h a t , t h e r e i s a God, i s a p e r s o n a l s o r t o f g o o d . We have n o t l e a r n e d a n y t h i n g new about t h e w o r l d by a d o p t i n g t h e \u00bb r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s and we do n o t t e s t i t by t h e u s u a l means. I f we r e c e i v e t h e ' v i t a l g o o d ' , i f o u r a c t i o n s and r e a c t i o n s a r e i n f l u e n c e d i r f s u c h a way t h a t t h e y can be a t t r i b u t e d t o o u r new b e l i e f , t h e n a c c o r d i n g t o James, t h e h y p o t h e s i s has ' w o r k e d ' f o r us and i s t h e r e b y t r u e ( f o r u s ) . As James s a y s , t h e t r u e s t s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s i s ' i s t h a t w h i c h ' w o r k s ' b e s t . But what e x a c t l y i s meant by ' w o r k s ' ? By ' w o r k s ' James means t h a t i t s a t i s f i e s u s , g i v e s us 36 p e a c e , s a f e t y , e n e r g y a n d \/ o r makes l i f e w o r t h l i v i n g . When i t does enough o f t h e s e t h i n g s , we see t h a t i t works and we deem i t t r u e . Of c o u r s e we must b e l i e v e i t BEFORE we can g e t t h e e f f e c t s , so a c t u a l l y we have deemed i t t r u e a l l a l o n g . I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o s e e , t h e r e f o r e , how we c o u l d w a i t t o see t h e e f f e c t s o f b e l i e v i n g (deeming t r u e ) t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o -t h e s i s b e f o r e we deem i t t r u e ( b e l i e v e i t ) . I t seems we must a l r e a d y b e l i e v e i t b e f o r e we can t e s t i t . I n b e l i e v i n g i t , we have a l r e a d y deemed i t t r u e . What James s a y s , t h e n , amounts t o t h i s : i f we deem t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s t r u e and r e c e i v e . t h e r e b y a v i t a l g o o d , t h e n we can deem t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s t r u e . Some t e s t I To sum u p ; James says t h a t t h e t e s t o f t h e r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f ' s t r u t h i s w h e t h e r o r n o t i t w o r k s . But b e f o r e i t can w o r k , one must a l r e a d y s u b s c r i b e t o i t s t r u t h . Thus t h e r e i s r e a l l y no t e s t a t a l l . S i n c e t h e ' t e s t ' cannot be c o n -d u c t e d u n l e s s one a c c e p t s t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s as b e i n g t r u e ( b e l i e v e s i t ) , nobody who does n o t a l r e a d y b e l i e v e t h e h y p o t h e s i s can ' t e s t ' i t . The ' t e s t ' , t h e r e f o r e , does n o t c o n c e r n t h e t r u t h o f t h e h y p o t h e s i s b u t o n l y t h e s u b j e c t i v e u t i l i t y o f i t - - i . e . , i t s e f f e c t upon t h e b e l i e v i n g i n d i v i d -u a l . I f i t ' w o r k s ' , t h e n t h e t e s t has been s u c c e s s f u l , and t h e h y p o t h e s i s i s ' t r u e ' ( f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l upon whom t h e ' t e s t ' has been s u c c e s s f u l ) . James ' p o s i t i o n comes t o t h i s : o n l y t h o s e who ALREADY deem t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s t r u e can j u d g e w h e t h e r o r n o t i t i s t r u e . And t h i s , I s u b m i t , i s a c l e a r c u t case o f b e g g i n g t h e q u e s t i o n . 37 I n c l a i m i n g t r u t h f o r any r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s , James means by ' t r u t h ' n o t what i s u s u a l l y meant b u t s o m e t h i n g d i f f e r e n t - - v i z . , i t ' w o r k s ' o r s a t i s f i e s o n e . I t c a n n o t be d e n i e d t h a t some r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s have ' w o r k e d ' f o r some p e o p l e . But t h i s does n o t mean t h a t t h e s e b e l i e f s a r e t h e r e b y o f what i s t r u e p a r t i c u l a r l y when d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s c o n f l i c t . ' X ' may work f o r me b u t ' n o t - X ' may work f o r y o u . . T h i s may be p o s s i b l e i n t h e f i e l d o f r e l i g i o n , b u t i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e i n s c i e n c e . I n s o -f a r as a h y p o t h e s i s w o r k s i n s c i e n c e , i t works f o r a l l o b s e r v e r s , n o t j u s t t h o s e who f a v o r i t . B e r t r a n d R u s s e l l s a y s ( p . 1 0 6 ) \"What s c i e n c e r e q u i r e s o f a w o r k i n g h y p o t h e s i s i s t h a t i t s h a l l work t h e o r e t i c a l l y , i . e . , t h a t a l l i t s v e r i f i a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s s h a l l be t r u e and none f a l s e . The law' o f g r a v i t a t i o n e n a b l e s us t o c a l c u l a t e t h e m o t i o n s o f t h e h e a v e n l y b o d i e s : so f a r as t h e s e m o t i o n s can be o b s e r v e d , t h e y a r e \u2022 . f o u n d t o a g r e e w i t h o u r c a l c u l a t i o n s . I t i s t r u e t h a t t h e h e a v e n l y b o d i e s have s u c h and s u c h a p p a r e n t p o s i t i o n s a t s u c h and s u c h t i m e s , and t h e l a w o f g r a v i t a t i o n a g r e e s w i t h t h i s t r u t h . T h i s i s what we mean when we say t h a t t h e l a w \" w o r k s \" . We do n o t mean t h a t g i v e s us e m o t i o n a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , t h a t i t s a t i s f i e s o u r a s p i r a t i o n s , - t h a t i t i s a h e l p i n n a v i g a t i o n , o r t h a t i t f a c i l i t a t e s a v i r t u o u s l i f e . \" When a h y p o t h e s i s w o r k s i n s c i e n c e , i t can be u s e d t o e x p l a i n a n d \/ o r p r e d i c t o b s e r v e d phenomena. I t works i n s o f a r 38 as i t s e r v e s t h e s e p u r p o s e s . The f r u i t s o f a s u c c e s s f u l s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s i s a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r a l l t o e n j o y - - n o t j u s t t h o s e who f i r s t p r o p o s e d o r a d o p t e d i t . A g e n u i n e h y p o t h e s i s , i f a d o p t e d , w i l l l e a d t o d i f f e r e n t p u b l i c l y o b s e r v a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a n a n o t h e r g e n u i n e h y p o -t h e s i s . The s i t u a t i o n , as James h i m s e l f a d m i t s , i s d i f f e r e n t i n r e l i g i o n . T h e r e , any number o f d i f f e r i n g and even c o n -f l i c t i n g ' h y p o t h e s e s ' may ' w o r k ' f o r d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s . James goes f u r t h e r and c l a i m s t r u t h f o r a l l t h e h y p o t h e s e s t h a t w o r k , even i f t h e y do c o n t r a d i c t each o t h e r . But a s i d e f r o m t h e q u e s t i o n o f t r u t h , we have t h e p r o b l e m o f b e i n g u n a b l e t o s e p a r a t e t h e b e t t e r f r o m t h e worse r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s e s . C o u l d t h e y a l l be as good as each o t h e r even t h o u g h t h e y make c o n f l i c t i n g c l a i m s about t h e w o r l d ? P e r h a p s t h e y a r e NOT ' a b o u t t h e w o r l d ' a t a l l . I f t h e r e were no way t o t e l l i f a h y p o t h e s i s i s b e t t e r t h a n any o t h e r h y p o t h e s i s , t h e n i n what s e n s e c o u l d i t be ' a b o u t t h e w o r l d ' ? E i t h e r i t w o u l d make a d i f f e r e n c e , i f t r u e , o r i t w o u l d n o t . I f t h e f o r m e r c a s e , t h e n i t i s a g e n u i n e h y p o t h e s i s - - one w h i c h may o r may n o t w o r k . I f t h e l a t t e r - - i f i t s b e i n g f a l s e makes no d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p u b l i c l y o b s e r v a b l e w o r l d , t h e n i t f a i l s t o q u a l i f y as a g e n u i n e h y p o t h e s i s . What T o u l m i n s a y s about i d e a s i s t r u e o f h y p o t h e s e s \u2014 ( p p . 1 0 1 - 1 0 2 ) : \"We a r e j u s t i f i e d i n p l a c i n g t h e t r u s t i n them t h a t we d o , o n l y b e c a u s e - and t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t - t h e y have p r o v e d t h e i r w o r t h i n c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h a l t e r n a t i v e s : i f e a r l i e r men had n e v e r t h o u g h t i n o t h e r t e r m s t h a n we d o , t h e n we o u r s e l v e s w o u l d s i m p l y be c a r r y i n g on a t r a d i t i o n a l h a b i t . \" A \" t r a d i t i o n a l h a b i t \" . T h i s sounds much more l i k e r e l i g i o n t h a n does ' h y p o t h e s i s ' . To spend F r i d a y e v e n i n g i n t h e synagogue i s n o t t o t e s t a h y p o t h e s i s . I t i s t o r e p e a t , o f t e n i n u n i s o n w i t h o t h e r s - what has been s a i d m i l l i o n s o f t i m e s b e f o r e . One may g a i n s o l a c e o r peace t h e r e b y . And when t h e r a b b i b l e s s e s h i s c o n g r e g a t i o n w i t h arms r a i s e d and a s k s t h a t ' G o d ' s l i g h t be c a u s e d t o s h i n e down upon t h e m ' , he does n o t t a k e the- l a c k o f change i n t h e r o o m ' s l i g h t i n g as e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s does n o t w o r k . He w o u l d be h a r d put t o s a y j u s t WHAT w o u l d c o u n t as e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s does n o t work b e c a u s e e v i d e n c e i s NOT r e l e v a n t t o r e l i g i o n . The p r e d i c t i o n s made by r e l i g i o n s a r e u s u a l l y g e n e r a l ( e . g . , t h e r e w i l l be a s e c o n d coming) a n d \/ o r c o n c e r n an a f t e r l i f e ( i f y o u d o n ' t b e l i e v e X , t h e n you w i l l be e t e r n a l l y p u n i s h e d e t c . ) T h a t i s why we c a n n o t d i s p r o v e r e l i g i o n s by a p p e a l t o p a r t i c u l a r f a c t s . R e l i g i o n s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y s e r v e d as C O N ^ s o l a t i o n . n o t E x p l a n a t i o n . James d e f i n e s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' as \" a n y t h i n g t h a t may be p r o p o s e d t o o u r b e l i e f \" , ( p . 2 ) . A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s d e f i n i t i o n t h e f o l l o w i n g c o u l d be h y p o t h e s e s : \" T h i s p i c t u r e i s n i c e r t h a n t h a t o n e \" : \" I t i s wrong t o k i l l a n y t h i n g a t any t i m e \" : \"God has t h r e e n a t u r e s b u t i s o n l y one P e r s o n \" . The meaning o f ' h y p o t h e s i s ' , a c c o r d i n g t o W e b s t e r ' s New C o l l e g i a t e D i c t i o n a r y ( 1 9 5 6 ) i s \"A t e n t a t i v e - t h e o r y o r s u p p o s i t i o n p r o v i s i o n a l l y a d o p t e d t o e x p l a i n c e r t a i n f a c t s and t o g u i d e i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f o t h e r s . \" The t h r e e ' h y p o t h e s e s ' above w o u l d h a r d l y q u a l i f y as e x p l a n a t i o n s . The l a s t s t a t e -ment i n p a r t i c u l a r , a l o n g w i t h s u c h s t a t e m e n t s as \"God i s 4 0 \u2022 H i s E s s e n c e \" , \"God i s H i s b e i n g \" and \"God i s goodness i t s e l f \" seem t o r e q u i r e r a t h e r t h a n p r o v i d e , an e x p l a n a t i o n . A l s o , i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o see how any o f t h e s e ' h y p o t h e s e s ' c o u l d , o r i s even i n t e n d e d t o , l e a d t o any f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n . I t seems t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s \" h y p o t h e s i s \" i s NOT i n t e n d e d t o e x p l a i n a n y t h i n g . To r e p e a t an e a r l i e r q u o t a t i o n , \"The w h o l e d e f e n c e o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h h i n g e s upon a c t i o n . \" ( see page 23). James adds i n a f o o t n o t e on page 3 0 : \" t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s g i v e s t o t h e w o r l d an e x p r e s s i o n w h i c h s p e c i f i c a l l y d e t e r m i n e s o u r . r e a c t i o n s , and makes them d n a l a r g e p a r t u n l i k e what t h e y m i g h t be on a p u r e l y n a t u r a l i s t i c scheme o f b e l i e f \" . I t w o u l d seem, t h e n , t h a t t h e t e s t o f a R e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s i s w h e t h e r i t changes o u r a c t i o n a n d \/ o r r e a c t i o n s . I f i t d o e s , t h e n i t i s t r u e ( f o r u s ) . I f n o t , t h e n i t i s f a l s e ( f o r u s ) . What e x a c t l y IS t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s w h i c h James i n v i t e s us t o a d o p t o r b e l i e v e ? He e x p l a i n s i t on pages 2 5 - 2 8 i n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e . The f i r s t a f f i r m a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n i s t h a t \"The b e s t t h i n g s , a r e t h e more e t e r n a l t h i n g s , t h e o v e r l a p p i n g t h i n g s , t h e t h i n g s i n t h e u n i v e r s e t h a t t h r o w t h e l a s t s t o n e , so t o s p e a k , and s a y t h e f i n a l w o r d . \" ( p . 2 5 ) He adds ( p . 2 7 - 2 8 ) t h a t \"The more p e r f e c t and more e t e r n a l a s p e c t o f t h e u n i v e r s e i s r e p r e s e n t e d i n our r e l i g i o n s as h a v i n g a p e r s o n a l f o r m . The u n i v e r s e i s no l o n g e r an I t t o u s , b u t a T h o u , i f we a r e r e l i g i o u s ; and any r e l a t i o n t h a t may be p o s s i b l e f r o m p e r s o n t o p e r s o n may be p o s s i b l e h e r e . \" On page 26 he t e l l s 41 us t h a t \"The s e c o n d a f f i r m a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n i s t h a t we a r e b e t t e r o f f even now i f we b e l i e v e h e r f i r s t a f f i r m a t i o n t o be t r u e . \" D e a t h w o u l d seem t o \" t h r o w t h e l a s t s t o n e \" and \" s a y t h e f i n a l w o r d \" , as f a r as we m o r t a l s a r e c o n c e r n e d . On t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e Thou w o u l d be D e a t h . But we w o u l d n o t l i k e l y c o n s i d e r d e a t h t h e b e s t t h i n g i n t h e u n i v e r s e . I f we d i d , we w o u l d l i k e l y a d v o c a t e s u i c i d e as t h e supreme r e l i g i o u s s a c r i f i c e . James seems a m b i v a l e n t as t o w h e t h e r t h e r e a r e ' t h i n g s ' o r o n l y one t h i n g t h a t i s t h e b e s t i n t h e u n i v e r s e . He s a y s t h a t t h e more e t e r n a l and p e r f e c t a s p e c t o f t h e u n i v e r s e has p e r s o n a l f o r m . P r e s u m a b l y he means t h a t God i s t h e o b j e c t o f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . H e n c e f o r w a r d we s h a l l use ' G o d ' r a t h e r t h a n ' T h o u ' o r \"The more e t e r n a l and p e r f e c t a s p e c t o f t h e u n i v e r s e \" . The r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' seems t o come t o t h i s : We a r e b e t t e r o f f i f we b e l i e v e t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s ( o r has) an e t e r n a l and p e r f e c t p e r s o n a l i t y ( i . e . a God) w i t h whom we m i g h t c o m m u n i c a t e . James s a y s t h a t we a r e (p.26) \" s u p p o s e d t o g a i n even now by ( o u r ) b e l i e f . . . . a c e r t a i n v i t a l good.:.11.-.The test of the 'hypothesis' is whether or not we gain a v i t a l good in \u2022 b e l i e v i n g i t . ' \" E x a c t l y what s o r t o f good we g a i n , James h e r e does n o t s p e c i f y , t h o u g h he does c l a i m t h a t we w i l l r e c e i v e b e n e f i t ( v i t a l good) i m m e d i a t e l y . (He l i k e l y ds r e f e r r i n g t o z e s t , s e c u r i t y , p e a c e , e t c . ) We have seen t h a t i t i s n o t w i t h i n o u r power t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g a t w i l l - - we c a n n o t j u s t d e c i d e t o a c c e p t s o m e t h i n g as t r u e . But i f i t i s wrong ( m e a n i n g l e s s ) t o say t h a t we can 42 and s h o u l d b e l i e v e a t w i l l , i t i s even l e s s m e a n i n g f u l t o s a y t h a t we s h o u l d b e l i e v e a h y p o t h e s i s a t w i l l . A h y p o t h e s i s i s n o t t h e s o r t o f t h i n g we b e l i e v e . I f we a c c e p t s o m e t h i n g as t r u e ( b e l i e v e i t ) , we do n o t r e g a r d i t as a h y p o t h e s i s r e q u i r i n g t e s t s i n o r d e r t h a t i t be c o n f i r m e d . I t w o u l d seem t h a t James i s g u i l t y o f what has been c a l l e d ' p e r s u a s i v e d e f i n i t i o n ' when he c a l l s r e l i g i o n a h y p o t h e s i s . As M a c i n t y r e s a y s (p .196), \" I f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s a r e e x -p l a n a t o r y h y p o t h e s e s , ( o r a r e s u p p o s e d t o be t h u s . J.O.) t h e r e c a n be no j u s t i f i c a t i o n w h a t e v e r f o r c o n t i n u i n g t o h o l d t h e m . . . t o t r e a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s as s u c h i s t o f a l s i f y i b o t h t h e k i n d o f b e l i e f s t h e y a r e and t h e way i n w h i c h t h e y a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y h e l d . \" He s a y s t h a t i f \"we p r e s e n t e d t h e c o n c e p t o f d e i t y as p a r t o f a t h e o r e t i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n ( t h e n ) s u c h a c o n c e p t w o u l d . . . be j u s t i f i a b l e i f i t were t h e o r e t i c a l l y f r u i t f u l , as f o r example t h e c o n c e p t o f an e l e c t r o n i s \" . I s t h e c o n c e p t o f God t h e o r e t i c a l l y f r u i t f u l ? Does i t e x p l a i n o r make s e n s e o f a n y t h i n g f o r us? James t h i n k s t h a t i t d o e s . He t h i n k s t h a t r e l i g i o u s f a i t h means e s s e n t i a l l y (p.51) \" f a i t h i n t h e e x i s t e n c e o f an unseen o r d e r o f some k i n d i n w h i c h t h e r i d d l e s o f t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r may be f o u n d e x p l a i n e d . \" I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o see how an \" u n s e e n o r d e r o f some k i n d \" c o u l d p o s s i b l y e x p l a i n ' a n y t h i n g . When we e x p l a i n s o m e t h i n g , we r e l a t e i t t o s o m e t h i n g e l s e - - a cause o r a p u r p o s e p e r h a p s - - b u t t o r e f e r i t t o an ' u n s e e n o r d e r ' and t o c o n s i d e r t h i s somehow an e x p l a n a t i o n , i s a move i t s e l f r e q u i r i n g e x p l a n a t i o n . 43 P e r h a p s James w o u l d a r g u e t h a t i f we. c o u l d SEE t h e u n -s e e n o r d e r ( o r WHEN we see i t ) , we w o u l d u n d e r s t a n d why we were b o r n and why we d i e , e t c . But t h i s w o u l d be t o p r e -suppose what he i s t r y i n g t o show - - v i z . , t h a t t h e r e w i l l be a t i m e , presumably a f t e r d e a t h , when t h i n g s w i l l be e x p l a i n e d t o u s . To s a y t h a t we must w a i t u n t i l we d i e t o ' t e s t ' a h y p o t h e s i s i s t o p r e s u p p o s e t h a t we w i l l be c o n s c i o u s a f t e r d e a t h - - t h a t i s t o p r e s u p p o s e t h a t we do n o t r e a l l y d i e \u2014 and t h i s i s . just what b o t h e r s t h o s e who r e q u i r e an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e seeming n e c e s s i t y o f d y i n g . I n o t h e r w o r d s , James p r e s u p p o s e s what he a s k s us t o - s u p p o s e . I n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e , James seems t o p r e s u p p o s e t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s , o r h a s , p e r s o n a l i t y . On page 2 $ , he s a y s \" t h i s f e e l i n g , f o r c e d on us we know n o t whence, t h a t by o b s t i n a t e l y b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e r e a r e g o d s . . . w e a r e d o i n g t h e u n i v e r s e t h e d e e p e s t s e r v i c e we c a n , seems p a r t o f t h e l i v i n g e s s e n c e o f . t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s . \" I n r e g a r d t o t h i s \" f e e l i n g f o r c e d on us we know n o t w h e n c e \" , b e t t e r s a y s ( p . 3 0 5 ) : \" C a n i t be t h a t James knew n o t h i n g o f t h e r o l e p l a y e d by e a r l y i n d o c t r i n a t i o n o f t h e c h i l d i n t h e f a m i l y and t h e c u l t u r e g e n e r a l l y t h a t he p l e a d s t h a t we know n o t whence t h e f e e l i n g t h a t i t i s v i r t u o u s t o b e l i e v e i n t h e g o d s ? \" The p h r a s e \"do t h e u n i v e r s e a s e r v i c e \" i n d i c a t e s t h a t James a l r e a d y b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s o r has p e r s o n a l i t y . We may u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' s e r v i c e a c a r ' b u t we n e v e r speak o f ' d o i n g a c a r a s e r v i c e ' . James i s a g a i n g u i l t y o f t h e f a l l a c y o f b e g g i n g t h e q i a e s t i o n when he t a l k s o f d o i n g t h e u n i v e r s e a s e r v i c e . We can do a s e r v i c e 44 o n l y t o s e n t i e n t b e i n g s , p a r t i c u l a r l y human b e i n g s . James p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s s e n t i e n t \u2014 and s u g g e s t s t h a t i t w o u l d somehow be b e t t e r o f f i f we b e l i e v e d . . Hobhouse s a y s t h a t (p.94) \" t h e p o i n t o f t h e whole a r g u -ment i s t h a t we do o u r d u t y i n t h e w o r l d by s u p p r e s s i n g l o g i c a l c r i t i c i s m and a c c e p t i n g t h e b e l i e f t o w h i c h e m o t i o n a l i m p u l s e p r o m p t s . And when we a r e a s k e d t o do t h i s d e l i b e r -a t e l y we a r e i n e f f e c t b e i n g i n v i t e d t o b e l i e v e w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o t h e t r u t h o f what we b e l i e v e . \" I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o see how, i f we p r e s u p p o s e what we s e t out t o p r o v e t r u e , we can l e a r n a n y t h i n g o r e x p l a i n a n y -t h i n g . Says James ( p . 5 2 ) \"we have a r i g h t t o s u p p l e m e n t i t ( i . e . t h e p h y s i c a l o r d e r , J . O . ) by an u n s e e n s p i r i t u a l o r d e r w h i c h we assume on t r u s t , i f o n l y t h e r e b y l i f e may seem t o us b e t t e r w o r t h l i v i n g . \" I t t u r n s out t h a t f o r James CONSOLATION o r i n s p i r - i a t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n e x p l a n a t i o n , i s what j u s t i f i e s b e l i e f i n God. To b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a God i s t o s a t i s f y o u r (p .56) \" i n n e r need o f b e l i e v i n g \" . I f o u r needs \" o u t r u n t h e v i s i b l e u n i v e r s e , why may n o t t h a t be a s i g n t h a t an i n v i s i b l e u n i v e r s e i s t h e r e ? \" , a s k s J a m e s . To assume s o m e t h i n g on t r u s t , as James says t h a t we s h o u l d do r e g a r d i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God,, i s a f a r c r y f r o m p u t t i n g a h y p o t h e s i s t o t h e t e s t . But James assumes some-t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e mere e x i s t e n c e o f a G o d . He goes so f a r as t o s u g g e s t ( p . 6 l ) t h a t \"God h i m s e l f . . . m a y draw v i t a l s t r e n g t h and i n c r e a s e o f v e r y b e i n g f r o m o u r f i d e l i t y . \" I n 45 o t h e r w o r d s , God w o u l d o n l y e x i s t p a r t i a l l y i f we d i d n o t e n c o u r a g e Him by p u t t i n g our f a i t h i n H i m . I do n o t ' s e e how t h i s i s d i f f e r e n t f r o m s a y i n g t h a t we CREATE God by b e l i e v i n g i n Him - - o r a t l e a s t we a s s i s t i n H i s c r e a t i o n . James i s t a l k i n g no l o n g e r o f t h e God o f any r e l i g i o n b u t o f . a god o f o u r v i v i d i m a g i n a t i o n . To s u g g e s t t h a t we c r e a t e Him and n o t v i c e v e r s a i s n o t t o a d v o c a t e r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f \u2014 i t i s t o a d v o c a t e h e r e s y o r b l a s p h e m y . But James w i l l have h i s b e l i e f i n G o d , n o t b e c a u s e he i s p e r s u a d e d by any e v i d e n c e o r b e -c a u s e he i s overawed a t t h e t h o u g h t o f a g o o d , w i s e and p o w e r f u l C r e a t o r ' o f t h e u n i v e r s e - - b u t because he NEEDS s u c h a b e l i e f . (That i s , he NEEDS a God and w i l l even go so f a r as t o s u g g e s t t h a t he w o u l d p o s t u l a t e one i f He d i d n o t a l r e a d y e x i s t ; o r t h a t we c o u l d h e l p b r i n g Him i n t o e x i s t e n c e by b e l i e v i n g i n Him b e f o r e He f u l l y e x i s t s . ) James a d m i t s t h a t ( p . 6 l ) , \" F o r my own p a r t , I do n o t \u2022 know what t h e sweat and b l o o d and t r a g e d y o f t h i s l i f e mean^ i f t h e y mean a n y t h i n g s h o r t o f t h i s . (That i s , t h a t God comes i n t o e x i s t e n c e as we b e l i e v e i n Him - J . O . ) I f t h i s l i f e be n o t a r e a l f i g h t , i n w h i c h s o m e t h i n g i s e t e r n a l l y g a i n e d f o r t h e u n i v e r s e by s u c c e s s , i t i s no b e t t e r t h a n a p r i v a t e game o f t h e a t r i c a l s f r o m w h i c h one may withdraxv a t w i l l . And i t f e e l s l i k e a r e a l f i g h t . . . \" As we m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e , James goes so f a r as t o say t h a t were t h e r e n o t a s h r e d o f e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e i s a God, man needs Him so much t h a t he w o u l d p o s t u l a t e H i m . I n The CTWT6), M o r a l P h i l o s o p h e r and M o r a l L l f e ^ he s a y s ( p . 2 1 3 ) \" e v e n i f t h e r e were no m e t a p h y s i c a l o r t r a d i t i o n a l g r o u n d s f o r b e l i e v i n g 46 i n a God, men w o u l d p o s t u l a t e one s i m p l y as a p r e t e x t f o r l i v i n g h a r d and g e t t i n g out o f t h e game o f e x i s t e n c e i t s k e e n e s t p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f z e s t \" . We w i l l r e t u r n l a t e r t o t h e s u g g e s t i o n t h a t men c o u l d a c t u a l l y w o r s h i p a God whom t h e y a c k n o w l e d g e i s b u t a p o s t u l a t e . We t u r n back now t o t h e e s s a y , The W i l l t o B e l i e v e i n o r d e r t o more s y s t e m a t i c a l l y examine t h e p o s i t i o n t a k e n by W i l l i a m J a m e s . . 47 6. THE OPTION James c a l l s t h e d e c i s i o n between two h y p o t h e s e s an o p t i o n . When an o p t i o n i s l i v e , f o r c e d and momentous, s a y s J a m e s , i t i s a g e n u i n e o n e . A g e n u i n e o p t i o n , t h e n , w i l l be between l i v e h y p o t h e s e s ' - - i . e . \u2014 b o t h h y p o t h e s e s make some a p p e a l , however s m a l l , t o o u r b e l i e f . I t w i l l be a d e c i s i o n t h a t i s f o r c e d o r u n a v o i d a b l e , i . e . , you c a n n o t e s c a p e c h o o s i n g between one h y p o t h e s i s and t h e o t h e r . F i n a l l y , a g e n u i n e o p t i o n o r d e c i s i o n i s momentous, i . e . , t h e d e c i s i o n i s u n i q u e , i m p o r t a n t and i r r e v e r s i b l e . We see on page 26 o f h i s e s s a y t h a t James c o n s i d e r s t h e o p t i o n ( d e c i s i o n ) t o a c c e p t o r r e j e c t t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s a g e n u i n e o n e . He a t one p o i n t s a y s t h a t a l i v e h y p o t h e s i s i s one w h i c h makes some a p p e a l , however s m a l l , t o o n e ' s b e l i e f (p .3) o r t h a t i t i s one w h i c h we have some t e n d e n c y t o a c t upon ( p . 6 ) . A t a n o t h e r p o i n t ( p . 2 6 ) , he i m p l i e s t h a t a l i v e h y p o t h e s i s i s one w h i c h we r e g a r d as p o s s i b l y t r u e . These a r e n o t t h e same t h i n g . We may r e g a r d i t as p o s s i b l y t r u e t h a t B a r r y G o l d w a t e r s h a l l be e l e c t e d p r e s i d e n t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n 1964, y e t we may f i n d t h a t t h i s h y p o t h e s i s makes a b s o l u t e l y no a p p e a l t o o u r b e l i e f . The d i s t i n c t i o n s h o u l d be. made between l ) h y p o t h e s e s t h a t a p p e a l t o o u r b e l i e f i n t h e s e n s e t h a t we w o u l d l i k e them t o be t r u e and 2) t h o s e t h a t a p p e a l t o o u r b e l i e f i n t h e sense t h a t we have n o t d i s -c o u n t e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e i r being; t r u e . The e x p r e s s i o n ' a p p e a l ' s t o o u r b e l i e f must mean t h a t t h e h y p o t h e s i s i s c o n s i d e r e d by us t o be c a p a b l e o f b e i n g t r u e , e l s e a l i v e o p t i o n w o u l d be between two. h y p o t h e s e s , each a n e g a t i o n o f 48 t h e o t h e r , and b o t h o f w h i c h we w o u l d l i k e t o be t r u e . T h i s w o u l d mean t h a t we w o u l d l i k e b o t h A and n o t - A t o be t r u e . S i n c e t h i s i s i m p o s s i b l e , we must i n t e r p r e t James as meaning number two a b o v e . We concede t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o r f a l s e h o o d o f t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' may be a ' l i v e ' one - -i n t h e s e n s e t h a t one c o u l d c o n s i d e r r e l i g i o n p o s s i b l y t r u e o r i t s n e g a t i o n p o s s i b l y t r u e \u2014 but n o t i n t h e s e n s e t h a t BOTH APPEAL t o u s . I n what s e n s e i s t h e o p t i o n between r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f and d i s b e l i e f a f o r c e d one? T h e r e i s \"no p o s s i b i l i t y o f n o t c h o o s i n g \" , where t h e d e c i s i o n i s f o r c e d , s a y s James ( p .3). One c a n n o t be an a g n o s t i c , he says' , b e c a u s e t o s u s p e n d b e l i e f i n God o r r e l i g i o n i s n o t t o a v o i d t h e o p t i o n - - i t i s t o o p t f o r t h e n e g a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n o r G o d . I f t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s be t r u e , t h e n we l o s e t h e good by s u s p e n d i n g b e l i e f j u s t as s u r e l y as we w o u l d i f we \" p o s i t i v e l y chose t o d i s b e l i e v e \" ( p .26) . James t h i n k s t h a t n o t h i n g i s l o s t by b e l i e v i n g i n God e x c e p t p e r h a p s t h a t one may be i n e r r o r , and ( p . 1 9 ) \" O u r e r r o r s a r e s u r e l y n o t s u c h a w f u l l y so lemn t h i n g s . \" \"'But p r e s u m a b l y even i f we a r e i n e r r o r , we s h a l l n e v e r know i t \u2014 a t l e a s t u n t i l we d i e . The p o i n t i s , t h a t even i f t h e r e i s b u t t h e l e a s t p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e r e i s a God, we do b e t t e r t o b e l i e v e i n H i m , e l s e we l o s e t h e good d e r i v e d f r o m s u c h b e l i e f . To deny t h a t t h e r e i s a God o r t o r e m a i n i n doubt c o n c e r n i n g h i s e x i s t e n c e amounts t o p r e c i s e l y t h e same t h i n g , a c c o r d i n g t o James - - v i z . , one l o s e s t h e good e n j o y e d by b e l i e v e r s I F r e l i g i o n i s t r u e ( p .26). I t i s 49 u n c e r t a i n w h e t h e r James means t h a t we r e c e i v e t h e v i t a l good m e r e l y by b e l i e v i n g o r by b e l i e v i n g what i s t r u e . He s a y s b o t h o f t h e s e t h i n g s on page 26. I n e f f e c t , James s a y s t h a t we l o s e t h e good i f r e l i g i o n be t r u e y e t we d i s b e l i e v e i t , b u t we g a i n t h e good i f we b e l i e v e i t , even t h o u g h i t i s n o t t r u e . I t may s a t i s f y u s , b u t as we have s e e n , t h i s does n o t mean t h a t i t w i l l be t r u e i n t h e o r d i n a r y sense o f t h e w o r d . I n o t h e r w o r d s , James ' p o s i t i o n comes t o t h i s : I f God e x i s t e d -but nobody b e l i e v e d t h a t He d i d , nobody w o u l d r e c e i v e b e n e f i t ; i f God d i d n o t e x i s t b u t vre b e l i e v e d t h a t He d i d , we w o u l d r e c e i v e b e n e f i t . That i s , w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e i s a God i s r e a l l y o f no i m -p o r t a n c e - - we may n o t know about i t u n t i l we d i e . However , God o r no God, b e l i e f t h a t He e x i s t s w i l l b e n e f i t us i m m e d i -a t e l y . The q u e s t i o n r e m a i n s w h e t h e r anyone c o u l d b e l i e v e t h a t God e x i s t s w h i l e r e m a i n i n g i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e r e i s i n d e e d a God o r n o t . As we saw e a r l i e r , , b e l i e f i n s o m e t h i n g i s i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h b e i n g u n c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e t h i n g b e l i e v e d i n . To b e l i e v e t h e s t a t e m e n t \" X e x i s t s \" i s t o commit o n e s e l f t o t h e e x i s t e n c e o f X . To b e l i e v e i n a s t a t e m e n t ' s t r u t h i s t o b e l i e v e t h a t s o m e t h i n g makes t h e s t a t e m e n t t r u e , v i z . , t h a t t h e r e r e a l l y :Ls an X . When James makes t h e b e n e f i t o f r e l i g i o n t o man dependent m e r e l y on what he b e l i e v e s r a t h e r t h a n on s o m e t h i n g making h i s b e l i e f ( o r s t a t e m e n t s e x p r e s s i n g i t ) t r u e , he f o r g e t s o r i g n o r e s t h e f a c t t h a t no r e l i g i o u s p e r s o n w o u l d a d m i t t o b e l i e f i n God xv i thout s u b s c r i b i n g t o H i s a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e . To b e l i e v e i n God ( o r t h a t t h e r e i s a 50. God) i_s t o s u b s c r i b e t o H i s e x i s t e n c e . We must d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e b e n e f i t d e r i v e d f r o m mere b e l i e f i n God and b e n e -f i t d e r i v e d f r o m b e l i e v i n g what t u r n s out t o be t r u e . P r e -sumably i n t h e f o r m e r c a s e , t h e b e l i e v e r may l i v e e a s i e r t h i n k i n g t h a t he may \"go t o h e a v e n \" w h i l e i n t h e l a t t e r c a s e , t h e b e l i e v e r w o u l d \"go t o h e a v e n \" . I s t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s a f o r c e d one? I do n o t t h i n k s o . I f t h e d e c i s i o n i s r e a l l y u n a v o i d a b l e (and remember t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o James, t o s u s p e n d b e l i e f i s as good as t o d e c i d e t h a t t h e r e i s no God) ' t h e n how can I l a t e r r e v e r s e t h e d e c i s i o n I .made l o n g ago t h a t I am i n DOUBT a b o u t G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , i f I have a l r e a d y been i n doubt r e g a r d i n g H i s e x i s t e n c e , t h e n a c c o r d i n g t o James, I c a n n o t r e v e r s e t h i s ' d e c i s i o n ' . Y e t he i s u r g i n g me t o do j u s t t h i s \u2014 t o q u e l l my d o u b t s and t o b e l i e v e . Why does he t r y t o c o n v i n c e t h o s e who have a l r e a d y made t h e i r ( f o r c e d ) d e c i s i o n ? The p r o b l e m h e r e i s : WHEN must. I \" d e c i d e t o b e l i e v e \" t h a t t h e r e i s a God? I n my i n -f a n c y , c h i l d h o o d , t e e n s , m a t u r i t y , o l d age o r d e a t h bed? I t seems t h a t as soon as one i s t o l d t h a t t h e r e i s a God, ( o r t h a t t h e r e may be o n e ) , one must b e l i e v e i t . To doubt o r t o deny i s , a c c o r d i n g t o James, t o t h e r e b y make an u n a v o i d a b l e and i r r e v e r s i b l e d e c i s i o n . (On page 4 he c l e a r l y i m p l i e s t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n , b e i n g u n i q u e , i s n o t r e v e r s i b l e . ) But t h i s i s p a t e n t l y a b s u r d . Many d e v o u t p e o p l e have s t r u g g l e d w i t h p r o f o u n d d o u b t s t o emerge more p a s s i o n a t e l y r e l i g i o u s t h a n b e f o r e t h e s e d o u b t s b e s e t t h e m . When t h e y f o u n d t h e m s e l v e s d o u b t i n g o r d i s b e l i e v i n g , t h e y made no 51 i r r e v e r s i b l e o r u n a v o i d a b l e d e c i s i o n . I n f a c t , t h e y c o u l d make no d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n . They were U N d e c i d e d about i t . To doubt t h a t God e x i s t s i s n o t t o make an u n a v o i d a b l e d e c i s i o n . I t i s : . t o h e s i t a t e t o make any d e c i s i o n . T r u e , t o r e m a i n s c e p t i c a l r e g a r d i n g r e l i g i o n may e n t a i l a c t i n g as t h o u g h r e l i g i o n were u n t r u e ( e . g . , one does n o t p r a y o r go t o c h u r c h ) , b u t \/ t h i s i s o n l y t o a c t as one b e l i e v e s . One who w o u l d encourage a n y t h i n g e l s e i s a p r o p h e t o f i n s i n c e r i t y . And i n s i n c e r i t y i s n o t r e c o g n i z e d as a v i r t u e by any known r e l i g i o n . I t seems t h a t James i s engaged i n a s e l f - d e f e a t i n g a r g u m e n t . He u r g e s t h o s e who d o u b t o r deny t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n t o b e l i e v e - - y e t he c l a i m s t h a t h i s a u d i e n c e has a l r e a d y made t h e i r u n a v o i d a b l e and i r r e v e r s i b l e d e c i s i o n . T h a t i s , t h e y have been \" a c t i n g . . . as i f r e l i g i o n were n o t t r u e \" ( p . 2 9 ) . I f , as James s a y s , t o deny o r doubt t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n i s t o make an u n a v o i d a b l e and i r r e v e r s i b l e d e c i s i o n , t h e n h i s argument i n f a v o r o f b e l i e f must a p p l y o n l y t o t h o s e who have n e v e r b e f o r e e n c o u n t e r e d t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s e s ' o r t o t h o s e who a l r e a d y b e l i e v e . To t r y t o c o n v i n c e t h o s e who a l r e a d y b e l i e v e i s l u d i c r o u s . And t h e o n l y o t h e r p e o p l e - - t h o s e who have n e v e r b e f o r e h e a r d o f t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' - - a r e a l s o i n t h e c l a s s o f t h o s e who have been a c t i n g as i f r e l i g i o n were n o t t r u e . (James does n o t s p e c i f y what he means when he s a y s t h a t n o n b e l i e v e r s a c t as i f . r e l i g i o n were n o t t r u e \u2014 I c a n o n l y assume he r e f e r s t o s u c h t h i n g s as p r a y i n g , c h u r c h - g o i n g e t c . ) I t 52 t u r n s out t h a t by J a m e s ' own a r g u m e n t , t h e r e i s nobody he can c o n v i n c e t o a c c e p t t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s . James s a y s t h a t one. i s f o r c e d t o d e c i d e when one i s -f a c e d w i t h t h e c h a l l e n g e . t o \" a c c e p t t h i s t r u t h o r go w i t h o u t i t \" ( p . 3 ) . As we have s e e n , i f t h e p e r s o n c h a l l e n g e d a c k n o w l e d g e d t h e h y p o t h e s i s o r s t a t e m e n t as a ' t r u t h ' , he w o u l d a l r e a d y a c c e p t i t . The p r o b l e m i n h i s m i n d i s n o t w h e t h e r he can a c c e p t as t r u e what he a c k n o w l e d g e s a l r e a d y as a ' t r u t h ' , b u t w h e t h e r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n p u t b e f o r e h i m i s o r i s n o t a ' t r u t h ' . I n p u t t i n g t h e c h a l l e n g e i n t h e f o r m \" a c c e p t t h i s t r u t h o r go w i t h o u t i t \" , James p r e s e n t s a t a u t o l o g y t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l \u2014 \" a c c e p t as t r u e what y o u see i s a ' t r u t h ' and t h e r e b y a c c e p t as t r u e \" \u2014 o r he i g n o r e s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e may be g e n u i n e doubt r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f t h e p r o p o s i t i o n u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , i . e . , doubt about w h e t h e r i t IS a ' t r u t h ' . James a r g u e s as t h o u g h one must a c c e p t h i s ' t r u t h ' o r go e m p t y - h a n d e d . We g e t t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t o go w i t h o u t t h e ' t r u t h ' we a r e o f f e r e d i s t o l e a v e an empty f i l e i n o u r k n o w l e d g e - c a b i n e t . But James h i m s e l f (1890, p .284) s a i d t h a t \"we n e v e r d i s b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g e x c e p t f o r t h e r e a s o n t h a t we b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g e l s e w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s t h e f i r s t t h i n g . \" I f James i s c o r r e c t h e r e , t h e n one who d i s b e l i e v e s t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' must a l r e a d y b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g w h i c h i s c o n t r a d i c t e d by i t . I f James i s i n c o r r e c t h e r e , t h e n , as S c h i l l e r s a i d ( p . 1 5 ) , we can d i s b e l i e v e a p r o p o s i t i o n \" j u s t because i t s t r i k e s us as i n t o l e r a b l e o r i n c r e d i b l e . \" 5 3 ' Thus t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n i s NOT u n a v o i d a b l e . I t i s NOT a case o f \" a c c e p t t h i s t r u t h o r go w i t h o u t i t \" . One may w e l l b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g e l s e w h i c h i s c o n t r a d i c t e d by t h e c l a i m s o f r e l i g i o n o r one may j u s t f i n d r e l i g i o n s e n s e l e s s and r e j e c t i t f o r t h i s r e a s o n . One may f i n d t h e n o t i o n o f God s e n s e l e s s because one may n o t know \"what c o n c e i v a b l e e f f e c t s o f a. p r a c t i c a l k i n d t h e o b j e c t may i n v o l v e \u2014 what s e n s a t i o n s we a r e t o e x p e c t f r o m i t , and what r e a c t i o n s we must p r e p a r e \" ( J a m e s , on m e a n i n g , 1 9 6 l , p . 2 0 0 ) . One may deem t h e word ' G o d ' m e a n i n g l e s s and a l l o f r e l i g i o n an i n c r e d i b l e s u p e r s t r u c t u r e b u i l t upon, a ' m e t a -p h y s i c a l m o n s t e r ' ( J a m e s , on God, 1929, p . 4 2 7 ) . We r e j e c t , t h e n , t h e c l a i m t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n i s a f o r c e d one on t h e . f o l l o w i n g g r o u n d s . A l l a t h e i s t s , . a g n o s t i c s and p e r s o n s h e a r i n g a b o u t r e l i g i o n f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e have a c t e d as i f r e l i g i o n \"were n o t t r u e \" , h e n c e , a c c o r d i n g t o James, t h e y b e l o n g t o t h e c l a s s o f t h o s e who have a l r e a d y made t h e i r d e c i s i o n . There i s nobody l e f t t o be p e r s u a d e d by J a m e s . ( P e r h a p s he i s l e f t a t t e m p t i n g t o c o n v i n c e h i m s e l f t h a t i t i s -good t o b e l i e v e what you b e l i e v e w o u l d be g o o d . ) T h e r e i s a w e l l known s t a t e o f i n d e c i s i o n w h i c h many r e l i g i o u s p e o p l e u n d e r g o and c o n q u e r . I t i s l u d i c r o u s t o s u g g e s t t h a t t h i s p e r i o d o f s e r i o u s doubt i s e q u i v a l e n t t o m a k i n g an u n a v o i d a b l e d e c i s i o n t h a t r e l i g i o n i s f a l s e \u2014 p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e i n d i v i d u a l l a t e r embraces r e l i g i o n more p a s s i o n a t e l y t h a n e v e r . I t i s a s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n a t what age one i s no l o n g e r e l i g i b l e f o r a change o f h e a r t - - must a d e c i s i o n i n a d o l e s c e n c e d e t e r m i n e o n e ' s 54 w h o l e l i f e ? O n e ' s e t e r n i t y ? L a s t l y , one may a l r e a d y b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g w h i c h r e l i g i o n c o n t r a d i c t s , i n w h i c h case one can and s h o u l d r e j e c t t h e s o - c a l l e d ' t r u t h ' o f f e r e d . O r , one may s i m p l y f i n d t h e n o t i o n o f God a n d \/ o r r e l i g i o n s e n s e l e s s and r e j e c t , i t f o r t h i s r e a s o n . One may s u s p e n d b e l i e f r e g a r d i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God i n d e f i n i t e l y . Those who a r e u n d e c i d e d a b o u t t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God and who t a k e s e r i o u s l y t h e c l a i m t h a t t h e y may s u f f e r l a t e r f o r t h e i r i n d e c i s i o n may d e c i d e t o a c t as t h o u g h r e l i g i o n were t r u e . . B u t t o a c t d e l i b e r a t e l y as t h o u g h someth were t r u e i s n o t t o b e l i e v e i t , e l s e t h e r e w o u l d be no need t o ' a c t ' as t h o u g h i t were. t r u e . And o f c o u r s e one may d e c i d e t o a c t o r t o c o n t i n u e t o a c t as t h o u g h t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o -t h e s i s ' were not t r u e , w h i l e r e m a i n i n g u n d e c i d e d about i t . One may a c t on a h y p o t h e s i s i n e i t h e r o f two ways and i n b o t h cases may r e m a i n i n doubt a b o u t i t . Of c o u r s e i f t h e g a t e s o f heaven a r e open o n l y t o b e l i e v e r s , t h e n i t w i l l do n o good m e r e l y t o a c t as t h o u g h one b e l i e v e d , u n l e s s one h e l d a l s o t h a t God c o u l d be d e c e i v e d by man. The p o i n t i s t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g and m e r e l y a c t i n g upon i t i s n e g l e c t e d h e r e by J a m e s . I n h i s P h i l o -s o p h i c a l E s s a y s (p.93), R u s s e l l g i v e s t h e example o f one who e n c o u n t e r s a f o r k i n t h e r o a d upon w h i c h he i s w a l k i n g . I f he i s e v e r t o r e a c h h i s d e s t i n a t i o n , he must t a k e one r o a d o r t h e o t h e r . When he chooses one o f t h e two r o a d s , he may be s a i d t o a c t on t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t i t i s t h e r i g h t one \u2014 he. does h o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s t h e r i g h t o n e . I f we l e t t h e d e s t i n a t i o n be d e a t h , t h e n one o f t h e f o r k s may l e a d t o heaven and t h e o t h e r may l e a d t o h e l l , e m p t i n e s s , p u r g a t o r y , e t c . The d i f f e r e n c e h e r e i s t h a t t h e r o a d o f l i f e i s r e p l e t e w i t h s i g n p o s t s a t e v e r y s t e p l There a r e s e v e r a l r o a d s l e a d i n g o f f i n d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n s , each w i t h i t s s i g n p o s t s a y i n g \" P r o c e e d w i t h h a s t e a l o n g t h i s r o a d . I t a l o n e l e a d s t o s a l v a t i o n . A l l o t h e r r o a d s l e a d nowhere ( o r t o h e l l ) . \" James u r g e s us t o t a k e any o f t h e s e r o a d s l e a d i n g away f r o m a t h e i s m o r a g n o s t i c i s m - - so l o n g , as i t ' w o r k s ' f o r us ( s a t i s f i e s u s ) . A t any r a t e , be t h e r e one f o r k o r s e v e r a l , one may s t r i k e out on any o f them w i t h o u t f e a r t h a t h i s d e c i s i o n i s i r r e v e r s i b l e . One can a l w a y s t u r n back i f one becomes d i s c o u r a g e d . I t i s much e a s i e r t o s t o p a c t i n g on a h y p o t h e s i s t h a n t o s t o p b e l i e v i n g o n e . James a s s e r t s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n i s momentous, ' i . e . , t h a t i t i s u n i q u e , i m p o r t a n t and i r r e v e r s i b l e ( p . 4 ) \u2022 Most o f t h e arguments u s e d r e g a r d i n g t h e c l a i m t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n i s f o r c e d a p p l y a l s o t o t h e c l a i m t h a t i t i s momentous. James compares t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n t o one about a chance t o j o i n a N o r t h P o l e e x p e d i t i o n . But t h e p r o b l e m i s n o t w h e t h e r one s h o u l d a f f i r m o r deny t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God \u2014 as t h o u g h I t were a f a c t t h a t t h e r e i s a God, as i t i s a f a c t t h a t t h e r e i s a N o r t h P o l e . The p r o b l e m i s w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e IS a G o d . That i s , t h e d e c i s i o n i s momentous o n l y i f t h e r e I S i n d e e d a God.. T h i s i s j u s t t h e p o i n t a t i s s u e . The problem, i s w h e t h e r t h e r e IS a momentous d e c i s i o n t o be made, n o t w h e t h e r one s h o u l d r e f u s e t o acknowledge t h e p r e s e n c e o f an o b j e c t ( o r p e r s o n ) whose e x i s t e n c e nobody w o u l d d e n y . James s a y s t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n i s o n e ' s \" o n l y s i m i l a r o p p o r t u n i t y \" , ( p . 4 ) . I t a k e I t he means h e r e t h a t 56 t h i s i s o n e ' s ONLY o p p o r t u n i t y and t h a t t h e r e IS no ' s i m i l a r o p p o r t u n i t y ' . A g a i n t h e q u e s t i o n a r i s e s as t o WHEN I must make t h e d e c i s i o n . I s t h e r e any p a r t i c u l a r age t h a t we r e a c h beyond w h i c h t h e r e i s no t u r n i n g back? C h r i s t i a n s h o l d t h a t s i n c e r e r e p e n t a n c e a t any t i m e e n a b l e s one t o e s c a p e t h e s i n n e r ' s j u s t d e s e r t s . T h i s w o u l d seem t o be d e n i e d by James who s a y s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n i s u n i q u e \u2014 t h a t i t i s o n e ' s ONLY o p p o r t u n i t y . P r e s u m a b l y one who had s i n n e d - - ' i . e . , a c t e d n o t o n l y as t h o u g h r e l i g i o n were u n -t r u e , b u t a l s o as i f he d i d n o t c a r e i f i t were t r u e - -p r e s u m a b l y h e ' w o u l d a l r e a d y have made h i s d e c i s i o n . F i n a l l y , r e g a r d i n g t h e u n i q u e n e s s o f t h e o p p o r t u n i t y , we a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e p r o s p e c t o f numerous Gods and r e l i g i o n s . I s EACH o f t h e s e u n i q u e o r i s o n l y one o f them?. I t seems t h a t t h e r e a r e as many o p p o r t u n i t i e s as t h e r e a r e r e l i g i o n s . And t h e y a r e l e g i o n . We c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t r u t h o f r e l i g i o n i s n e i t h e r f o r c e d n o r momentous. The o p t i o n , t h e r e -f o r e , i s NOT a ' g e n u i n e ' o n e . a s d e f i n e d by J a m e s . 57 7 . B E L I E F AND K N O W L E D G E James s a y s t h a t we a r e u n a b l e t o v o l u n t a r i l y b e l i e v e t h i n g s w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t any one o f \" t h e w h o l e f a b r i c o f t h e t r u t h s t h a t we do b e l i e v e i n \" (p.5). He t h e n c l a i m s t h a t \" I t i s - - o n l y o u r a l r e a d y dead h y p o t h e s e s t h a t o u r w i l l i n g n a t u r e i s u n a b l e t o b r i n g t o l i f e a g a i n . But what has made them dead f o r us i s f o r t h e most . p a r t a p r e v i o u s a c t i o n o f o u r w i l l i n g n a t u r e o f an a n t a g o n i s t i c k i n d ' ! (pp ,$-9). T h i s i n t r o d u c e s a s e c t i o n i n w h i c h James argues , t h a t ( p . 1 0 ) \"As a r u l e we d i s b e l i e v e a l l f a c t s (I.) and t h e o r i e s f o r w h i c h we have no u s e . \" As an i n s t a n c e where we c o u l d n o t choose t o b e l i e v e o t h e r w i s e , James had u s e d o u r b e l i e f t h a t Abraham L i n c o l n ' s e x i s t e n c e i s a f a c t and n o t a m y t h . (p.4)\u2022 Y e t a few pages l a t e r , he says t h a t what has made o u r dead h y p o -t h e s e s dead ( i . e . , n o t a p p e a l i n g t o o u r b e l i e f ) , i s f o r t h e most p a r t a p r e v i o u s a c t i o n o f o u r w i l l i n g n a t u r e o f an a n t a g o n i s t i c k i n d . I f we t a k e t h e example o f L i n c o l n ' s n o n - e x i s t & n c e as a dead h y p o t h e s i s - - i . e . - , i t i s a dead h y p o t h e s i s f o r us t h a t L i n c o l n n e v e r e x i s t e d \u2014 t h e n i t seems a b s u r d t o c l a i m t h a t t h i s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' 'was ' k i l l e d ' by o u r w i l l i n g n a t u r e . James seems t o i m p l y t h a t we cannot d i s -b e l i e v e t h a t L i n c o l n ( o r H i t l e r ) e x i s t e d , l a r g e l y because We have' p r e v i o u s l y w i l l e d t o b e l i e v e i n h i s e x i s t e n c e . I n t r y i n g t o show t h a t o u r b e l i e f s ARE a f u n c t i o n o f our w i l l i n g n a t u r e , James use's s u c h examples as b e l i e f i n democracy and n e c e s s a r y p r o g r e s s (does he r e a l l y mean ' f a i t h ' o r ' c o n v i c t i o n ' h e r e ? ) b u t n o t h i s p r e v i o u s example o f L i n c o l n ' s e x i s t e n c e . My p o i n t i s t h i s : when i t s u i t s h i m , James u s e s examples 58 where our needs and i n t e r e s t s and c u l t u r e may i n d e e d i n -f l u e n c e o u r b e l i e f s , b u t he n e g l e c t s to . m e n t i o n t h e s o r t o f b e l i e f w h i c h i n t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n he u s e d t o show t h a t we a r e UNABLE t o choose o u r b e l i e f s . I s u b m i t t h a t what has made o u r dead h y p o t h e s e s dead f o r u s , i . e . , what makes them u n a p p e a l i n g t o our b e l i e f ( w h i c h i s what James seems t o mean by ' d e a d ' h e r e ) , i s n o t a \" p r e v i o u s a c t i o n o f our w i l l i n g n a t u r e o f an a n t a g o n i s t i c k i n d \" ( p . 9 ) , b u t our judgment b a s e d on e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t p o s s i b l y be t r u e . James seems t o u s e t h e w o r d ' d e a d ' i n two d i f f e r e n t s e n s e s (as he d i d w i t h ' l i v e ' , see p.f7). These s e n s e s must be k e p t d i s t i n c t t o a v o i d t h e s o r t o f a b s u r d i t y t h a t r e s u l t s i n c l a i m i n g t h a t we have p r e v i o u s l y w i l l e d t h a t L i n c o l n ' s e x i s t e n c e ( o r H i t l e r ' s ) s h o u l d n o t have been a myth and THAT i s why we f i n d t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t he n e v e r e x i s t e d a dead o n e . (Many w i l l t h a t H i t l e r ' s e x i s t e n c e WERE a m y t h ) . ( I n p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s we have d e a l t more t h o r o u g h l y w i t h t h e n o t i o n t h a t b e l i e f i s v o l u n t a r y . The above p a r a g r a p h was i n c l u d e d t o show t h a t i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n t y p e s o f example can l e a d t o c o n t r a d i c t o r y r e s u l t s , v i z . , b e l i e f s a r e v o l u n t a r y and i n v o l u n t a r y . ) James s a y s t h a t a s a r u l e \"we f i n d o u r s e l v e s b e l i e v i n g we h a r d l y know how o r -why\" ( p . 9 ) and he adds on t h e same, page t h a t \" O u r f a i t h i s f a i t h i n someone e l s e ' s f a i t h , and i n t h e g r e a t e s t m a t t e r s t h i s i s most t h e cas-e-.\" I t w o u l d seem t h a t r e l i g i o n i t s e l f i s . the b e s t example o f t h i s \u2014 where f a i t h has been made a v i r t u e o f n e c e s s i t y . The l a s t r e f u g e o f many r e l i g i o u s a p o l o g i s t s seems a l w a y s t o be f a i t h i n some-t h i n g - - i n someone e l s e ' s r e v e l a t i o n , i n someone e l s e ' s 59 a u t h o r i t y o r i n God H i m s e l f . As t o how we have come t o h o l d t h e b e l i e f s we h a v e , we c a n o f t e n t o a g r e a t e x t e n t t r a c e . t h e b e l i e f f r o m t h e t i m e and c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h we f i r s t e n t e r t a i n e d t h e p r o p o -s i t i o n e x p r e s s e d by i t , t h r o u g h t h e r e a s o n s f o r w h i c h we a s s e n t e d , o r came t o a s s e n t t o i t . There i s a d i f f e r e n c e between ' f i n d i n g ' - o n e s e l f b e l i e v i n g s o m e t h i n g and s l o w l y a m a s s i n g enough e v i d e n c e t o c o n v i n c e o n e s e l f o f t h e t r u t h a b o u t s o m e t h i n g . One may ' b e l i e v e i n ' democracy m e r e l y b e c a u s e o n e ' s p a r e n t s do and one may b e l i e v e i n i t b e c a u s e y e a r s o f r e s e a r c h have l e d one t o b e l i e v e t h a t no o t h e r f o r m o f p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n w o r k s b e t t e r o r i s more j u s t . The c a u s e s o f , and r e a s o n s f o r , t h e v i e w s about democracy h e l d by a p r o f e s s i o n a l p o l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t and by a s i x y e a r o l d c h i l d may be c o n s i d e r a b l y d i f f e r e n t . T h e - . d i s t i n c t i o n s between them s h o u l d n o t be b l u r r e d by t h e c l a i m t h a t NOBODY knows how o r why he b e l i e v e s what he d o e s . On page 10, James s a y s t h a t \" A s a r u l e we d i s b e l i e v e a l l f a c t s and t h e o r i e s f o r w h i c h we have no use...\" I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o e n v i s a g e somebody d i s b e l i e v i n g what he acknow-l e d g e s i s a FACT. To a c k n o w l e d g e s o m e t h i n g as a f a c t \u2014 t o a d m i t t h a t a s t a t e m e n t f a i t h f u l l y r e p o r t s a f a c t - - i s t o b e l i e v e t h e s t a t e m e n t e x p r e s s i n g i t . And one does n o t b e l i e v e ' a f a c t i n any case - - one e i t h e r i s aware o f i t o r one i s . i g n o r a n t o f i t . To be aware o f a f a c t i s t o know t h a t t h e s t a t e m e n t e x p r e s s i n g i t i s t r u e . I d i s a g r e e t h a t we d i s b e l i e v e t h e o r i e s ( o r f a c t s ) f o r w h i c h we have no u s e . One may n o t f i n d t h a t he can use t h e t h e o r y o f r e l a t i v i t y y e t one may n o t d i s b e l i e v e i t . One may 60 be aware o f s e v e r a l f a c t s f o r w h i c h one has no u s e ' ( e . g . , t h a t t h i s i s a d e c l a r a t i v e s t a t e m e n t ) y e t one n e e d n o t deny t h a t t h e y ARE f a c t s . The ' l e a d i n g b i o l o g i s t now d e a d ' ( p . 19), t o whom James r e f e r s m i g h t have f o u n d t h a t o t h e r s c o u l d use t e l e p a t h y b u t t h a t he c o u l d n o t . He w o u l d d o u b t l e s s have b e l i e v e d t h e c l a i m s a b o u t t e l e p a t h y had he seen t h a t i t c o u l d be u s e d , r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r o r n o t HE c o u l d use i t . The t r u t h o f t h i n g s and o u r d e s i r e o r a b i l i t y t o use them a r e n o t as a r u l e the. same t h i n g . W h i l e r e a d i n g , a h i s t o r y b o o k , we may e n c o u n t e r c o u n t l e s s f a c t s w h i c h we s h a l l n e v e r u s e , y e t n o t deny them on t h i s s c o r e . And how do we come t o b e l i e v e t h a t a c e r t a i n f a c t i s u s e f u l ? Do we f i n d out what i t w o u l d be u s e f u l t o b e l i e v e u s e f u l and t h e n b e l i e v e i t ? James s a y s t h a t C l i f f o r d f o u n d no u s e f o r C h r i s t i a n i t y and so d e n i e d i t on t h a t s c o r e . I t i s a c t u a l l y t h e case t h a t C l i f f o r d deemed t h e c l a i m s o f C h r i s t i a n i t y u n t r u e and i n \" r f h e E t h i c s o f R e l i g i o n \" ( f r o m L e c t u r e s and E s s a y s , v o l . I I ) , C l i f f o r d s a y s t h a t t h e u s e s ( e f f e c t s ) o f r e l i g i o n a r e l a r g e l y d e l e t e r i o u s . We have a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d t h e n o t i o n t h a t some-t h i n g i s t r u e i n s o f a r as i t ' w o r k s ' ( o r s a t i s f i e s ) . The u t i l i t y o f a b e l i e f i s c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m i t s b e i n g o f what i s t r u e o r o f what i s f a l s e . James t a c t l y a d m i t s (p.11) t h a t i d e a l l y p u r e i n s i g h t and l o g i c ought t o p r o d u c e o u r c r e e d s \u2014 and n o t o u r a b i l i t y t o use t h e m . I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t w h i l e men's needs may change f r o m t i m e t o t i m e , t h e s t a t e m e n t s e x p r e s s i n g b e l i e f s w h i c h were t r u e a t one t i m e do n o t s u d d e n l y become f a l s e as t h e needs c h a n g e . As we showed e a r l i e r , i f t r u t h and f a l s i t y were a f u n c t i o n o f heeds and 6 1 d e s i r e s a l o n e , t h e n t h e y w o u l d l o s e t h e i r p r e s e n t meanings a l t o g e t h e r . There w o u l d be no way t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e t r u e f r o m t h e f a l s e . On page 1 1 James d e f e n d s t h e t h e s i s t h a t o u r p a s s i o n a l n a t u r e ( i . e . , o u r d e s i r e s , J . O . ) must d e c i d e w h i c h o f two h y p o t h e s e s i s t r u e whenever i t i s a g e n u i n e o p t i o n \" t h a t c a n n o t by i t s n a t u r e be d e c i d e d on i n t e l l e c t u a l g r o u n d s . \" ' James i n c l u d e s r e l i g i o n among t h e s e o p t i o n s . But we have s e e n t h a t r e l i g i o n i s WOT a g e n u i n e o p t i o n as d e f i n e d by J a m e s . , And i f i t w e r e , t h e n r e l i g i o n c o u l d h a r d l y be a ' h y p o t h e s i s ' s i n c e t h e t r u t h o r w o r k a b i l i t y o f h y p o t h e s e s i s n e v e r d e c i d e d by o u r p a s s i o n s , e m o t i o n s , e t c . , b u t by o b j e c t i v e t e s t s . James o n l y c o n f u s e s t h e i s s u e when he i m p l i e s t h a t s c i e n t i f i c v e r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s may ' y e t ' be p r o d u c e d (p.25). E i t h e r r e l i g i o n i s l i k e m o r a l i t y where e v i d e n c e a l o n e c a n n o t show what i s r i g h t or wrong (and James seems c o n f u s e d about t h i s t o o , as we s h a l l s e e ) , o r i t i s l i k e a s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s i s w h i c h can be t e s t e d and e i t h e r c o n -f i r m e d o r f a l s i f i e d \u2014 b u t i t cannot be BOTH, as James w o u l d seem t o have i t . I n r e g a r d t o making d e c i s i o n s on t h e b a s i s o f e m o t i o n where o u r i n t e l l e c t f a i l s u s , L a i r d s a y s ( p . 1 5 4 ) t h a t \" T h i s q u a l i f i e d d e f e n s e o f p a s s i o n a l d e c i s i o n i s , i n i t s e l f , a f r a n k a d m i s s i o n t h a t p a s s i o n may b e , and f r e q u e n t l y i s , i r r e l e v a n t i n t h e s e a f f a i r s . \" And he adds - t h a t \" P a s s i o n . . . p a c k s t h e j u r y and p r e v e n t s a f a i r t r i a l . \" I n o t h e r w o r d s , James i n a d v e r t e n t l y c o n t r a d i c t s what he has been s a y i n g p r e -v i o u s l y , v i z . , t h a t o u r b e l i e f s , and p r e s u m a b l y o u r d e c i s i o n s , a r e ALL i n f l u e n c e d o r c a u s e d by o u r n o n - i n t e l l e c t u a l n a t u r e \u2014 62 i . e . , we c a n n o t make a d e c i s i o n o r a s s e n t t o a p r o p o -s i t i o n w i t h o u t b e i n g p r e j u d i c e d i n some s e n s e . 3 . CERTAINTY 63 James d e v o t e s a c o n s i d e r a b l e p o r t i o n o f h i s e s s a y t o d i s p a r a g e t h e n o t i o n t h a t we can .'.ever be c e r t a i n o f a n y -t h i n g b u t t r i v i a l , a b s t r a c t p r o p o s i t i o n s w h i c h by t h e m s e l v e s t e l l us n o t h i n g about c o n c r e t e r e a l i t y ( p . 1 5 ) . He s a y s t h a t , t h o u g h we may a t t a i n k n o w l e d g e , we c a n n o t i n f a l l i b l y know when we have done so ( p . 1 2 ) . We may know s o m e t h i n g , but we c a n n o t know f o r c e r t a i n THAT we know i t , he s a y s . He even goes so f a r as t o say t h a t \"no c o n c r e t e t e s t o f what i s r e a l l y t r u e has e v e r been a g r e e d u p o n . \" (p. 1 5 ) \u2022 He c o n t i n u e s w i t h a l o n g l i s t o f t h i n g s w h i c h , t h o u g h deemed a b s o l u t e l y f a l s e by someone, w e r e \/ c o n s i d e r e d a b s o l u t e l y t r u e by o t h e r s . A l l t h i s i s p a r t o f a g e n e r a l campaign u n d e r t a k e n h e r e by James t o d e t h r o n e r e a s o n and t o p l a c e t h e crown o f T r u t h -F i n d e r upon t h e head ( o r h e a r t ) o f e m o t i o n . T h r o u g h o u t t h i s e s s a y , James t r i e s t o show t h a t anyone who r e l i e s s o l e l y upon h i s i n t e l l e c t t o d e c i d e what i s t r u e and what i s f a l s e , w i l l be l e f t w a i t i n g f o r t h e f a i r . James has c l a i m e d t h a t no c o n c r e t e t e s t o f what i s r e a l l y t r u e has e v e r been a g r e e d u p o n . I f he means .here t h a t no s i n g l e c r i t e r i o n o r t e s t o f what i s t r u e has e v e r been a g r e e d u p o n , t h e n he may be r i g h t . T h a t i s , t h e r e may be no s i n g l e t e s t o r c r i t e r i o n w h i c h i n e v e r y case w i l l be an i n f a l l i b l e g u i d e t o t h e t r u t h . But t h o u g h t h e r e may be no s i n g l e t e s t w h i c h w i l l work i n a l l c a s e s , t h e r e a r e SEVERAL c o n c r e t e t e s t s w h i c h men u s e t o s u c c e s s f u l l y d i s t i n g u i s h t h e t r u e f r o m t h e f a l s e . The t e s t o r c r i t e r i o n depends on t h e 64 q u e s t i o n o r p r o b l e m t h a t one i s t r y i n g t o answer o r s o l v e . Suppose I am phoned by a f r i e n d who i n v i t e s me (and my w i f e ) f o r S a t u r d a y n i g h t t o a p a r t y a t h i s home. He has r e c e n t l y moved and t h e r e f o r e must g i v e me h i s a d d r e s s and d i r e c t i o n s w h i c h w i l l h o p e f u l l y g e t me t h e r e . Comes S a t u r d a y n i g h t my w i f e and m y s e l f f a i t h f u l l y f o l l o w t h e d i r e c t i o n s and e v e n t u a l l y k n o c k a t a d o o r b e h i n d w h i c h we h e a r t h e t i n k l i n g o f g l a s s e s and t h e l a u g h t e r and v o i c e s o f f r i e n d s whom we know were a l s o i n v i t e d . Suppose o u r f r i e n d comes t o t h e d o o r , c o n g r a t u l a t e s us on f i n d i n g h i s p l a c e , welcomes us i n , t a k e s o u r c o a t s and l e a v e s us t o m i n g l e w i t h our f r i e n d s . I f my w i f e c l a i m e d t o be i n d o u b t as t o w h e t h e r we had f o u n d t h e p a r t y , I w o u l d n o t q u o t e f r o m The W i l l t o B e l i e v e t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t \"no c o n c r e t e t e s t o f what i s r e a l l y t r u e has e v e r been a g r e e d u p o n \" . I w o u l d s e r i o u s l y q u e s t i o n h e r s a n i t y . Any sane p e r s o n i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f my w i f e w o u l d have no need t o q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r we had f o u n d t h e p a r t y . S e v e r a l ' t e s t s ' o r c r i t e r i a had been e v i d e n t t o i n d i c a t e t h a t we had f o u n d o u r p a r t y . We had b o t h seen t h e a d d r e s s above t h e f r o n t d o o r and h e a r d o u r f r i e n d s ' v o i c e s f r o m w i t h i n . When a d m i t t e d ( a n o t h e r c r i t e r i o n t h a t we had f o u n d o u r p a r t y ) , we had b o t h seen and h e a r d t h e h o s t and o u r f r i e n d s . A l l t h e e v i d e n c e o f o u r s e n s e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t we had t r u l y f o u n d o u r p a r t y . The most c o n c r e t e t e s t o f a l l i s when every.-;one o f o u r s e n s e s , and e v e r y one o f t h e s e n s e s o f a l l o t h e r o b -s e r v e r s i n t h e same s i t u a t i o n , r e p o r t p r e c i s e l y t h e same t h i n g . 65 But t h e e v i d e n c e o f o u r s e n s e s i s o n l y one o f t h e many t e s t s o r c r i t e r i a t h a t have been a g r e e d upon as t h e s u r e s t p a t h t o t r u t h . What we remember f r o m t h e p a s t can a l s o be a t e s t o f t h e t r u t h . P a r t i c u l a r l y when o t h e r s r e c a l l t h i n g s as we d o , can we be s u r e ' t h a t t r u t h i s i n o u r g r a s p . And t h e r e a r e t e s t s f o r what none o f us c o u l d p o s s i b l y r e c a l l s i n c e we were n o t p r e s e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , - t h e f a c t t h a t L i n c o l n e x i s t e d c a n n o t now be a t t e s t e d t o by o u r s e n s e s n o r by o u r m e m o r i e s , e x c e p t p e r h a p s i n d i r e c t l y . James h i m s e l f c a n n o t b e l i e v e t h a t L i n c o l n ' s e x i s t e n c e i s a m y t h . R e f e r e n c e s i n enough r e s p e c t e d b o o k s , n e w s p a p e r s , l e t t e r s , e t c . can s e r v e as c r i t e r i a o f t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f many e v e n t s i n c e n t u r i e s p a s t . I t i s f a l s e t h a t \"no c o n c r e t e t e s t o f what i s r e a l l y t r u e has e v e r been a g r e e d u p o n \" . S e v e r a l t e s t s a r e a c k n o w -l e d g e d by sane a d u l t s t o be s u f f i c i e n t t o p r o v e t h i n g s t r u e . I t seems t h a t James i s d e n y i n g t h a t we can j u s t i f y , on i n t e l l e c t u a l g r o u n d s a l o n e , any b e l i e f . He a r g u e s a t l e n g t h t o show t h a t m o s t , i f n o t a l l , o f our b e l i e f s , a r e c a u s e d by o u r d e s i r e s o r n e e d s . We do n o t b e l i e v e w i t h r e a s o n ( s ) - - \"we f i n d o u r s e l v e s , b e l i e v i n g we h a r d l y know how o r why\" ( p .9). He seems t o t h i n k t h a t i f he can d i s c r e d i t reason! , ' t h e n he c a n a r g u e e f f e c t i v e l y t h a t we s h o u l d f e e l f r e e t o b e l i e v e t h a t w h i c h most s a t i s f i e s u s . I f d e s i r e o r n e e d were t h e s o l e cause o f b e l i e f - - and i t s s o l e ' j u s t i f i c a t i o n ' t o o \u2014 t h e n w o u l d we n o t be f o o l s t o b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n what we most d e s i r e ? But i f o u r d e s i r e s o r needs WERE t h e s o l e cause o f b e l i e f , t h e n we WOULD b e l i e v e o n l y what we most d e s i r e d . 66 J u s t as we w o u l d b e l i e v e o n l y what we deemed most s u p p o r t e d b y e v i d e n c e ( o r what was s e l f - e v i d e n t ) , i f r e a s o n were t h e s o l e cause o f . b e l i e f . W h a t e v e r may i n f l u e n c e p e o p l e t o b e l i e v e as t h e y d o , t h e y c a n n o t j u s t i f y t h e i r b e l i e f s by a p p e a l t o d e s i r e s o r needs b u t t o r e a s o n s w i t h w h i c h any sane p e r s o n w o u l d c o n c u r . D e s i r e o r need may i n f l u e n c e p e o p l e t o b e l i e v e as t h e y do b u t t h e s e can n e v e r s e r v e as j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f b e l i e f s \u2014 j u s t i f i c a t i o n means j u s t i f i a b l e f o r a n y o n e , n o t j u s t t h o s e w i t h c e r t a i n d e s i r e s o r n e e d s . There ARE ways i n w h i c h we can \"know t h a t we know\" \u2014 t h e r e ARE c o n c r e t e t e s t s o f what i s r e a l l y t r u e . To i n v i t e c o n t r a d i c t i o n f r o m o t h e r s , but t o r e c e i v e o n l y c o n f i r m a t i o n , i s one s i g n t h a t we a r e i n p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e t r u t h . R o g e r s s a y s (p.399) t h a t \"when we see t h a t two i n d e p e n d e n t b e l i e f s c o r r o b o r a t e one a n o t h e r , . , t h e c o n f i d e n c e we have i n b o t h i s i n c r e a s e d ; and t h i s i s what we mean by t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n . \" O t h e r p e o p l e s ' b e l i e f s o r o t h e r b e l i e f s o f o u r own can s e r v e t o s u b s t a n t i a t e a b e l i e f . F o r e x a m p l e , i f I b e l i e v e t h a t a c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l i n my c l a s s i s c o n s i s t e n t l y c h e a t i n g , I w o u l d p l a c e more c o n f i d e n c e i n t h i s b e l i e f i f a n o t h e r t e a c h e r ( o r t e a c h e r s ) t o l d me t h a t he t o o had r e a s o n s t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e i n d i -v i d u a l was c h e a t i n g \u2014 p a r t i c u l a r l y i f t h i s o p i n i o n was u n -s o l i c i t e d by me. I t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y othat one have a c l o s e d ' s y s t e m ' as d e s c r i b e d by James on page 1 3 . But most o f our b e l i e f s , t o be r a t i o n a l , must be c o n n e c t e d i n some way w i t h OTHER b e l i e f s . As H a m p s h i r e s a y s ( p . 1 4 4 ) , \" I n t h e domain o f o p i n i o n , 67 r a t i o n a l i t y i s s i m p l y t h e o p p o s i t e o f d i s c o n n e c t e d n e s s , t h e o p p o s i t e o f h o l d i n g my o p i n i o n s a p a r t w i t h o u t f o r c i n g m y s e l f t o r a n g e them i n a d e c i d e d o r d e r o f d e p e n d e n c e . \" He adds ( p . 1 4 9 ) : \"The i d e a o f a r a t i o n a l a c t i o n r e q u i r e s t h e d o i n g o f s o m e t h i n g w i t h i n t h e penumbra o f a l a r g e r i n t e n t i o n , as t h e i d e a o f a r a t i o n a l b e l i e f r e q u i r e s an a c c e p t a n c e o f some s t a t e m e n t w i t h i n an e n v i r o n m e n t o f o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s a c c e p t e d . \" I n o t h e r w o r d s , few b e l i e f s a r e o r p h a n s and w i l l b e l o n g t o one o f t h e many f a m i l i e s o f b e l i e f we a r e h o u s i n g . Even i f i t be t r u e t h a t we do n o t a l w a y s p r o p o r t i o n b e l i e f ex a c t l y t o t h e e v i d e n c e a v a i l a b l e , even i f o u r d e s i r e s and needs DO p l a y a p a r t i n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f our b e l i e f s \u2014 t h i s does n o t mean t h a t we s h o u l d f e e l f r e e t o b e l i e v e w h a t e v e r most t e m p t s us i f we deem i t i m p o r t a n t enough. Hobhouse i n t e r p r e t s James ( p . l $ 7 ) as s a y i n g s o m e t h i n g l i k e t h i s : \"As s o o n as t h e l i g h t s o f r e a s o n a r e t u r n e d down, we may h e l p o u r s e l v e s i n t h e d a r k t o what we can l a y hands o n . \" James had e a r l i e r w r i t t e n t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g c e a s e s w i t h l a c k o f e x p e r i e n c e . He s a i d (16*90, p.301) t h a t \" S e n s i b l o b j e c t s a r e t h u s o u r r e a l i t i e s o r t h e t e s t s .of o u r r e a l i t i e s . C o n c e i v e d o b j e c t s must show s e n s i b l e e f f e c t s o r e l s e be d i s b e l i e v e d . \" T h i n g s u n e x p e r i e n c e d o r u n e x p e r i e n c a b l e by us w i l l be u n r e a l f o r u s . I f we b e l i e v e i n them, we do n o t r e a l l y know what I t i s t h a t we b e l i e v e , t h u s we b e l i e v e i r -r a t i o n a l l y . And James had w r i t t e n i n a l e t t e r t o L o v e j o y i n 1907 ( P e r r y , 1948, p.481) t h a t \"we can i m a g i n e , as c o e x i s t i n g w i t h our e x p e r i e n c e , m y r i a d s o f e n t i t i e s a b s o l u t e l y i s o l a t e d f r o m i t . I n t h a t c a s e , h o w e v e r , we can n o t o n l y n o t v e r i f y 68 w h i c h o f them t r u l y e x i s t s , b u t a p a r t f r o m some p o s s i b i l i t y o f coming i n t o t o u c h w i t h o u r s e l v e s , we c a n n o t even c o n c e i v e what . . . t h e r e a l e x i s t e n c e o f any one o f them w o u l d m e a n . \" I n v i e w o f t h e s e q u o t a t i o n s , i t i s s u r p r i s i n g t h a t James d i d n o t f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o c l a r i f y s u c h p r o p o s i t i o n s as ( p . 2 5 ) \" t h e b e s t t h i n g s a r e t h e more e t e r n a l t h i n g s \" and ( p . 2 7 ) \"The more p e r f e c t and more e t e r n a l a s p e c t o f t h e u n i v e r s e . . . ( h a s ) p e r s o n a l f o r m . \" R a t i o n a l b e l i e f s , t h e n , a r e o f t h o s e t h i n g s w h i c h a r e i n some way c o n n e c t e d w i t h what we have e x p e r i e n c e d o r w i t h o t h e r b e l i e f s o f o u r s w h i c h a r e o f t h i n g s c o n n e c t e d i n some way w i t h o u r e x p e r i e n c e . Those b e l i e f s w h i c h meet t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r a t i o n a l . But f o r a b e l i e f t o be r a t i o n a l , i t must a t l e a s t be a b o u t t h i n g s w h i c h we can c o n c e i v e - - i . e . , t h i n g s w h i c h , as James s a y s , we c o u l d come i n t o t o u c h . James a r g u e s ( p . 1 2 ) t h a t we c a n n o t know f o r - c e r t a i n t h a t we know s o m e t h i n g , t h o u g h we can know t h i n g s . But i t makes no s e n s e t o say t h a t one d o u b t s t h a t one knows some-t h i n g , t h e r e f o r e i t makes no s e n s e t o say t h a t one knows t h a t one knows s o m e t h i n g . To know A i s t o be c e r t a i n t h a t . A.. We a r e a l l f a m i l i a r w i t h R y l e ' s d i s p o s i t i o n a l a n a l y s i s o f ' k n o w i n g t h a t ' (see h i s book The Concept o f M i n d ) and w i t h t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t a r i s e when one a r g u e s t h a t we know fe.hatv.we know and we know t h a t we know t h a t we know, e t c . When I am a s k e d f o r my t e l e p h o n e number, I j u s t g i v e i t . A s s u m i n g t h a t I g i v e i t . c o r r e c t l y e v e r y t i m e , we w o u l d s a y t h a t I know rny number. To r e p l y \" O f c o u r s e I d o \" i f a s k e d \"Do y o u know t h a t you know y o u r number?\" i s t o a s s e r t e m p h a t i c a l l y 69 t h a t I do know my number. ( I w o u l d be more l i k e l y t o a'sk what t h e q u e s t i o n e r m e a n t . ) To show t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n makes no s e n s e i f i n t e r p r e t e d l i t e r a l l y , t h i n k o f how i n a p p r o p r i a t e t h e r e p l i e s \" n o \" o r \" I ' m n o t s u r e \" w o u l d b e . I do n o t t h i n k t h a t James, shows s u c c e s s f u l l y t h a t we n e v e r know a n y t h i n g w i t h c e r t a i n t y . He a d m i t s t h a t we can c a l l m a t h e m a t i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n s t r u e w i t h c e r t a i n t y but as we have s e e n , t h e r e a r e o t h e r c a s e s where we a r e c o m p l e t e l y j u s t i f i e d i n c l a i m i n g c e r t a i n t y - - e . g . , we can knew w i t h c e r t a i n t y t h a t we HAVE f o u n d t h e r i g h t p a r t y . The s o r t s o f t h i n g s l i s t e d by James on page 17 w h i c h h a v e been b r a n d e d as c e r t a i n and as c e r t a i n l y f a l s e by d i f f e r e n t p e o p l e a r e a l l examples o f a b s t r a c t p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r o b l e m s . T h i s s o r t o f p r o b l e m i s n o t o r i o u s l y i n s o l u b l e by t h e o r d i n a r y means o f e m p i r i c a l ' t e s t . T h i n g s w h i c h have been t h o u g h t a b s o l u t e l y f a l s e by some and a b s o l u t e l y t r u e by o t h e r s , t o w h i c h e m p i r i c a l t e s t s a r e n o t a p p l i c a b l e (and c o u l d n o t be a p p l i c a b l e ) , may w e l l be m e a n i n g l e s s ' m e t a p h y s i -c a l m o n s t e r s ' w h i c h c o u l d n o t p o s s i b l y t o u c h u s . I f James had d e a l t w i t h l e s s g r a n d examples and u s e d i n s t e a d s u c h examples as L i n c o l n ' s e x i s t e n c e (and, e . g . , o n e ' s t e l e p h o n e n u m b e r , ) he m i g h t have had more d i f f i c u l t y a r g u i n g t h a t n o t h i n g i n f o r m a t i v e o f c o n c r e t e r e a l i t y c o u l d be known w i t h c e r t a i n t y . ' I a g r e e w i t h James ( p . 1 7 ) t h a t where a h y p o t h e s i s comes f r o m i s l e s s i m p o r t a n t t h a n where i t l e a d s t o . A s c i e n t i s t may dream o f a h y p o t h e s i s , y e t i t may p r o v e u s e f u l and l e a d t o i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s . \u2022 B u t James' p h r a s e ' t h i n k i n g ' ( p . 1 7 - -. 7 0 ' t o t a l d r i f t o f t h i n k i n g ' ) must n o t be o v e r l o o k e d . I f by ' t h e t o t a l d r i f t o f t h i n k i n g ' James means t h a t a l l s o r t s o f t e s t s c o n t i n u e t o c o n f i r m t h e h y p o t h e s i s , t h e n we may c o n t i n u e t o c a l l t h e h y p o t h e s i s a ' t r u e ' o n e . But i f James means o n l y c o n t i n u e d s a t i s f a c t i o n by t h i s p h r a s e , t h e n t h e h y p o -t h e s i s i s n o t c o n f i r m e d . I t i s a d h e r e d t o f o r s u b j e c t i v e g r a t i f i c a t i o n , n o t b e c a u s e i t . l e a d s t o i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s o f an o b j e c t i v e ( p u b l i c l y o b s e r v a b l e ) s o r t . To sum u p : c e r t a i n t y I S p o s s i b l e ; t h e r e a r e c a s e s where no sane p e r s o n w o u l d o r s h o u l d have any d o u b t s ( e . g . , t h e p a r t y e x a m p l e ) ; d e s i r e s o r needs may i n f l u e n c e one t o b e l i e v e b u t o n l y r e a s o n can j u s t i f y i t ( t o t h e w o r l d a t l a r g e ) ; even i f we c o u l d p r o v e n o t h i n g t r u e , t h i s w o u l d be no r e a s o n f o r l i c e n c e t o b e l i e v e what most tempts us and i s deemed i m p o r t a n t - - i t i s a l l t h e more r e a s o n f o r c h e r i s h i n g b e l i e f as o u r o n l y g u i d e t o r e a l i t y ; c o n f i r m a t i o n i s g a i n e d by t e s t i n g , as opposed t o c o n s o l a t i o n o r g r a t i f i c a t i o n g a i n e d by b e l i e v i n g t h a t w h i c h i s t o o vague t o t e s t o r i s c l a i m e d t o be beyond t e s t i n g . 71 9 . B E L I E F AND TRUTH I n t h e n e x t s e c t i o n ( 1 7 - 1 9 ) , James d i s t i n g u i s h e s two ways o f l o o k i n g a t our d u t y i n t h e m a t t e r o f o p i n i o n 'know t r u t h ' and ' a v o i d e r r o r ! He a r g u e s t h a t i t makes more sense t o b e l i e v e , when i n d o u b t , t h a n t o d i s b e l i e v e . He s a y s t h a t i f one b e l i e v e s A , t h e n t h e r e i s a chance t h a t one w i l l g a i n t h e t r u t h . I f one' d i s b e l i e v e s A , t h e n even i f \u2022 one. e s c a p e s e r r o r , i t i s - u n l i k e l y i n so d o i n g , t h a t one w i l l b e l i e v e B ( t h e t r u t h ) . I n e s c a p i n g t h e e r r o r A , s a y s James, we may' b e l i e v e o t h e r f a l s e h o o d s C o r D, o r we may n o t b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g a t a l l i n t h e m a t t e r . T h e r e f o r e , s a y s James , b e t t e r t o b e l i e v e t h a n t o d i s b e l i e v e . James s a y s t h a t ' B e l i e v e t r u t h ' and ' S h u n e r r o r ' a r e two s e p a r a b l e laws ( p p . 1 7 and 1 $ ) . He s a y s t h a t ( p . 2 7 ) i t i s b e t t e r t o y i e l d t o o n e ' s hope t h a t A may be t r u e t h a n t o y i e l d t o o n e ' s f e a r t h a t A may be wr_qng. \"To b e l i e v e i s t o be b r a v e , t o d i s b e l i e v e i s c o w a r d l y \" , i s w h a t , i n e f f e c t , James s a y s . He i s s a y i n g t h a t i f one d i s b e l i e v e s , one has gained nothing but perhaps freedom from error and \"Our e r r o r s a r e s u r e l y n o t s u c h a w f u l l y so lemn t h i n g s . \" ( p . 1 9 ) b u t i f one b e l i e v e s , t h e n one has a chance t o g a i n t r u t h and t h e b l e s s i n g s o f r e a l k n o w l e d g e . Caveat emptor' . Suppose a man went t o a u s e d c a r l o t and a s a l e s m a n t r i e d t o p r e s s u r e h i m i n t o b u y i n g what l o o k e d as i f i t c o u l d be a d u d , t h o u g h t h e c h a n c e s l o o k e d , a b o u t $0-50 t h a t i t w a s . The s a l e s m a n a r g u e s t h a t o n l y i f he 'buys t h e c a r w i l l he have t h e chance t o see i f i t i s a peach--(-and n o t a l e m o n ) , 72 w h e r e a s n o t t o buy i t w i l l c u t h i m o f f f o r e v e r f r o m t h e o p p o r t u n i t y . One m i g h t l o s e one's temper and say t o t h e s a l e s m a n \" E v e n - i f t h i s were t h e l a s t c a r on e a r t h . . . e t c . \" . And t h i s i s j u s t t h e p o i n t . T h e r e a r e t h o u s a n d s o f u s e d c a r s ( b e l i e f s ) a v a i l a b l e and t o choose t h e f i r s t one y o u e n c o u n t e r i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y w o u l d be u t t e r f o l l y . You w o u l d e l i m i n a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y , f o r t h e p r e s e n t a t l e a s t , o f t r y i n g a n o t h e r c a r , and even . from s c r u t i n i z i n g t h e o t h e r c a r s . You w i l l be so b u s y d r i v i n g ( o r r e p a i r i n g ) t h a t f i r s t c a r ( b e l i e f ) t h a t y o u w i l l l i k e l y have no t i m e o r i n t e r e s t i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g f u r t h e r . But we do n o t choose b e l i e f s as we do c a r s . As we saw e a r l i e r , b e l i e f i s n o t v o l u n t a r y . We c a n n o t choose t o b e l i e v e w h a t e v e r most t e m p t s u s , as we c o u l d buy t h e c a r . So i n one s e n s e , J a m e s ' a d v i c e t o b e l i e v e r a t h e r t h a n d i s b e l i e v e i s n o n s e n s e . I t a l s o t u r n s o u t t h a t he u t t e r s o n l y a t a u t o l o g y . \" B e l i e v e t r u t h ' . Shun e r r o r ! \" Nobody w o u l d argue w i t h e i t h e r o f t h e s e , n o r even w i t h J a m e s ' emphasis on t h e f o r m e r ' r u l e ' . But nobody w o u l d argue w i t h h i m b e c a u s e , as we_saw, b e l i e f and what we deem t o be t h e t r u t h a r e one 'and t h e same  t h i n g . Thus what James a c t u a l l y u r g e s us t o do when he s a y s \"know t r u t h ! \" o r \" f c e l i e v e t r u t h ! \" i s \"deem t r u e what i s deemed t r u e ' . \" . That i s , James u r g e s us t o b e l i e v e \u2014 t o deem t r u e \u2014 what i s t r u e , w h i c h i s what most o f us t h i n k we a r e d o i n g a n y w a y s . But James does n o t m e r e l y u r g e us t o b e l i e v e what i s x t r u e - - he u r g e s us t o b e l i e v e r a t h e r t h a n d i s b e l i e v e i n t h e hope t h a t vie w i l l b e l i e v e t r u l y . I f we d i s b e l i e v e , he s a y s , we may b e l i e v e n o t h i n g o r we may b e l i e v e 73 s o m e t h i n g e l s e t h a t i s f a l s e . So t h e b e s t t h i n g t o do i s t o b e l i e v e ! The o n l y p r o b l e m i s , WHAT s h o u l d we b e l i e v e ? James a c c u s e s C l i f f o r d o f e x h o r t i n g us t o b e l i e v e n o t h i n g and t o keep o u r minds i n s u s p e n s e f o r e v e r ( p . l $ ) . Nowhere do we f i n d C l i f f o r d a d v o c a t i n g s u c h n o n s e n s e . I n The E t h i c s o f B e l i e f , he c a u t i o n e d us t o a t t e m p t t o p r o p o r -t i o n b e l i e f t o t h e e v i d e n c e and n o t t o o u r d e s i r e s . He s a i d n o t h i n g a b o u t w h e t h e r i t i s b e t t e r i n g e n e r a l t o b e l i e v e , d i s b e l i e v e o r s u s p e n d j u d g m e n t . He s a i d o n l y t h a t t o b e l i e v e on a n y t h i n g b u t s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e i s t o m i s u s e b e l i e f . We e n c o u r a g e t h e s p r e a d o f s e l f - d e c e p t i o n and d e c e p t i o n i n g e n e r a l when we do n o t r e s p e c t t h e t r u t h enough, he s a i d . James a r g u e s t h a t i t i s b e t t e r as a r u l e t o b e l i e v e t h a n t o d i s b e l i e v e b e c a u s e one can r a r e l y , i f e v e r , b e l i e v e t r u l y j u s t by d i s b e l i e v i n g . That i s , t o b e l i e v e t r u l y , one must b e l i e v e , t h e r e f o r e d i s b e l i e f a l o n e , w i l l r a r e l y , i f e v e r , l e a d one t o t h e t r u t h . A l s o , one i s a coward, t o y i e l d t o t h e f e a r o f b e i n g i n e r r o r r a t h e r t h a n y i e l d t o t h e hope o f g a i n i n g t r u t h . I n t h e p u r s u i t o f t r u t h , i t i s more p r u d e n t t o be c a r e -f u l t o a v o i d e r r o r s t h a n t o b e l i e v e m e r e l y i n t h e HOPE t h a t y o u w i l l b e l i e v e what i s t r u e . F o r e v e r y t h i n g t r u e , t h e r e a r e an i n f i n i t e number o f f a l s e h o o d s . W h i l e i t i s t r u e t h a t I have one w i f e , i t i s f a l s e t h a t I have t w o , t h r e e , f o u r e t c . e t c . I f what James s a y s i s t r u e , v i z . , t h a t \" o u r m i n d s a r e as r e a d y t o g r i n d out f a l s e h o o d as v e r a c i t y \" ( p . l $ ) , t h e n I w o u l d r e a l l y be h a r d put t o say how many w i v e s I h a v e . 74 I r e a l i z e t h a t my example i s c l e a r - c u t - - I know f o r c e r t a i n t h a t I h a v e no more t h a n one w i f e . B u t t h e case i s even s t r o n g e r a g a i n s t James when we go t o c a s e s where t h e t r u t h i s n o t so o b v i o u s . I n t r y i n g t o l e a r n how n a t u r e i s c o n -s t i t u t e d , man has b e l i e v e d many f a l s e h o o d s . He b e l i e v e d t h a t he was a t t h e c e n t e r o f a f i n i t e u n i v e r s e , and t h a t he was s i t u a t e d on a f l a t e a r t h . I f men had c o n t i n u e d t o b e l i e v e t h e s e and c o u n t l e s s o t h e r t h i n g s i n t h e hope t h a t t h e y b e l i e v e d t r u l y , r a t h e r t h a n t o doubt and d i s b e l i e v e as a few o f them d a r e d t o , we m i g h t S T I L L b e l i e v e t h a t o u r w o r l d i s f l a t , a t t h e c e n t e r o f t h e u n i v e r s e and t h a t d a n c i n g a r o u n d f i r e s w i l l e n c o u r a g e t h e gods t o g i v e f o r t h w a t e r . I f a p o l i c y o f b e l i e f s u c h as James a d v o c a t e d had been f o l l o w e d , man w o u l d be where he w a s . There w o u l d be no t r i a l and e r r o r , no d o u b t o r d i s b e l i e f , no change o r p r o g r e s s o r e n l a r g e m e n t o f k n o w l e d g e . On page 18 James s a y s t h a t \"we may e s c a p e B by n o t b e -l i e v i n g a n y t h i n g a t a l l , even A . \" Y e t i n The P r i n c i p l e s o f  P s y c h o l o g y , ( p . 2 8 4 ) , he had s t a t e d t h a t \"we. n e v e r d i s b e l i e v e a n y t h i n g e x c e p t f o r t h e r e a s o n t h a t we b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g e l s e w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s t h e f i r s t t h i n g . \" He s t a t e d f u r t h e r t h a t \" a l l p r o p o s i t i o n s . . . a r e b e l i e v e d t h r o u g h t h e v e r y f a c t o f b e i n g c o n c e i v e d , u n l e s s t h e y c l a s h w i t h o t h e r p r o p o s i t i o n s b e l i e v e d a t t h e same t i m e . \" I f we t a k e what he s a i d i n The  P r i n c i p l e s o f P s y c h o l o g y s e r i o u s l y , t h e n we must r e j e c t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t one c o u l d r e j e c t or ' e s c a p e ' a p r o p o s i t i o n B by n o t b e l i e v i n g a n y t h i n g a t a l l . To d i s b e l i e v e B, one must b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g e l s e w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s i t , i f James 75 was c o r r e c t i n h i s book The P r i n c i p l e s o f P s y c h o l o g y . We q u o t e d S c h i l l e r e a r l i e r (page5Z) t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t one can r e j e c t a p r o p o s i t i o n B j u s t b e c a u s e i t s t r i k e s one a s ' b e i n g i n t o l e r a b l e . F o r e x a m p l e , I c o u l d r e j e c t t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e r e a r e 100 g o d s , n o t j u s t on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t I have a l r e a d y b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e r e a r e o n l y t h r e e gods o r t h a t t h e r e i s o n l y o n e . I can r e j e c t i t s i m p l y because i t s t r i k e s me as i n t o l e r a b l e o r p a t e n t l y f a l s e o r even r i d i c u l o u s o r m e a n i n g l e s s . I may ' e s c a p e ' one p r o p o s i t i o n n o t by b e l i e v i n g n o t h i n g r e g a r d i n g t h e m a t t e r , but by b e l i e v i n g t h a t i t i s p a t e n t ^ f a l s e , a b s u r d , i n t o l e r a b l e o r m e a n i n g l e s s . I f i t i s a p r o p o s i t i o n w h i c h I u n d e r s t a n d b u t see no e v i d e n c e f o r , I may s u s p e n d judgement o r d e c l a r e i t f a l s e u n t i l some e v i -dence i s f o u n d - - i f i t i s a m a t t e r amenable t o e v i d e n c e . James seems t o t h i n k t h a t we have t o m a i n t a i n a c e r t a i n number o f b e l i e f s o r we w i l l go e m p t y - h a n d e d . But we w o u l d n o t d i s b e l i e v e a p r o p o s i t i o n B t h a t we u n d e r s t o o d u n l e s s we b e l i e v e d t h e p r o p o s i t i o n n o t - B , and. we may have e v e r y r e a s o n t o r e j e c t B . He seems a l s o t o t h i n k t h a t we a r e u n a b l e t o a c t u n l e s s we b e l i e v e , , but s i n c e d i s b e l i e f o f any p r o p o s i t i o n B e n t a i l s b e l i e f i n n o t r B , we a r e a b l e t o a c t on our ' ' ' d i s -b e l i e f . ' . One m i g h t say t h a t t h e r e i s no s u c h s t a t e o f mind as d i s b e l i e f . A l l c a s e s o f d i s b e l i e f a r e r e a l l y c a s e s o f b e l i e f t h a t ' n o t - X ' v . T h a t i s , we b e l i e v e t h a t t h e p r o p o -s i t i o n b e f o r e us i s f a l s e . James s a y s ( p . 1 8 ) t h a t i t i s b e t t e r t o be duped many t i m e s i n o n e ' s i n v e s t i g a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n p o s t p o n e i n d e f i n i t e l y \" t h e chance o f g u e s s i n g t r u e \" . T h i s i s a most c u r i o u s 76 p h r a s e . I f one makes a g u e s s , t h e n how does one d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n i s t h e c o r r e c t one? U s u a l l y one w a i t s u n t i l t h e e v i d e n c e i s i n , o r i f p o s s i b l e , one t e s t s t h e c o n c l u s i o n g u e s s e d a t i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e i t s w o r t h . As R u s s e l l s a y s ( p . 9 5 ) , even i f we b e l i e v e t r u l y , i f we have no r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e i t , t h e n i n what sense do we ' g a i n ' a t r u t h \u2014 'know t r u t h ! ' \u2014 o r a c q u i r e knowledge? I f we want t h e \" b l e s s i n g s o f r e a l k n o w l e d g e \" , as James p u t s i t , t h e n t o m e r e l y guess ( b e l i e v e ) w i l l n e v e r d o . As R u s s e l l s a y s ( p . 9 6 ) , where we guess and by chance h i t on t h e t r u t h , we may b e l i e v e what happens t o be t r u e b u t we cannot know t h e t r u t h . As we s a i d e a r l i e r , t o know i s t o b e l i e v e w i t h j u s t i f i e d c o n f i d e n c e (what i s t r u e ) , and one r a r e l y h a s . j u s t i f i e d c o n f i d e n c e (a p r o d u c t o f b e i n g c o n v i n c e d by e v i d e n c e ) when one m e r e l y g u e s s e s t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s t r u e . O n l y r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e can g i v e one k n o w l e d g e , n e v e r b e l i e f a l o n e . To know t h a t some-t h i n g i s so e n a b l e s one t o a c t much more e x p e d i t i o u s l y t h a n m e r e l y t o b e l i e v e o r g u e s s , and happen t o be r i g h t . I f one i s t o \"know t r u t h \" , t h e n , i t i s n o t enough t o guess a t o r b e l i e v e a c o n c l u s i o n w h i c h y o u do n o t know t o be t r u e ( i . e . w h i c h happens t o be t r u e ) . As Kaufmann s a y s ( p . 1 0 9 ) \"The mere f a c t t h a t I f e e l c e r t a i n and happen t o be r i g h t does n o t mean I k n o w \" . . I b e l i e v e w i t h Kaufmann t h a t t h e r e i s a c r u c i a l c o n n e c t i o n between knowledge and e v i d e n c e . To say \" I know\" a d v i s e d l y , i s t o say t h a t one has \" e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o c o m p e l t h e a s s e n t o f every r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n \" (Kaufmann, p . 1 1 3 ) . (Of c o u r s e we can know w i t h o u t e v i d e n c e \u2014 77 b u t o n l y i n c a s e s where no e v i d e n c e i s r e q u i r e d . F o r e x -ample;-, \" I know I have a h e a d a c h e \" o r \" I know I l o v e h e r \" ) . When one makes a guess and t h e c o n c l u s i o n i s c o n f i r m e d i m m e d i a t e l y by someone who r e a l l y does know ( e . g . \" Y o u ' r e r i g h t ' . M a r y d i d h a v e , t w i n s ' . ) - , one m i g h t say \" I ' m c l e v e r eh? ' . \" o r \" P r e t t y s m a r t e h ' . B u t one i s u n l i k e l y t o s a y (and be j u s t i f i e d i n s a y i n g ) , \" ! knew i t a l l t h e t i m e \" . I f one k n o w s , t h e n t h e r e i s ' no need t o g u e s s . And i f one wants t o f i n d o u t , one a s k s t h o s e who know (and a s k s how t h e y know) o r one p u t s t h e q u e s t i o n t o n a t u r e i n t h e f o r m o f e x p e r i m e n t s - -one does n o t f i n d out by g u e s s i n g and b e l i e v i n g . As we have s e e n , t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between b e l i e v i n g what happens t o be t r u e and r e a l l y k n o w i n g what i s t r u e . The d i f f e r e n c e l i e s i n t h e r e a s o n s one has f o r b e l i e v i n g when one knows. One i s e n t i t l e d t o say one knows o n l y i f one has r e a s o n s . I t i s p a r t o f t h e meaning o f t h e word ' k n o w ' t h a t one has r e a s o n ( s ) t o b e l i e v e something^ e x c e p t i n i t s u s e s where r e a s o n s a r e i n a p p r o p r i a t e , e . g . , \" I know I have a h e a d a c h e \" . S e c u r i t y o f m i n d comes when enough r e a s o n s a r e d e p o s i t e d i n o n e ' s ' b e l i e f - b a n k ' . T h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between b e l i e v i n g t h e t r u t h ( B e l i e v e t r u t h ' . \" ) and k n o w i n g i t (\"Know t h e t r u t h \" ) . James i g n o r e s t h i s d i f f e r e n c e . I t i s a waste o f t i m e - t o a r g u e t h a t we s h o u l d b e l i e v e o r know what i s t r u e . I t i s n o t s i l l y , h o w e v e r , t o a r g u e t h a t we s h o u l d b e l i e v e what t h e e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e s i s t r u e . I n B e l i e f and C o n s t r a i n t , Mayo p o i n t s o u t ( p . 1 4 9 ) t h a t \" i t i s o f t e n f a l s e t h a t a p e r s o n ought t o b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g w h i c h , t h o u g h i t happens t o be t r u e , y e t he a c t u a l l y has c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e a g a i n s t i t \" . I t i s a waste o f t i m e t o 78 t r y t o c o n v i n c e p e o p l e t h a t t h e y ought t o b e l i e v e o r t o know what i s t r u e b e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e o r t o know means t o deem s o m e t h i n g t r u e . I t i s n o t s i l l y t o a r g u e t h a t we s h o u l d make e v e r y a t t e m p t t o p r o p o r t i o n o u r b e l i e f t o t h e e v i d e n c e b e c a u s e t h e r e i s no b e t t e r g u i d e t o t h e t r u t h t h a n e v i d e n c e \u2014 t h o u g h o f t e n p e o p l e make l e s s e f f o r t t h a n t h e y s h o u l d t o examine i t o r t o s e a r c h f o r m o r e . \u2022 There i s much more chance t h a t one w i l l b e l i e v e t r u l y , i f one t r i e s t o c u l t i v a t e t h e h a b i t o f d o u b t i n g and demanding e v i d e n c e r a t h e r t h a n t h a t o f b e l i e v i n g . I t i s l e s s a m a t t e r o f b r a v e r y o r c o w a r d i c e t h a n o f w i s d o m . I f men p r a c t i s e d what James p r e a c h e d i n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e , v i z . , t h a t i t i s b e t t e r t o b e l i e v e t h a n t o - d o u b t o r deny b e c a u s e one i s more l i k e l y t o g a i n t h e t r u t h by b e l i e v i n g , t h e n t h e y w o u l d n e v e r have emerged f r o m s a v a g e r y . As James h i m s e l f s a i d (1890, p . 3 0 8 ) \"The g r e a t e s t p r o o f t h a t a man i s s u i compos i s h i s a b i l i t y t o s u s p e n d b e l i e f ' i n p r e s e n c e o f an e m o t i o n a l l y e x -c i t i n g i d e a . To g i v e t h i s power i s t h e h i g h e s t r e s u l t o f e d u c a t i o n . I n u n t u t o r e d m i n d s t h e power does n o t e x i s t . \" I t w o u l d seem f r o m t h i s q u o t a t i o n t h a t i n h i s l a t e r work The  W i l l t o B e l i e v e James a d v o c a t e s t h a t we s h o u l d a c t i n an u n e d u c a t e d and u n t u t o r e d way, i.e., we s h o u l d b e l i e v e r a t h e r t h a n d i s b e l i e v e o r s u s p e n d j u d g e m e n t , and t h a t t h i s w i l l g i v e us more chance o f g a i n i n g t r u t h . James a d v o c a t e d b e l i e f as opposed t o s u s p e n s e o f j u d g e -ment b e c a u s e he t h o u g h t t h a t i n t h e s t a t e o f doubt and i n q u i r y , \"The c o n t e n t o f o u r m i n d i s i n u n r e s t . \" (I89O, p . 2 8 4 ) 79 I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e . , he h e l d t h a t t o b e l i e v e i s t h e n a t u r a l t h i n g . \" A n y o b j e c t w h i c h r e m a i n s u n c o n t r a d i c t e d i s i p s o f a c t o b e l i e v e d and p o s i t e d as a b s o l u t e r e a l i t y . \" (1890, p.289) S e c o n d l y , he h e l d t h a t - o n e can a c t w i t h p u r p o s e and v i g o r o n l y when one b e l i e v e s w i t h c o n f i d e n c e . He f e l t t h a t one was p a r a l y z e d when i n d o u b t and t h a t b e l i e f o f any s o r t was b e t t e r t h a n d o i n g n o t h i n g b u t w a i t u n t i l a l l t h e e v i d e n c e i s i n . James may be c o r r e c t when he s a y s t h a t b e l i e f comes n a t u r a l l y t o man b u t t h i s seems t o a p p l y t o t h e c h i l d h o o d o f man and o f men. When t h e human r a c e became e d u c a t e d , o r when a s m a l l p o r t i o n o f i t d i d , i t l e a r n e d n o t t o b e l i e v e upon mere e n c o u n t e r b u t t o b e l i e v e o n l y what was i n d i c a t e d by e v i d e n c e . O r , r a t h e r , as he l e a r n e d t o d o u b t and q u e s t i o n , man became e d u c a t e d . I f no man q u e s t i o n e d what h i s f a t h e r b e l i e v e d , t h e n he w o u l d b e l i e v e e x a c t l y as h i s f a t h e r d i d - -t h e same a p p l i e s t o t h e g e n e r a t i o n s o f men. Many members of o u r r a c e now n a t u r a l l y q u e s t i o n what t h e y a r e t a u g h t o r t o l d , hence i t i s no l o n g e r t r u e , i f i n d e e d i t e v e r was, t h a t man . n a t u r a l l y b e l i e v e s e v e r y t h i n g t h a t he i s t o l d o r t h a t he or c o n c e i v e s o f ^ e n c o u n t e r s - - i f i t i s n o t c o n t r a d i c t e d . E v e n i f a l l men d i d b e l i e v e t h a t w h i c h t h e y c o n c e i v e d o r e n c o u n t e r e d t h a t was n o t c o n t r a d i c t e d , t h i s w o u l d n o t mean t h a t t h e y :.: s h o u l d do s o . (As Hunie r e m i n d e d u s , i t may be an i n d e f i n i t e - -n a y i m p o s s i b l e \u2014 j o u r n e y f r o m ' i s ' t o ' o u g h t ' ) . Does d o u b t o r s u s p e n s e o f judgement r e n d e r one i n a c t i v e ? On t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e r e may be no more e f f e c t i v e i n t e l l e c t u a l 80 e n e r g i z e r t h a n a s e r i o u s d o u b t . S c i e n c e i n t h e p a s t few c e n t u r i e s c o u l d h a r d l y be c a l l e d ' i n a c t i v e ' y e t i t p r o g r e s s e d by men d o u b t i n g o r d i s b e l i e v i n g what t h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s t a u g h t . I t d i d n o t p r o g r e s s by h a v i n g men b e l i e v e i n t h e hope t h a t t h e y m i g h t be t r u e . I t p r o g r e s s e d b e c a u s e men t r i e d t o f i n d e v i d e n c e t o j u s t i f y t h e i r d o u b t . I n t h e s p h e r e o f p h y s i c a l a c t i o n , e . g . d o i n g a broad, jump, what i s wanted i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e l i e f t h a t one w i l l s u c c e e d b u t hope a n d \/ o r c o n f i d e n c e t h a t one can s u c c e e d . What i s wanted i s a happy medium between b e l i e f t h a t one w i l l s u c c e e d ( w h i c h c a n e a s i l y change t o o v e r c o n f i d e n c e o r f o o l h a r d i n e s s ) , and b e l i e f t h a t one w i l l n o t s u c c e e d ( w h i c h c a n e a s i l y change t o t i m i d i t y o r c o w a r d i c e ) . (We s h a l l soon d e a l w i t h t h e c l a i m t h a t b e l i e f o r f a i t h i s sometimes r e q u i r e d t o c r e a t e i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n . ) James s a y s ( p . 1 9 ) t h a t o u r e r r o r s a r e n o t s u c h a w f u l l y s o l e m n t h i n g s . I s u b m i t t h a t t h e y can be t h e most s o l e m n t h i n g s . i m a g i n a b l e . I f t h o s e who p e r p e t r a t e d t h e I n q u i s i t i o n had n o t been i n e r r o r a b o u t t h e f a t e o f t h e s o u l s o f t h o s e who d i d n o t a c q u i e s c e , t h e n i t m i g h t n e v e r have o c c u r r e d . I f enough p e o p l e had n o t been i n e r r o r when t h e y t h o u g h t H i t l e r m e r e l y l a u g h a b l e o r when t h e y t h o u g h t he w o u l d c e a s e demanding more t e r r i t o r y when he a c q u i r e d C z e c h o s l o v a k i a , t h e Second W o r l d War w i t h a l l i t s a t r o c i t i e s m i g h t have been p r e v e n t e d , o r a t l e a s t m i t i g a t e d . E r r o r s and m i s -c a l c u l a t i o n s can be a w f u l l y s o l e m n . \" L i g h t n e s s o f h e a r t \" ( p . 1 9 ) must n e v e r become l i g h t n e s s o f h e a d . I t seems t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e e r r o r i s , t h e g r e a t e r i s t h e e n s u i n g t r a g e d y . 81 E r r o r s t h a t make, no d i f f e r e n c e a r e o f t h i n g s t h a t make no d i f f e r e n c e . E r r o r s t h a t m i s r e p r e s e n t r e a l i t y t o u s , i . e . , e r r o r s t h a t a r e o f t h i n g s t h a t do make a d i f f e r e n c e ( e . g . ' T h i s i c e i s n o t t h i n ' ) a r e e r r o r s t h a t do make a d i f f e r e n c e . I n t h e n e x t s e c t i o n James a r g u e s t h a t i n most s c i e n t i f i c and e v e r y d a y m a t t e r s , i t i s w i s e r t o s u s p e n d judgement o r t o doubt t h a t t o b e l i e v e p r e c i p i t o u s l y b e c a u s e ( p .20) \"The n e e d o f a c t i n g i s s e l d o m so u r g e n t t h a t a f a l s e b e l i e f t o a c t i o n i s b e t t e r t h a n no b e l i e f a t a l l \" . B u t , he s a y s , t h e r e .are some m a t t e r s i n w h i c h p a s s i o n must i n f l u e n c e and s h o u l d i n f l u e n c e ( a n o t h e r v i r t u e o f n e c e s s i t y ? ) us i n o u r o p i n i o n s . Here t h e o p t i o n i s f o r c e d and momentous - - h e r e we c a n n o t \" a l w a y s w a i t w i t h i m p u n i t y t i l l t h e c o e r c i v e e v i d e n c e s h a l l have a r r i v e d \" ( p . 2 2 ) . He goes on t o use m o r a l i t y and r e l i g i o n as examples where t h e o p t i o n i s momen-t o u s and f o r c e d . James i m p l i e s t h a t one c a n n o t a c t u n l e s s one b e l i e v e s and t h a t t h e r e f o r e , i f a c t i o n i s n e c e s s a r y , i t i s b e t t e r t o b e l i e v e f a l s e l y t h a n n o t a t a l l . I d i s a g r e e t h a t a c t i o n i s i m p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t b e l i e f . R e c a l l t h e f o r k - i n - t h e r o a d example (pages' 1 *). One need n o t b e l i e v e t h a t one has c h o s e n t h e r i g h t r o a d i n o r d e r t o t a k e i t . One may be c o m p l e t e l y i n t h e d a r k , s u s p e c t t h a t t h e r o a d i s t h e r i g h t o n e , hope t h a t i t i s t h e r i g h t one o r a c t on t h e h y p o t h e s i s \u2014 ( o r g u e s s ) - - t h a t i t i s t h e r i g h t o n e . B e l i e f i s n o t a r e -q u i s i t e t o a c t i o n . On t h e c o n t r a r y i n c a s e s where one d o u b t s , a c t i o n i s r e q u i s i t e t o b e l i e f . T h a t i s , d o u b t c a n o n l y be q u e l l e d by a c t i o n w h i c h l e a d s t o d i s c o v e r y t h u s 82 d i s p e l l i n g i t . We must r e j e c t t h e n o t i o n i m p l i e d by James t h a t a c t i o n r e q \\ i i r e s b e l i e f - - p a r t i c u l a r l y when he s u g g e s t s t h a t a f a l s e b e l i e f i s b e t t e r t h a n none a t a l l . Our e r r o r s c a n be s o l e m n . James s a y s t h a t a l e a r n e d judge once t o l d h i m t h a t \" f e w c a s e s a r e w o r t h s p e n d i n g much t i m e o v e r : t h e g r e a t t h i n g i s t o have them d e c i d e d on any a c c e p t a b l e p r i n i c i p l e and g o t out o f t h e way\" ( p . 2 0 ) . Over h i s c o u r t t h e judge must have i n s c r i b e d \" A l l hope abandon ye who e n t e r h e r e \" . To o p e r a t e on t h i s p r i n c i p l e w o u l d be a g r o s s m i s c a r r i a g e o f j u s t i c e . P a r t i c u l a r l y when a j u d g e i s m a k i n g l a w , he must n o t s e t t l e f o r \" a n y a c c e p t a b l e p r i n c i p l e \" . The judgement he makes w i l l s e r v e as a p r e c e d e n t w h i c h i n f u t u r e c o u r t s w i l l h o l d much w e i g h t . An e r r o r on h i s p a r t c o u l d l e a d t o c o u n t l e s s i n -j u s t i c e s i n t h e f u t u r e and n o t m e r e l y i n t h e case b e f o r e h i m . T h i s seems t o be a v e r y p o o r example t o s u p p o r t t h e c l a i m t h a t any b e l i e f i s b e t t e r t h a n no b e l i e f o r s u s p e n s e o f judgement u n t i l \" o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e has come\" ( p . 2 0 ) . James s a y s t h a t \" i n o u r d e a l i n g s w i t h o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e we o b v i o u s l y a r e r e c o r d e r s , n o t makers o f t h e t r u t h ; and d e c i s i o n s f o r t h e mere sake o f d e c i d i n g p r o m p t l y and g e t t i n g on t o t h e n e x t b u s i n e s s w o u l d be w h o l l y out o f p l a c e \" ( p . 2 0 ) . I t seems f r o m t h i s q u o t a t i o n t h a t James h e l d m o r a l i t y and r e l i g i o n t.o-.be t h i n g s a p a r t f r o m \" o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e \" \"since he goes on t o a r g u e t h a t d e c i s i o n s i n r e g a r d t o m o r a l i t y and r e l i g i o n a r e f o r c e d and momentous, i . e . , t h e y MUST be made. F u r t h e r e v i d e n c e t h a t James c o n s i d e r e d r e l i g i o n t o be 83 i n d e p e n d e n t o f \" o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e \" , i s f o u n d i n t h i s q u o t a t i o n f r o m h i s e s s a y \" l s L i f e W o r t h L i v i n g ? ' i n The W i l l , t o B e l i e v e . ' \u2022 , ( p . 5 2 ) : \" t h e p h y s i c a l o r d e r o f n a t u r e , t a k e n s i m p l y as s c i e n c e knows i t , c a n n o t be h e l d t o r e v e a l any one h a r m o n i o u s s p i r i t u a l i n t e n t . I t i s mere . . . . d o i n g and u n d o i n g w i t h o u t e n d . \" But we a r e l e f t i n d o u b t w h e t h e r o r n o t James deemed r e l i g i o n i n d e p e n d e n t o f ' o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e ' . I n R e f l e x A c t i o n  and T h e i s m (TWTB, p . 1 2 2 ) he s a y s \" G o d ' s p e r s o n a l i t y i s t o be r e g a r d e d . . . . as s o m e t h i n g l y i n g o u t s i d e o f my own and o t h e r t h a n me, and whose e x i s t e n c e I s i m p l y come upon and f i n d . \" T h i s seems t o mean t h a t God i s e n c d u n t e r e d i n a s i m i l a r manner t o t h a t o f o t h e r men o r p e r h a p s as we e n c o u n t e r t h e w i n d i n v i s i b l e t o our eyes b u t f e l t by o u r b o d i e s . We g e t t h i s i m p r e s s i o n t o o f r o m s o m e t h i n g he s a y s l a t e r i n t h e same e s s a y ( p , 1 3 5 ) ; \" I s i m p l y come upon h i m ( i . e . , G o d . J . O . ) and f i n d h i s e x i s t e n c e g i v e n t o m e . \" James s a y s h e r e t h a t he f i n d s G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e g i v e n t o h i m . W o u l d n o t G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e be a ' f a c t q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t o f u s ' ? ( p . 2 0 ) . I s o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e a p p r o p r i a t e t o r e l i g i o n ? James a t t i m e s s p e a k s as t h o u g h i t i s ( p . 2 5 ) : r e l i g i o n ' s f i r s t a f f i r m a t i o n , o r t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s \" o b v i o u s l y c a n n o t y e t be v e r i f i e d s c i e n t i f i c a l l y a t a l l . \" But when he d e s c r i b e s r e l i g i o n as a . m a t t e r t h a t ( p . 1 1 ) \" c a n n o t by i t s ' n a t u r e be d e c i d e d on i n t e l l e c t u a l g r o u n d s \" ( e m p h a s i s mine J . O . ) , t h e n he seems t o h o l d two i n c o m p a t i b l e v i e w s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f r e l i g i o n . On t h e one hand we s i m p l y come upon God and f i n d H i m , f i n d H i s e x i s t e n c e g i v e n t o u s ; and on t h e o t h e r h a n d , 84 ( p . 1 1 ) r e l i g i o n c a n n o t by i t s n a t u r e be d e c i d e d on i n t e l l e c -t u a l g r o u n d s , o u r e m o t i o n s must and s h o u l d make t h e d e c i s i o n f o r us ( p . 1 9 ) , and i t c o n c e r n s a d e c i s i o n \" w h i c h t h e i n t e l l e c t o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l cannot by i t s e l f r e s o l v e \" ( p . 2 9 ) . P e r h a p s James t h o u g h t t h a t s i n c e we s i m p l y come upon God and f i n d H i m , we need no e v i d e n c e t o p e r s u a d e us o f H i s e x i s t e n c e . But t h i s v i e w c o u l d be h e l d o n l y by one who had come upon God and f o u n d H i m , a c l a s s o f p e o p l e who r e q u i r e n e i t h e r e v i d e n c e n o r d e c i s i o n . That i s , i f James i s c o r r e c t t h a t we s i m p l y FIND God, t h e n t h e r e i s no need f o r o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e . But i f he i s c o r r e c t t h a t r e l i g i o n i s NOT e v i d e n t i n o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e and t h a t o u r e m o t i o n s MUST d e c i d e f o r u s , t h e n a g a i n . o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e . We may assume t h a t James d i d NOT deem r e l i g i o n amenable t o o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e , i . e . , r e l i g i o n i s n o t a h y p o t h e s i s c a p a b l e o f c o n f i r m a t i o n o r d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n by o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c s o r t . James must be i n t e r p r e t e d as t a k i n g t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t e x p e r i m e n t s , t e s t s , o b s e r v a t i o n s and p r e d i c t i o n s , i n t h e s c i e n t i f i c m e a n i n g o f t h e s e w o r d s , a r e NOT a p p l i c a b l e t o r e l i g i o n . R e l i g i o n i s a m a t t e r o f t h e h e a r t , n o t t h e h e a d . 85 1 0 . RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND SCIENCE On page 2 1 , James l a y s the groundwork f o r h i s ' \" f a i t h -c r e a t e s - i t s - o w n - v e r i f i c a t i o n \" argument on pages 2 3 ' t o 2 5 . He has s t a t e d t h a t i t i s almost always the case i n s c i e n t i f i c matters t h a t we should not make up our minds at a l l ' \" \" t i l l o b j e c t i v e evidence has come\" ( p . 2 0 ) . He adds that \"The a t t i t u d e of s c e p t i c a l balance i s t h e r e f o r e the a b s o l u t e l y wise one i f we would escape mistakes.\" (p.20). Decisions or options i n s c i e n t i f i c matters are not u s u a l l y momentous or f o r c e d , he says. But on the next page (p.2 1 ), he says that \"For purposes of discovery such i n d i f f e r e n c e i s l e s s h i g h l y to be recommended, and science would be f a r l e s s advanced than she i s i f the passionate d e s i r e s of i n d i v i d u a l s to get t h e i r own f a i t h s confirmed had been kept out of the game.\" James attempts to equate r e l i g i o n and science as both being areas where discovery i s made by men who have a 'pet hypo-t h e s i s ' (p.22) or a pet ' l i v e hypothesis' (p.21) and who search f o r confirmation of t h i s hypothesis. In r e l i g i o n , James argues, f a i t h creates i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n . In science, he says, the man who has \"no i n t e r e s t whatever i n ... r e s u l t s ... i s the warranted incapable, the p o s i t i v e f o o l \" ( p .2 1 ) . He. maintains, i n other words, th a t the s c i e n t i s t and the p o t e n t i a l r e l i g i o u s b e l i e v e r are no d i f f e r e n t i n t h e i r b e l i e f i n a 'pet hypothesis' which they make every attempt to v e r i f y \u2014 and v e r i f i c a t i o n and discovery would be impossible without the pet hypothesis and the f a i t h (or b e l i e f ) invested i n i t . Does science resemble r e l i g i o n i n that discovery i s 86 made p o s s i b l e o n l y i f one has ' p a s s i o n a t e d e s i r e s ' t o get h i s own ' f a i t h s ' c o n f i r m e d ? I do n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e r e i s ANY a n a l o g y h e r e w h a t s o e v e r . On page 21 James b l u r s t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between U N i n t e r e s t , i n d i f f e r e n c e o r a p a t h y and D i s i n t e r e s t o r i m p a r t i a l i t y . One can d e s i r e g r e a t l y t h a t a c e r t a i n h y p o t h e s i s be c o n f i r m e d , i . e . , be most i n t e r e s t e d and c o n c e r n e d i n t h e r e s u l t , y e t r e m a i n i m p a r t i a l o r D i s i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e r e s u l t . James u s e s t h e c u r i o u s p h r a s e \" g e t t h e i r own f a i t h s c o n f i r m e d \" ( p . 2 1 ) . The p o i n t i s , i f a h y p o t h e s i s o r f a i t h i s c o n f i r m e d , t h e n f a i t h i s no l o n g e r r e q u i r e d . F a i t h i s b e l i e f beyond t h e e v i d e n c e , a c c o m p a n i e d by t h e d e s i r e t h a t t h e b e l i e f be a . c o r r e c t o n e . I f a f a i t h o r p e t h y p o t h e s i s i s c o n f i r m e d , t h e n i t i s no l o n g e r f a i t h b u t a j u s t i f i e d b e l i e f . We must d i s -t i n g u i s h between ' p a s s i o n a t e d e s i r e s ' t o g e t o n e ' s f a i t h c o n f i r m e d and an i n t e r e s t i n v e r i f y i n g a h y p o t h e s i s t h a t s t r i k e s one as b e i n g p l a u s i b l e . S c i e n t i s t s know o n l y t o o w e l l t h a t t r u t h i s n o t u s u a l l y f o u n d by t h o s e who have p a s s i o n a t e d e s i r e s t o g e t t h e i r i d e a s c o n f i r m e d . They have s y s t e m a t i z e d t h e ' n e r v o u s n e s s ' ( l e s t t h e y become d e c e i v e d ) ( p . 2 1 ) , i n t o e f f o r t s t o d i s c o n -f i r m t h e i r p e t h y p o t h e s e s . They see w h e t h e r o r n o t i t can be f a l s i f i e d and i f enough e x p e r i m e n t s f a i l ( t o d i s c o n f i r m t h e i r h y p o t h e s i s ) , t h e y a r e c o n f i d e n t t h a t i t c a n w i t h s t a n d i n v e s t i g a t i o n and t e s t by a n y o n e . Then i t s t r u t h w i l l be a PUBLIC one b e l i e v a b l e by any sane and r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n \u2014 n o t a p r i v a t e f a i t h t h a t nobody c o u l d d i s c o n f i r m b e c a u s e t e s t s and e x p e r i m e n t s a r e i r r e l e v a n t . 87 F i n d l a y - w r i t e s ( p . 1 2 0 ) \"As Popper w o u l d put t h e m a t t e r , t h a t b e l i e f i s most a p p r o v a b l e w h i c h most r i s k s f a l s i f i c a t i o n by a d v e r s e e x p e r i e n c e and w h i c h b e s t s u r v i v e s and t r i u m p h s o v e r t h a t r i s k . \" Of c o u r s e j u s t e x p o s i n g a b e l i e f t o t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f b e i n g f a l s i f i e d o r d i s c o n f i r m e d i s n o t enough t o r e n d e r t h e b e l i e f a p p r o v a b l e . F i n d l a y adds ( p . 1 2 0 ) : \" I t i s . . . b e c a u s e b e l i e f i s l o y a l t o . . . e x p e r i e n c e t h a t i t r i s k s g r e a t e r f a l s i f i c a t i o n . . . and i t I s t h i s p o s i t i v e l o y a l t y w h i c h g r o u n d s i t s a p p r o v a b i l i t y r a t h e r t h a n i t s e x -p o s u r e t o f a l s i f i c a t i o n . \" And he adds on t h e n e x t page t h a t b e l i e f \" w i l l a l s o be a p p r o v a b l e i n s o f a r as i t goes p o s i t i v e l y i n q u e s t o f s u c h e x p e r i e n c e , i n s o f a r a s , i n o t h e r w o r d s , i t c o n s t a n t l y i n v i t e s and c o u r t s r e f u t a t i o n . . . t h i s s u s t a i n e d , g r a t u i t o u s g a l l a n t r y c o n s t i t u t e s t h e h e a r t and s o u l o f s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d . \" I f a s c i e n t i s t d i d what a p e r s o n d e s i r o u s o f b e l i e v i n g i n God d i d ( i . e . , d i d what an i n d i v i d u a l who w i s h e s t h a t t h e r e WERE a God d i d ) , t h e n he w o u l d n o t expose t h e b e l i e f o r h y p o t h e s i s t o e v e r y p o s s i b l e d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n . R a t h e r , he w o u l d , i f he t o o k t h e a d v i c e o f W i l l i a m James i n Some P r o b l e m s  o f P h i l o s o p h y ( p . 2 2 4 ) , c l i m b upon t h e ' f a i t h - l a d d e r ' and t r y t o c o n v i n c e h i m s e l f t h a t : \" 1 . T h e r e i s n o t h i n g a b s u r d i n a c e r t a i n v i e w o f t h e w o r l d b e i n g t r u e , n o t h i n g s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y ; 2. I t m i g h t have been t r u e u n d e r c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; 3 . I t may be t r u e , even now; 4 . I t i s f i t t o be t r u e ; 5 . I t ought t o be t r u e ; 88 6. I t must be t r u e ; \u20227. I t s h a l l be t r u e , at any r a t e f o r me.\" The l a s t f i v e words give the game away. The ' t r u t h s ' of r e l i g i o n are p r i v a t e . As James says, (1929, p.422), \" f e e l i n g i s the deeper source of r e l i g i o n . \" and a few pages on he adds (p.447): \"In the r e l i g i o u s sphere, i n p a r t i c u l a r , b e l i e f t h a t formulas are true can never wholly take the place of personal experience.\" ' The t r u t h s or p r o b a b l i t i e s of science are a v a i l a b l e to a l l who can understand them. Not so w i t h r e l i g i o n . As James says, (1929, p.445): \"the attempt to demonstrate by purely i n t e l l e c t u a l processes the t r u t h of the- d e l i v e r a n c e s of d i r e c t r e l i g i o u s experience i s a b s o l u t e l y hopeless.\" In s c i e n c e , experiences (or observations) are such that they can be shared, i n p r i n c i p l e , by any t r a i n e d person having the normal f a c u l t i e s . There i s a vast d i f f e r e n c e between confirming one's own 'pet hypothesis' or ' p r i v a t e f a i t h ' by i n c a n t a t i o n s and confirming a hypothesis by producing pub-l i c l y observable phenomena under s p e c i f i e d c o n d i t i o n s . I f a s c i e n t i s t t r i e d to confirm a hypothesis by c l i m b i n g on James' f a i t h - l a d d e r , he would be q u i c k l y \" p u l l e d down\" by' other s c i e n t i s t s who search f o r the t r u t h as normally understood \u2014 t h a t which ALL men can share. Anyone who would admit that something were true FOR HIM, would be t a c i t l y a dmitting an overwhelming d e s i r e , need or even compulsion to b e l i e v e as he does. ( R e c a l l the d i s c u s s i o n about 'true f o r me', pp.io-lfl . S c i e n t i s t s must be cautious about being deceived because 89 t h e y know how e a s i l y t h i s can h a p p e n . The man w i t h a p a s s i o n a t e d e s i r e t o g e t h i s f a i t h c o n f i r m e d i s much l e s s l i k e l y t o be i m p a r t i a l t h a n i f he were m e r e l y i n t e r e s t e d o r c o n c e r n e d t o get c e r t a i n r e s u l t s . As R u s s e l l s a y s ( p . 9 4 ) , \"The a c t u a l b e l i e f t h a t t h e h y p o t h e s i s is_ t r u e . . . i s a p t t o be a h i n d r a n c e , s i n c e i t r e t a r d s t h e abandonment o f f a l s e h y p o t h e s e s when t h e e v i d e n c e goes a g a i n s t them, and i f t h e b e l i e f i s g e n e r a l , i t makes p e o p l e r e g a r d e x p e r i m e n t a l v e r i -f i c a t i o n as u n n e c e s s a r y . \" B e l i e f o r f a i t h i n a h y p o t h e s i s c a n i n f l u e n c e o n e ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f e x p e r i m e n t s a n ^ o r o b s e r v a t i o n s t o a g r e a t d e g r e e . S t e p h e n T o u l m i n w r i t e s i n F o r e s i g h t and U n d e r s t a n d i n g ( p p . 1 0 0 - 1 0 1 ) : \" I f a man e n t e r s t h e o b s e r v a t o r y o r l a b o r a t o r y w i t h p r e c o n c e i v e d i d e a s a b o u t what he w i l l f i n d , t h i s ( s c i e n t i s t s f e e l ) w i l l p r e j u d i c e h i s i n v e s t i -g a t i o n . I f he has a l r e a d y made up h i s m i n d (say) t h a t p i g s can f l y , t h a t w i l l d i s q u a l i f y h i m as an o b s e r v e r : he w i l l go a r o u n d t h e w o r l d l o o k i n g f o r e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t h i s p r i o r b e l i e f , and may end by h a i l i n g some p o r k e r l e a p i n g o f f t h e r o o f o f h i s s t y as p r o o f o f h i s c o n t e n t i o n . . . . when i t comes t o i n t e r r o g a t i n g N a t u r e , i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y o r i n t h e f i e l d , vie must l e a v e h e r t o answer f o r h e r s e l f -and a n s w e r . w i t h o u t any p r o m p t i n g . \" We must d i s t i n g u i s h , he s a y s , between p r e j u d i c e d b e l i e f s ( e . g . , p i g s f l y ) and p r e f o r m e d c o n c e p t s ( e . g . a b o d y ' s m o t i o n 90 i s s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y o n l y when f r e e f r o m a l l f o r c e s , i n -c l u d i n g i t s own w e i g h t . ) The d e s i r e f o r t h e t r u t h cannot be e q u a t e d w i t h t h e p a s s i o n t o g e t a c e r t a i n b e l i e f , f a i t h o r h y p o t h e s i s c o n -f i r m e d . There i s a d i f f e r e n c e between h o n i n g t h a t a c e r t a i n h y p o t h e s i s s h a l l be c o n f i r m e d and b e i n g d e t e r m i n e d t h a t i t s h a l l be c o n f i r m e d , come h e l l o r h i g h w a t e r . The d i f f e r e n c e i s between a s k i n g a q u e s t i o n o f n a t u r e and h a v i n g an answer w h i c h one m e r e l y t r i e s t o impose on n a t u r e \u2014 between SEEING w h e t h e r p i g s f l y and d o i n g e v e r y t h i n g i n o n e ' s power t o c o n -f i r m o n e ' s b e l i e f t h a t t h e y d o . The f u n c t i o n s and p u r p o s e s o f r e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e a r e n o t t h e same. C o m p a r i n g t h e s c i e n t i s t ' s t a s k t o t h a t o f one who s e e k s c o n f i r m a t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r p r o p o s i t i o n i s n o t f r u i t f u l . Where d e c i s i o n i s a p p l i c a b l e t o r e l i g i o n , i t i s n o t so w i t h s c i e n c e . T a l k o f e m p i r i c a l p r o o f , e v i d e n c e , t e s t s , h y p o t h e s e s , e t c . , i n r e g a r d t o r e l i g i o n i s u n r e a l i s t i c . I t i s , as M a c i n t y r e s a y s , ( p . 1 9 7 ) , \" a l i e n t o t h e whole s p i r i t o f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . H a v i n g made o u r d e c i s i o n , we a d h e r e t o b e l i e f u n c o n d i t i o n a l l y , we commit o u r s e l v e s as c o m p l e t e l y as one can e v e r commit o n e s e l f t o a n y t h i n g . \" The r e l i g i o u s b e l i e v e r commits h i m s e l f t o a way o f l i f e and t o a s e t o f f u n d a m e n t a l a t t i t u d e s r e g a r d i n g h i m s e l f and o t h e r s . James s a y s ( 1 9 3 1 , p.223) t h a t \" P h i l o s o p h y and R e l i g i o n have t o i n t e r p r e t t h e t o t a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e w o r l d . \" F o r i n s t a n c e , he a d d s , \" I t may be t r u e a l l t h e w h i l e (even t h o u g h t h e e v i -dence ( ! ) be s t i l l i m p e r f e c t ) t h a t . . . ' t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r i s a t b o t t o m a m o r a l o r d e r ' \" . As James s a y s , r e l i g i o n i s c o n -91 c e r n e d w i t h t h e u n i v e r s e as a WHOLE \u2014 w i t h w h e t h e r o r n o t i t has a p u r p o s e , a meaning and. w h e t h e r man i s a p a r t o f t h i s m e a n i n g o r p u r p o s e . N o t i c e t h a t James t h i n k s EVIDENCE m i g h t be r e l e v a n t t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r t h e u n i v e r s e as a w h o l e i s m o r a l . S c i e n c e makes no judgements c o n c e r n i n g t h e u n i v e r s e as a w h o l e , i n r e g a r d t o m e a n i n g , p u r p o s e o r m o r a l o r d e r . The c o n c e r n o f s c i e n c e i s t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e o b s e r v e d and o b -s e r v a b l e , n o t t o s p e c u l a t e a b o u t t h e w o r t h o f t h i n g s , as 'James h i m s e l f s a i d ( p . 2 2 ) . Would i t make sense t o s a y t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s good? I do n o t t h i n k s o . The word ' g o o d ' i s a c o m p a r a t i v e t e r m and we have no OTHER u n i v e r s e ( t h e . word ' u n i v e r s e ' meaning what i t does) as a. b a s i s o f c o m p a r i -s o n . I f we a r e p l e a s e d w i t h t h e u n i v e r s e we m i g h t s a y i t i s good b u t t h e n we must g r a n t t h o s e who a r e n o t p l e a s e d , t o c a l l i t bad o r e v i l . As R o g e r s s a y s ( p . 4 0 4 ) \" t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e w o r l d i s good s t a r t s f r o m o u r n a i v e f a i t h i n o u r e m o t i o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s . . . . \" ( I t may be s a i d t h a t t h i s u n i v e r s e c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d good compared t o p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e u n i v e r s e s . T h i s may be t r u e , but t h e f a c t s t i l l r e m a i n s t h a t t h o u g h r e l i g i o n s \" may d e c i d e t h a t t h i s o r t h a t u n i v e r s e w o u l d be b e t t e r , o r w o r s e , s c i e n c e ' s c o n c e r n i s w i t h t h e u n i v e r s e as i t i s , n o t as i t m i g h t have been o r m i g h t b e . ) S c i e n c e ' p r e a c h e s ' t h a t d o u b t i s a d u t y and b l i n d f a i t h a s i n . . As S c h i l l e r s a y s ( p . 1 9 ) , d o u b t i s \" t h e c o n d i t i o n o f s p i r i t u a l p r o g r e s s . So l o n g as what a p p e a r s i s a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n , t h e r e c a n be no p r o g r e s s i n k n o w l e d g e , 92 b e c a u s e t h e r e i s no cause f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Thus t h e s t i m -u l u s t h a t i n c i t e s us t o new t r u t h a l w a y s comes f r o m d o u b t a b o u t t h e o l d . \" Many r e l i g i o n s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y r e g a r d e d b l i n d f a i t h as b e i n g p r e f e r a b l e t o d o u b t . S c i e n c e s u b m i t s new h y p o t h e s e s t o t e s t s , r e l i g i o n has r e v i s e d h e r dogma b e c a u s e o f s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s and s c i e n t i f i c a d v a n c e m e n t . S c i e n c e a d v a n c e s b e c a u s e new d i s c o v e r i e s a r e made ( o r b e t t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s \u2022 a r e m a d e ) . R e l i g i o n changes as i t s d o c t r i n e s a r e r e i n t e r p r e t e d t o meet m a n ' s c h a n g i n g NEEDS. A s c i e n t i s t a d o p t s new h y p o t h e s e s as o l d e r ones seem d i s c o n f i r m e d ; a man- embraces a new r e l i g i o n , n o t u s u a l l y b e -c a u s e t h e o l d e r one seems d i s c o n f i r m e d b u t b e c a u s e i t no l o n g e r s a t i s f i e s h i m e m o t i o n a l l y . He may a d m i t t h a t f o r o t h e r s t h e r e l i g i o n i s s t i l l f i n e b e c a u s e i t answers t h e i r needs o r d e s i r e s . No s c i e n t i s t w o u l d say t h e same o f a h y p o -t h e s i s t h a t he had d i s c a r d e d - - b e c a u s e o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e w o u l d p e r s u a d e a n y o n e . One may embrace a n o t h e r r e l i g i o n b e -cause i t seems t o be t h e ' t r u e ' one , b u t i n t h e m a i n , a change o f r e l i g i o n comes f r o m a change o f h e a r t , n o t o f ' h e a d ' , so t o s p e a k . T o u l m i n s a y s ( p . 9 9 ) t h a t s c i e n c e i s m a i n l y \" c o n c e r n e d . w i t h a s e a r c h f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g - a d e s i r e t o make t h e c o u r s e , o f N a t u r e n o t j u s t p r e d i c t a b l e b u t i n t e l l i g i b l e - and t h i s has meant l o o k i n g f o r r a t i o n a l p a t t e r n s o f c o n n e c t i o n s i n t e r m s o f w h i c h we can make s e n s e o f t h e f l u x o f e v e n t s . \" S c i e n t i s t s a t t e m p t t o e x p l a i n phenomena by a p p e a l i n g t o s o m e t h i n g more b a s i c , more s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . What t h e y a p p e a l 93 t o a r e d e s c r i b e d by T o u l m i n as ' i d e a l s o f n a t u r a l o r d e r ' w h i c h a r e r e g a r d e d , f o r t h e t i m e b e i n g a t l e a s t , as b e i n g s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . F o r example one may e x p l a i n t h e phenomena o f t h e t i d e s ( o r o f some o t h e r m o t i o n ) by a p p e a l i n g t o t h e p r i n c i p l e o f i n e r t i a . The p o i n t i s , one e x p l a i n s some phenomenon o r phenomena i n n a t u r e o n l y by a p p e a l i n g t o some-t h i n g E L S E , u n l e s s o f c o u r s e i t i s a l r e a d y r e g a r d e d as s e l f -e x p l a n a t o r y - - i n w h i c h case i t w i l l r e q u i r e no e x p l a n a t i o n . But when we t u r n t o r e l i g i o n , t h e s t o r y i s d i f f e r e n t \u2014 a p p e a l t o s o m e t h i n g e l s e e x p l a i n s n o t h i n g . \u2022 94 11. PURPOSE. GOD AND MORALITY R e l i g i o n , as we s a i d b e f o r e , a t t e m p t s t o e x p l a i n t h e u n i v e r s e as a WHOLE. I t may r e f e r t o a G o d , a p u r p o s e , a m o r a l c h a r a c t e r o r a l l o f t h e s e t h i n g s . I t a t t e m p t s , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t o e x p l a i n why man i s h e r e and why t h e u n i v e r s e i s ^ h e r e ' \u2014 i . e . , why i t e x i s t s . James p u t s i t t h u s (1890, p .317) : \"What i s beyond t h e c r u d e e x p e r i e n c e s i s n o t a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e m , b u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t means them f o r me h e r e and n o w . \" James r e q u i r e s a meaning f o r t h e t o t a l i t y o f t h i n g s \u2014 he a s k s what he c a l l s t h e u l t i m a t e \"Why?\" (TWTB p .73). He i s w i l l i n g , he s a y s , t o s u p p l e m e n t t h e v i s i b l e u n i v e r s e w i t h an u n s e e n s p i r i t u a l o r d e r \" i f o n l y t h e r e b y l i f e may seem t o us b e t t e r w o r t h l i v i n g a g a i n \" ( p .52); he s a y s t h a t men w o u l d p o s t u l a t e a God, even i f t h e r e were no g r o u n d s f o r b e l i e v i n g i n o n e , \" s i m p l y as a p r e t e x t f o r l i v i n g h a r d \" ( p .213). Does i t make sense t o a s k why t h e u n i v e r s e i s ' h e r e ' ? I s i t p o s s i b l e t o f i n d s o m e t h i n g t h a t g i v e s meaning t o t h e t o t a l i t y o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e s (and p o s s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e s ) , i . e . , t o e v e r y t h i n g ? I t h i n k t h a t b o t h q u e s t i o n s must be a n s w e r e d i n t h e n e g a t i v e . We a s c r i b e p u r p o s e o n l y t.o c o n s c i o u s b e i n g s \u2014 and u s u a l l y o n l y t o humans. To a s k t h e p u r p o s e o f an i n a n i m a t e o b j e c t i s t o a s k i t s U S E , e . g . , \"What i s t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s i n s t r u m e n t ? \" We do n o t c o n s i d e r n o n c o n s c i o u s t h i n g s c a p a b l e o f i n t e n t i o n o r g o a l - s e e k i n g a c t i v i t y b e c a u s e t h e y do n o t e x h i b i t t h e t y p i c a l p u r p o s e f u l b e h a v i o r - - i f we can s a y t h a t t h e y ' b e h a v e ' a t a l l . I t i s t r u e t h a t some o f t h e o t h e r 95 l i v i n g t h i n g s , even p r o t o z o a n s , r e a c t t o s t i m u l i i n t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t , and o b t a i n f o o d . But mere r e a c t i o n t o s t i m u l i and. i n s t i n c t i v e p r o c u r e m e n t o f f o o d does n o t q u a l i f y as p u r p o s e f u l b e h a v i o r - - e l s e we w o u l d n o t c a l l i t ' r e a c t i o n ' and ' i n s t i n c t ' . The s i n e qua non o f p u r p o s e f u l c o n d u c t i s t h a t t h e a g e n t be aware ( c o n s c i o u s ) o f t h e g o a l and t h a t he d e l i b e r a t e l y a c t t o a c h i e v e h i s e n d . To a s k o f a hammer what p u r p o s e i t h a s , i s t o a s k what u s e can be made o f i t . The human who u s e s i t w i l l ( o r c o u l d ) do so f o r a p u r p o s e . One who a s k s t h i s q u e s t i o n knows t h a t t h e hammer i s n o t c o n s c i o u s . He r e a l l y means t o a s k t o what p u r p o s e a human w o u l d u s e i t . Those who ask what p u r p o s e t h e u n i v e r s e h a s , e i t h e r b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s i t s e l f c o n s c i o u s o r p r e s u p p o s e t h a t t h e r e i s some c o n s c i o u s a g e n t who can o r does USE t h e u n i v e r s e f o r some p u r p o s e . P a n t h e i s t s - - t h o s e who h o l d t h e u n i v e r s e as a w h o l e t o be God - - w o u l d deem t h e f i r s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e q u e s t i o n s e n s i b l e . That i s , t h e y c o n s i d e r t h e u n i v e r s e a c o n s c i o u s a g e n t w i t h a p u r p o s e o f i t s own. Those who b e l i e v e t h a t God i s n o t t h e w h o l e o f t h e u n i v e r s e t h i n k t h a t i t c o u l d b e , o r i s , u s e d by H i m . But t h i s l e a v e s a t h e i s t s , a g n o s t i c s and s c e p t i c s e t c . i n the d a r k as t o what t h e q u e s t i o n c o u l d mean. The q u e s t i o n b e i n g a s k e d i s sometimes c a l l e d ' t h e u l t i m a t e W h y ' . Only, t h o s e who p r e s u p p o s e t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e c o u l d have a p u r p o s e ( i . e . , t h a t i t i s o r c o n t a i n s G o d ) , w o u l d ask what t h a t p u r p o s e i s ; The p o i n t i s , t h a t i f . a s James s a y s , r e -l i g i o n t r i e s t o answer t h e q u e s t i o n , t h e n i t p r e s u p p o s e s , q u i t e n a t u r a l l y , t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . B u t t h o s e t o whom 96 James s p e a k s i n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e , need NOT p r e s u p p o s e t h i s . When James s a y s t h a t God o r an ' u n s e e n s p i r i t u a l o r d e r ' c a n g i v e meaning t o l i f e o r t o the u n i v e r s e , one must b e l i e v e ( i n God) b e f o r e one can u n d e r s t a n d what he i s s a y i n g . I t seems u t t e r n o n s e n s e ' t o a s c r i b e p u r p o s e t o t h e t o t a l i t y o f t h i n g s u n l e s s one a l r e a d y b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s a l i v i n g , c o n s c i o u s b e i n g o r t h a t i t was c r e a t e d o r i n h a b i t s s u c h a b e i n g . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e u n i v e r s e a r i s e s o n l y w i t h t h e c o n c e p t o f - - and p a r -t i c u l a r l y t h e b e l i e f i n \u2014 a G o d . Those who b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a p u r p o s e w i l l t r y t o d i s c o v e r what i t i s . N o n -b e l i e v e r s s h o u l d n o t be b o t h e r e d by t h e ' p r o b l e m ' b e c a u s e t h e y s h o u l d deny t h a t t h e r e I S any p r o b l e m . T h e r e can be no p r o b l e m , t h e y s h o u l d s a y , where t h e r e can be no p u r p o s e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h o s e who do n o t a l r e a d y b e l i e v e i n God w i l l n o t f e e l t h e need t o a s k t h e u l t i m a t e Why i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e . The q u e s t i o n w i l l make no sense t o t h e m . I t makes no s e n s e t o me. What f u n c t i o n o r p u r p o s e c o u l d t h e u n i v e r s e p o s s i b l y s e r v e ? I t i s t r u e t h a t we ' u s e ' i t ( o r a t i n y p a r t o f i t ) as 'home' f o r a w h i l e , but t h i s o n l y means t h a t WE put i t t o ' u s e ' , i t i s o u r p u r p o s e and n o t t h e u n i v e r s e ' s . Though m i n u t e p a r t s o f t h e u n i v e r s e , v i z . , we hupians, engage I n p u r p o s e f u l c o n d u c t , i t does not seem t h a t much e l s e does o r c a n . And i t c e r t a i n l y does n o t seem t h a t t h e WHOLE o f . t h e u n i v e r s e c o n d u c t s i t s e l f , w i t h p u r p o s e . I t makes no s e n s e f o r b e l i e v e r s t o condemn n o n b e l i e v e r s f o r n o t s e e i n g t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r a s k i n g t h e u l t i m a t e Why. 97 N o n b e l i e v e r s c a n n o t make SENSE o f t h e q u e s t i o n . They see t h a t i t w o u l d make s e n s e o n l y i f one -presupposes t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e i s God o r c o n t a i n s G o d . . One who f a i l s t o see how t h e u n i v e r s e c o u l d ACT as a w h o l e , l e t a l o n e a c t p u r p o s e -f u l l y , o r how i t c o u l d be USED has t h e r i g h t , nay t h e d u t y , t o deny t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e Why c o u l d p o s s i b l y be a n s w e r e d . F o r n o n b e l i e v e r s , t h e r e i s , and can b e , no u l t i m a t e Why. James s a y s t h a t ( p .21) \" I t i s o n l y t r u t h as t e c h n i c a l l y v e r i f i e d t h a t i n t e r e s t s h e r ( s c i e n c e ) . The t r u t h o f t r u t h s m i g h t come i n m e r e l y a f f i r m a t i v e f o r m and she w o u l d d e c l i n e t o t o u c h i t . \" . T h i s i s n o n s e n s e . Though s c i e n t i s t s g e n e r a l l y a r e c o n c e r n e d o n l y w i t h m a t t e r s w h i c h a r e a t l e a s t t h e o r e t i c -a l l y amenable t o c o n f i r m a t i o n , phenomena o c c u r i n g b u t once a r e a c c e p t e d i f o b s e r v e d by r e l i a b l e w i t n e s s e s ( o r j u s t one r e l i a b l e w i t n e s s ) . S c i e n c e c a n n o t be b lamed f o r n o t d o i n g what i t was n e v e r meant t o d o . S c i e n t i s t s t r y t o u n d e r s t a n d k i n d s o f phenomena, s u c h as what makes a n y t h i n g move t h e way i t does o r what makes c e r t a i n t y p e s o f p s y c h o p a t h s behave t h e way t h e y d o . That i s , we u s u a l l y use t h e s c i e n t i f i c method t o d i s c o v e r g e n e r a l l a w s w h i c h w i l l e x p l a i n t y p e s o f . phenomena, n o t u n i q u e e v e n t s o r e n t i t i e s . S c i e n c e does n o t i g n o r e c e r t a i n e v e n t s t h a t o c c u r o n l y once ( e . g . , t h e r o c k e t s e n t t o t h e moon w h i c h s e n t back t h o u s a n d s o f p h o t o g r a p h s ) , b u t h e r m a i n c o n c e r n i s t o e x p l a i n c l a s s e s o f e v e n t s , s i n c e t h e s e a r e t h e t h i n g s u s u a l l y r e q u i r i n g e x p l a n a t i o n . S c i e n t i s t s a s k e d \"Why do s t o n e s f a l l ? \" , n o t \"Why d i d t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s t o n e f a l l ? \" . S c i e n c e does n o t have t o i n v e s t i g a t e e v e r y s t o n e ' s f a l l b e f o r e i t can g i v e t h e c a u s e s . I t makes g e n e r a l 98 l a w s o f t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l s o r t , e . g . , \" i f s u c h and s u c h c o n -d i t i o n s p r e v a i l , t h e n a s t o n e (ANY s t o n e ) w i l l f a l l \" . James does n o t e l u c i d a t e h i s p h r a s e \" t h e t r u t h o f t r u t h s \" b u t he i m p l i e s t h a t t h e r e m i g h t be a t r u t h w h i c h i s more i m p o r t a n t t h a n a l l o t h e r t r u t h s o r a t r u t h w h i c h makes a l l o t h e r t r u t h s t r u e . I f t h e r e were s u c h a t r u t h , I am s u r e t h a t s c i e n t i s t s w o u l d g l a d l y a c c e p t i t , p r o v i d i n g o f c o u r s e t h a t t h e y c o u l d be made t o u n d e r s t a n d t h i s ' t r u t h o f t r u t h s ' and how i t r a t e s so h i g h l y . I f a l o u d v o i c e came o u t o f t h e s k y and spoke t o a l l men i n t h e i r s e v e r a l l a n g u a g e s , i t w o u l d be i g n o r e d o r s t i l l e d u n l e s s i t l ) made s e n s e , 2) r e p o r t e d t h i n g s w h i c h r e a s o n a b l e men c o u l d see were t r u e or a t l e a s t v e r i f i a b l e and 3) e x p l a i n e d how and-why i t i t s e l f came t o b e . I s u s p e c t t h a t James had i n mind something; l i k e t h i s v o i c e when he u s e d t h e p h r a s e ' t r u t h o f t r u t h s ' . P e r h a p s he b e l i e v e d t h a t o n l y i f God s h o u t e d t o us w o u l d we b e l i e v e t h a t He e x i s t s . The t r o u b l e i s , even were ' t h e v o i c e ' t o be h e a r d , many w o u l d r e m a i n r e l u c t a n t t o c a l l i t h o l y o r ' t h e v o i c e o f G o d ' . They w o u l d i n s i s t on e n g a g i n g i t i n ' l e n g t h y and i n v o l v e d c o n v e r s a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f e v i l , p a i n , d i s e a s e , d i v e r s e r e l i g i o n s e t c . e t c . , u n t i l t h e c l u s t e r o f p r o b l e m s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e c o n c e p t o f God were s o l v e d t o t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , ' G o d ' m i g h t g e t more t h a n he b a r g a i n e d f o r i f He e v e r e f f e c t s c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h . s c e p t i c s , a g n o s t i c s , a t h e i s t s , l o g i c a l p o s i t i v i s t s , e t c . ( a s s u m i n g t h e r e were a God, t h a t i s ) . 99 James t h e n t u r n s (p.22) t o m o r a l q u e s t i o n s . He c a l l s them \" s p e c u l a t i v e q u e s t i o n s \" and s u g g e s t s t h a t i f we d i d w a i t l o n g enough, \" c o e r c i v e e v i d e n c e \" m i g h t a r r i v e . Y e t he adds (p.22) t h a t q u e s t i o n s o f m o r a l i t y a r e \" q u e s t i o n s whose s o l u t i o n c a n n o t w a i t f o r s e n s i b l e p r o o f . \" A t one p o i n t he s u g g e s t s t h a t m o r a l q u e s t i o n s a r e ' s p e c u l a t i v e ' and t h a t ' c o e r c i v e e v i d e n c e ' i s a t l e a s t r e l e v a n t t o t h e m . A t a n o t h e r , he s a y s t h a t t h o u g h t h e r e i s a ' s o l u t i o n ' , we ' c a n n o t w a i t ' f o r s e n s i b l e p r o o f . I t i s n o t c l e a r w h e t h e r he deemed em-p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e r e l e v a n t o r n o t . I t i s a l s o n o t c l e a r w h e t h e r he t h o u g h t t h a t a l o n g enough w a i t f o r ' s e n s i b l e p r o o f m i g h t r e s u l t i n a ' s o l u t i o n ' . On one h a n d t h e o p t i o n ( o r d e c i s i o n ) i s ' f o r c e d ' y e t he s a y s t h a t i t i s a ' s p e c u l a -t i v e ' q u e s t i o n and s u g g e s t s t h a t e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e m i g h t e v e n t u a l l y answer t h e q u e s t i o n . I s h a l l i n t e r p r e t James as meaning t h a t q u e s t i o n s o f m o r a l i t y a r e NOT s u s c e p t i b l e o f e m p i r i c a l c o n f i r m a t i o n o r p r o o f . I>. He c a n n o t a t one and t h e same t i m e h a v e m o r a l q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d e d as s p e c u l a t i v e or s c i e n t i f i c ones amenable t o em-p i r i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n and as f o r c e d d e c i s i o n s f o r w h i c h t h e HEART must a n s w e r . My i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f h i m i s w a r r a n t e d by what he s a y s (p.22) when he c o n t r a s t s s c i e n c e t o m o r a l i t y : \" S c i e n c e can t e l l us what e x i s t s ; b u t t o compare t h e w o r t h s , b o t h o f what e x i s t s and o f what does n o t e x i s t , we must c o n s u l t n o t s c i e n c e , b u t what P a s c a l c a l l s o u r h e a r t . \" He s a y s t h a t (p.22-23) \"The q u e s t i o n o f h a v i n g m o r a l b e l i e f s a t a l l or n o t h a v i n g them i s d e c i d e d by our w i l l . \" 100 When m a k i n g a m o r a l d e c i s i o n ^ , , t h e n , a c c o r d i n g t o James , we a r e f o r c e d t o d e c i d e . I f someone were d r o w n i n g and o n l y we c o u l d save h i m , we MUST a c t i f he i s t o be s a v e d . To w a i t , o r t o f a i l t o d e c i d e w h e t h e r i t i s r i g h t o r wrong t o save h i m , ( o r m o r a l l y n e u t r a l ) , IS t o d e c i d e . I f we LET h i m drown when we COULD have s a v e d h i m , t h e n we h a v e , i n a s e n s e , d e c i d e d t h e i s s u e a l r e a d y . To d e c i d e a f t e r he drowns t h a t we s h o u l d save h i m w o u l d be s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y . We may, o f c o u r s e , d e c i d e a f t e r he has drowned t h a t we s h o u l d have  s a v e d h i m , b u t we can no l o n g e r d e c i d e TO save h i m . I n o t h e r w o r d s , one o f our t h r e e o p t i o n s ( r i g h t ? wrong? n e u t r a l ? ) , v i z . , t h a t i t i s r i g h t t o save h i m , has been l o s t f o r e v e r . I a g r e e w i t h James t h a t m o r a l d e c i s i o n s a r e i n a sense f o r c e d . To f a i l t o a c t can be t a n t a m o u n t t o d e c i d i n g NOT t o a c t . One can be h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e f o r f a i l i n g t o a c t . F o r e x a m p l e , i f I do n o t warn someone t h a t h i s l i f e i s t h r e a t e n e d and i f he i s k i l l e d u n n e c e s s a r i l y , t h e n I am t o blame f o r h i s d e a t h . ( A s s u m i n g I c o u l d have warned h i m i n t i m e ) . James a d m i t s t h a t m o r a l d e c i s i o n s ARE made. He does n o t say t h a t we must b e l i e v e i n God i n o r d e r to make o u r m o r a l d e c i s i o n s or t o answer o u r m o r a l q u e s t i o n s . We c o n -s u l t , i n s t e a d , o u r h e a r t and w i l l , he s a y s . James a p p a r e n t l y d i d not . t h i n k t h a t m o r a l i t y depended on r e l i g i o n . He s a y s t h a t t h e p r o p o s a l t h a t g o o d n e s s be d e f i n e d as t h e f o l l o w i n g o f G o d ' s w i l l must be r e j e c t e d b e c a u s e t h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s \" u n a s c e r t a i n a b l e and v a g u e \" ( p . 2 0 1 ) . I t seems, t h e n , t h a t f o r James t h e r e i s no l o g i c a l o r n e c e s s a r y c o n n e c t i o n between m o r a l d e c i s i o n s ( o r b e l i e f s ) and r e l i g i o n ( o r G o d ) . 1 0 1 I n v i e w o f t h i s , i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o see why James l a t e r c l a i m s t h a t \"The whole d e f e n c e o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h h i n g e s upon a c t i o n . \" ( p . 2 9 f o o t n o t e ) . That i s , i f we do n o t n e e d r e l i g i o n i n o r d e r t o make m o r a l d e c i s i o n s , j u s t why DO we n e e d i t ? I s t h e r e some o t h e r c l a s s o f d e c i s i o n s o r a c t i o n s w h i c h r e q u i r e r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f b e f o r e t h e y can be made o r engaged i n ? I f s o , James does n o t e l u c i d a t e - - a t l e a s t i n t h i s e s s a y . James ( 1 9 2 9 , p . 4 7 6 - 4 7 7 ) t h o u g h t t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f g i v e s one z e s t , p e a c e , s a f e t y , e t c . , b u t nowhere do we f i n d h i m s a y i n g t h a t m o r a l d e c i s i o n s o r a c t i o n s a r e i m -p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . I n o t h e r w o r d s , r e l i g i o n f o r James had s u b j e c t i v e o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a l u e b u t l o g i c a l l y s p e a k i n g , i t i s i r r e l e v a n t t o m o r a l i t y . James compares t h e d e c i s i o n t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s wrong o r r i g h t t o t h e d e c i s i o n t h a t t h e r e i s or i s n o t a G o d . As James p u t s i t , t h e d e c i s i o n i n t h e s e c a s e s i s f o r c e d . He s a y s t h a t one must d e c i d e w i t h o u t w a i t i n g f o r ' c o e r c i v e e v i -d e n c e ' t o a r r i v e . But i f m o r a l i t y and r e l i g i o n a r e a r e a s where e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e i s i r r e l e v a n t ( t o t h e i r f i n a l s o -l u t i o n ) , t h e n t h e r e i s no USE w a i t i n g . I t w o u l d be l i k e w a i t i n g f o r t h e Bowen I s l a n d F e r r y B o a t i n B . C . on P o r t a g e Avenue i n W i n n i p e g , M a n i t o b a . One w o u l d be doomed t o d i s -a p p o i n t m e n t \u2014 t h e s c h e d u l e s j u s t a r e n ' t MADE t h a t way. As M a c i n t y r e s a y s ( p . 1 9 7 ) , \"where p r o o f i s i n p l a c e , d e c i s i o n i s n o t . \" He adds t h a t \" f r e e d e c i s i o n i s t h e e s s e n c e of the Christian religion.\" Free decision is the essence o f a l l r e l i g i o n s . No r e l i g i o n t h a t I knoxv o f w o u l d , o r c o u l d , s u b j e c t i t s c l a i m s about men 's s o u l s o r m o r a l i t y o r s a l v a t i o n t o e m p i r i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n . I n s a y i n g t h a t r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n 102 i s l i k e m o r a l d e c i s i o n , James a d m i t s t h a t r e l i g i o n i s no h y p o t h e s i s i n t h e o r d i n a r y sense o f t h a t word and t h a t em-p i r i c a l ' p r o o f i s j u s t n o t RELEVANT t o r e l i g i o u s commitment . Though n o t h i n g may be more i m p o r t a n t i n making a m o r a l o r r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n , t h a n becoming aware o f a l l r e l e v a n t f a c t s , t h e s e f a c t s a l o n e c a n n o t t e l l us w h i c h d e c i s o n i s t h e c o r r e c t o n e . As James s a y s , h e r e we must c o n s u l t o u r h e a r t . Of c o u r s e t h e r e a r e r e a s o n a b l e d e c i s i o n s and u n r e a s o n -a b l e o n e s . An u n r e a s o n a b l e d e c i s i o n would b e , e . g . , t o phone t h e p o l i c e t h a t a murder had been c o m m i t t e d m e r e l y on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t a l o u d n o i s e had be_en h e a r d i n t h e s t r e e t . A r e a s o n a b l e d e c i s i o n i s one t h a t i s g r o u n d e d upon as much i n v e s t i g a t i o n and c o n s u l t a t i o n as t i m e p e r m i t s . James d e -f i n e s t h e r e a s o n a b l e t y p e o f d e c i s i o n as b e i n g (1\u00a3>90, p . 5 3 1 ) \" t h a t o f t h o s e caaes i n w h i c h t h e arguments f o r and a g a i n s t a g i v e n c o u r s e seem g r a d u a l l y and a l m o s t i n s e n s i b l y t o s e t t l e t h e m s e l v e s i n the m i n d and t o end by l e a v i n g a c l e a r b a l a n c e i n f a v o r o f one a l t e r n a t i v e , w h i c h a l t e r n a t i v e we t h e n a d o p t w i t h o u t e f f o r t o r c o n s t r a i n t . \" Where we must c o n s c i o u s l y expend e f f o r t t o d e c i d e , t h e n we d e c i d e u n r e a s o n a b l y , s a y s J a m e s . I t w o u l d seem t h a t t h e ' f o r c e d ' d e c i s i o n o f r e l i g i o n where we must l e t o u r h e a r t or p a s s i o n s d e c i d e f o r u s i s an u n r e a s o n a b l e o n e . When one must a t t e m p t ( w i l l ) t o b e l i e v e ( o r t o d e c i d e ) , one does so u n r e a s o n a b l y . I n t h i s e s s a y , James does n o t s a y t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n i s u n r e a s o n a b l e , b u t a c c o r d i n g t o h i s own d e f i n i t i o n o f ' r e a s o n a b l e d e c i s i o n ' , and o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n , i t w o u l d a p p e a r t h a t t h i s i s t h e c a s e . 103 One m i g h t t r y t o d e f e n d James by s a y i n g t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s d e c i s i o n may be n o n r e a s o n a b l e and n o t UN r e a s o n a b l e . I t h i n k , h o w e v e r , t h a t t h i s i s c l e a r l y a case where t o f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o w i l l t o b e l i e v e i s t o b e l i e v e IRRATIONALLY. As we saw e a r l i e r , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t b e l i e f i s v o l u n t a r y , i t i s i r r a t i o n a l (see p.14- ) . W i s h f u l t h i n k i n g i s a n o t a b l e example o f f i n d i n g i t n e c e s s a r y t o b e l i e v e what one wants t o b e l i e v e . James s a y s ( p .22) t h a t \" s c i e n c e h e r s e l f c o n s u l t s h e r h e a r t when she l a y s i t down t h a t t h e i n f i n i t e a s c e r t a i n m e n t o f f a c t and c o r r e c t i o n o f f a l s e b e l i e f a r e t h e supreme goods f o r m a n . \" Though we have f o u n d t h e s c i e n t i f i c method b e s t i n a s c e r t a i n i n g t h e f a c t s and c o r r e c t i n g f a l s e b e l i e f s , t h i s does n o t mean t h a t t h e s e t h i n g s a r e r e g a r d e d by s c i e n t i s t s as ' t h e supreme goods f o r m a n ' . I t seems t h a t James i m p l i e s t h a t u l t i m a t e l y a l l i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s c i p l i n e s must r e s o r t t o t h e h e a r t i n o r d e r t o j u s t i f y t h e i r e x i s t e n c e . S c i e n c e need NOT be r e g a r d e d as c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e r e i s any supreme good f o r man. I t i s a d i s c i p l i n e e m p l o y i n g a method o f d i s c o v e r y w h i c h t h u s f a r has p r o v e n by f a r t h e most e f f e c t i v e i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h . O n l y MEN can deem s o m e t h i n g t h e i r supreme good - - n e v e r an a c t i v i t y o r d i s c i p l i n e s u c h a s ' s c i e n c e ' (Alsoi,.- James SAW t h a t s c i e n c e cannot t e l l us t h e w o r t h o f t h i n g s , ( p .22) 104 12. FAITH AMD V E R I F I C A T I O N James t h e n t u r n s t o a c e r t a i n c l a s s o f q u e s t i o n s o f f a c t , q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s , s t a t e s o f m i n d between one man and a n o t h e r (p.23-25). These a r e c a s e s where (p.24) \"The d e s i r e f o r a c e r t a i n k i n d o f t r u t h . . . b r i n g s a b o u t t h a t s p e c i a l t r u t h ' s e x i s t e n c e \" and (P.25) \" I n t r u t h s d e p e n d e n t on o u r p e r s o n a l a c t i o n , . . . . f a i t h based, on d e s i r e i s c e r t a i n l y a l a w f u l and. p o s s i b l y an i n d i s p e n s a b l e t h i n g \" . ' He u s e s t h e sample o f one who wonders w h e t h e r a n o t h e r p e r s o n l i k e s h i m o r n o t . He s u g g e s t s t h a t i f an i n d i v i d u a l A r e m a i n s a l o o f and does n o t h i n g a b o u t e s t a b l i s h i n g a r e l a t i o n -s h i p w i t h B u n t i l he has o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e t h a t B l i k e s h i m , t h e n i t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t B n e v e r w i l l l i k e h i m . A s h o u l d meet B h a l f way, says J a m e s . A s h o u l d be w i l l i n g t o assume 1 t h a t B must l i k e h i m , and show B t r u s t and e x p e c t a t i o n . O n l y by h a v i n g f a i t h t h a t B l i k e s h i m , c a n A e v e r make B l i k e him.. S i n c e James words t h e q u e s t i o n \"Dp_ y o u l i k e me o r n o t \" and n o t \" W i l l y o u l i k e me o r n o t \" , I t a k e i t t h a t A i s s u p p o s e d t o b e l i e v e even now t h a t B l i k e s h i m , o r i s d i s -p o s e d t o l i k e h i m . I a g r e e w i t h James t h a t p e o p l e who r e m a i n a l o o f and r e f u s e t o \"budge an i n c h \" u n l e s s t h e y a r e s u r e t h a t t h e y a r e l i k e d , a r e much l e s s l i k e l y t o be l i k e d t h a n t h o s e who meet p e o p l e h a l f - w a y and show them t r u s t and e x p e c t a t i o n . Most o f us a r e u n w i l l i n g t o g i v e o f o u r s e l v e s t o a r e l a t i o n s h i p i f t h e o t h e r p e r s o n p l a y s ' h a r d t o g e t ' o r t r e a t s us as t h o u g h we were on t r i a l . Of c o u r s e t h e r e a r e e x c e p t i o n s . T h e r e i s a c e r t a i n f a s c i n a t i o n e n g e n d e r e d by some women who 105 g i v e t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t h e y a r e c o m p l e t e l y ' u n a v a i l a b l e ' . But by and l a r g e i t i s t r u e t h a t \" i f y o u l i k e o t h e r p e o p l e t h e y w i l l l i k e y o u \" . However , t h e r e a r e l i m i t s t o what o u r f a i t h o r t r u s t o r c o n f i d e n c e ( o r d e s i r e o r a c t i o n ) can d o . We may be a b l e t o e f f e c t c e r t a i n changes i n o t h e r p e o p l e s ' e m o t i o n s and we may be a b l e t o g e t t h e j o b f o r w h i c h o t h e r s may be b e t t e r q u a l i f i e d , by h a v i n g c o n f i d e n c e . But we c a n n o t b r i n g i n t o e x i s t e n c e c e r t a i n e n t i t i e s s i m p l y by h a v i n g c o n f i d e n c e o r even by o u r a c t i o n s . As James h i m s e l f s a y s ( p . 2 0 ) , \" T h r o u g h - , o u t t h e b r e a d t h o f p h y s i c a l n a t u r e f a c t s a r e what t h e y a r e q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f u s , and i n o u r d e a l i n g w i t h o b j e c t i v e n a t u r e we o b v i o u s l y a r e r e c o r d e r s , n o t m a k e r s , o f t h e t r u t h . \" T h e r e a r e l i m i t s t o what we can do by f a i t h , d e s i r e o r a c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t i m e a l s o . We c a n n o t a l t e r t h e p a s t no m a t t e r how much we w o u l d l i k e t o . B e l i e v i n g o r d e s i r i n g t h a t t h e r e had been no Second W o r l d War w i l l n o t c h a n g e . t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e was o n e . No m a t t e r what we do now, we can n e v e r b r i n g i t a b o u t t h a t t h e Second W o r l d War d i d n o t o c c u r . The e x p r e s s i o n \" b r i n g i t a b o u t \" i s a c r u c i a l one h e r e . We c a n \" b r i n g t h i n g s a b o u t \" b u t we cannot a l t e r t h e p a s t . I n a s e n s e , we can change t h e way t h i n g s a r e I n t h e p r e s e n t , b u t t h e change w i l l be e f f e c t e d only i n t h e f u t u r e . That i s , as we l o o k about us and w i s h t h a t c e r t a i n t h i n g s were d i f f e r -e n t , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e n o t , o f c o u r s e , p r e s e n t a l r e a d y \u2014 i f t h e y were t h e r e w o u l d be no need f o r t h e m . The p o i n t i s , our f a i t h , d e s i r e and a c t i o n c a n be a f a c t o r i n c h a n g i n g t h i n g s o r even c r e a t i n g some t h i n g s , but o n l y i n t h e f u t u r e , 106 not the past. That i s why James should have phrased i t \" W i l l you l i k e me?\" i n s t e a d of \"Do you l i k e me?\" I f I am introduced to someone and immediately wonder i f he does l i k e me, t h i s i s a s i g n that I lack confidence. I f I am to get people to l i k e me, I hope that they w i l l and act on the premise that they w i l l do so. \u2022 I do not need to b e l i e v e that they' l i k e me now. We may have j u s t met \u2014 and i f they l i k e everyone they meet i n s t a n t l y , I may take t h i s as a sign t h a t t h e i r a f f e c t i o n , even i f i t i s genuine, i s not worth very much. We may change things only i n a very l i m i t e d sphere of time and space. But James seems to think that f a i t h can not only move mountains -- i t can produce them. He says (p.28) that one should not \" t r y to make the gods e x t o r t h i s recog-n i t i o n w i l l y - n i l l y \" and compares our reluctance to have f a i t h i n God to our r e l u c t a n c e to have f a i t h i n our f e l l o w , man. But i f God d i d not e x i s t i n the past and does not e x i s t now, could anything that we- do b r i n g about h i s existence? James seems to t h i n k so. He says i n \"Is L i f e V\/orth L i v i n g ? \" (The W i l l to B e l i e v e , p . 6 l ) , \"God' himself...may draw v i t a l s t r e n g t h and increase of very being from our f i d e l i t y \" . I do not know what \"increase of very being\" means. Perhaps i t means that we are a s o r t of midwife who a s s i s t s i n the b i r t h of God or that He e x i s t s ' i n i d e a ' , so t o speak and r e q u i r e s our f i d e l i t y to become, a r e a l i t y . Or perhaps we are not the midwife but a c t u a l l y the c r e a t o r s of God. On every i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n of t h i s phrase, i t seems that i t i s we who could create God. I f t h i s i s t r u e , then s u r e l y He should worship 107 us and n o t v i c e v e r s a . W i t h o u t u s , He w o u l d be n o w h e r e . W h a t e v e r James means by s a y i n g t h a t f a i t h i n God c a n b r i n g Him a b o u t , I t h i n k he i s m i s t a k e n . On page 2L James s a y s t h a t f a i t h c a n c r e a t e \" i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n \" . T h i s t u r n s out t o be a t a u t o l o g y , i f i n t e r p r e t e d l i t e r a l l y . We s h a l l use t h e example o f f a i t h i n God (meaning f a i t h t h a t 'He e x i s t s , n o t f a i t h i n H i s l i k i n g u s ) . To have f a i t h i n God i s t o b e l i e v e i n G o d . To v e r i f y .. s o m e t h i n g means t o l ) t e s t t h e t r u t h o f i t , o r 2) t o f i n d t h e t r u t h o f i t . T h u s , t o say t h a t f a i t h c r e a t e s i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n i s t o s a y t h a t b e l i e f ( t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s t r u e ) p r o d u c e s b e l i e f ( t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s t r u e ) - - i . e . \u2014 \" b e l i e f i n God p r o d u c e s b e l i e f i n G o d \" . The t r o u b l e w i t h f a i t h , i s t h a t one i s l i k e l y o n l y t o v e r i f y i n s e n s e two a b o v e . As we s a i d b e f o r e , one does n o t r e a l l y t r y t o t e s t o r v e r i f y some-t h i n g i n the s e n s e t h a t one r e a l l y wants t o f i n d t h e t r u t h \u2014 one w a n t s t o f i n d t h e t r u t h c o n g e n i a l and s e e k s o n l y c o n f i r -m a t i o n . To b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g , as we s t a t e d b e f o r e , i s t o deem i t t r u e . A n d , a s D . S . M i l l e r s a y s ( p . 1 8 4 ) \" B e l i e f and a d m i s s i o n o f f a l s i t y a r e , w h e t h e r a b s o l u t e l y o r i n d e g r e e s , m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e \" . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i f one r e a l l y has f a i t h i n o r b e l i e v e s i n God, ( i . e . deems i t t r u e t h a t t h e r e i s a God) t h e n one w i l l n o t b o t h e r t o v e r i f y t h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d . So on one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f \" f a i t h c r e a t e s i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n \" , what James r e a l l y s a y s amounts t o t h e t a u t o l o g y t h a t \" t o b e l i e v e i n God one must b e l i e v e i n God\" o r \" i f one b e l i e v e s i n God, t h e n one w i l l b e l i e v e i n G o d . \" We must d i s t i n g u i s h between b e l i e f and f a i t h . B e l i e f 108 i s t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l a s s e n t t o a p r o p o s i t i o n - - t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f s o m e t h i n g as b e i n g t r u e . F a i t h , i s b e l i e f , u s u a l l y on l i t t l e o r no e v i d e n c e ( o r even i n t h e f a c e o f a d v e r s e e v i d e n c e w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f d e s i r e t h a t t h e t h i n g be t r u e . (One does n o t , as Kaufmann s a y s ( p . 1 1 3 ) have f a i t h t h a t o n e ' s x -r a y w i l l show e v i d e n c e o f c a n c e r - - d e s i r e f o r t h e t r u t h o f s o m e t h i n g i s a n e c e s s a r y p a r t o f f a i t h . ) ' One c a n d e s i r e t h a t o t h e r s w i l l l i k e h im and even a c t on t h e b a s i s t h a t t h e y w i l l l i k e h i m w i t h o u t b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e y w i l l o r d o . I f a p e r s o n b e l i e v e s t h a t o t h e r s a l r e a d y do l i k e h i m , t h e n he i s n o t l i k e l y t o make g r e a t e f f o r t s t o make them l i k e h i m . He may b e l i e v e t h a t o t h e r s may l i k e h i m o r c o u l d l i k e h i m , i . e . t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t o t h e r s w i l l l i k e h i m , w i t h o u t n e c e s -s a r i l y b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e y w i l l f o r s u r e . That i s , what James seems t o be t a l k i n g a b o u t h e r e i s n o t b e l i e f b u t r a t h e r c o n f i d e n c e o r hope and t h e a c t i o n s t h e s e t h i n g s make p o s s i b l e . What t h i s has t o do w i t h t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a supreme b e i n g i s n o t easy t o s e e . Those who b e l i e v e i n God, b e l i e v e n o t o n l y t h a t He e x i s t s b u t a l s o , i n a l l p r o b a b i l i t y , t h a t He c o u l d make H i s p r e s e n c e known t o a l l i f He so d e s i r e d . T h i s w o u l d be a c c e p t e d by n o n b e l i e v e r s as p r o o f t h a t t h e r e i s a G o d , ( i . e . H i s m a k i n g H i s p r e s e n c e k n o w n ) . James seems t o t h i n k t h a t o n l y by . b e l i e v i n g c o u l d we have e v i d e n c e o r p r o o f o f God \u2014 b u t who needs e v i d e n c e t h e n ? And even i f one does have f a i t h , t h e r e a r e l i m i t s t o what one can d o . As V e t t e r s a y s ( p . 3 0 2 ) , \"The o n l y f a i t h t h a t c a n h e l p c r e a t e a f a c t i s a f a i t h t h a t s t i m u l a t e s c o n c r e t e a c t i o n i n an a r e a where a t l e a s t s o m e t h i n g 109 c a n be t r i e d o r o b s e r v e d . \" God i s n o t o b s e r v e d by n o n -b e l i e v e r s , n o r by most b e l i e v e r s e i t h e r , so t h e v e r i f i c a t i o n James r e f e r s t o i s n o t s c i e n t i f i c , p u b l i c l y o b s e r v a b l e ' , v e r i f i c a t i o n , b u t o n l y s u b j e c t i v e s a t i s f a c t i o n . We e a r l i e r d e a l t w i t h s a t i s f a c t i o n as t h e c r i t e r i o n o f t r u t h (see p.ufJ) . I t seems p r e p o s t e r o u s t o c l a i m t h a t f a i t h o r d e s i r e o r a c t i o n on o u r p a r t c o u l d cause o r h e l p God t o e x i s t . The I d e a seems i r r e l i g i o u s and even s a c r i l e g i o u s . I t seems a l s o s a c r i l e g i o u s t o s u g g e s t t h a t God i s l i k e a man whose f a v o u r we c a n w i n by s h o w i n g Him t h a t we t r u s t H i m . James seems t o f o r g e t t h a t G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e i s what i s i n q u e s t i o n , n o t h i s a p p r o v a l . The q u e s t i o n i s w h e t h e r t h e r e a r e \"powers a b o v e \" ( p . 2 4 ) , n o t w h e t h e r we s h o u l d r e m a i n a l o o f , t r u s t them o r t r y t o w i n t h e i r f a v o u r . James seems t o evade t h e w h o l e i s s u e i n s u g g e s t i n g t h a t r e l i g i o n i s l i k e , q u e s t i o n s o f \" p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s , s t a t e s o f rnind between one man and a n o t h e r \" ( p . 2 3 ) . We know t h a t t h e r e a r e o t h e r men b u t we do n o t know t h e r e i s a G o d . How t h e n can any a n a l o g y be made h e r e ? He seems t o f o r g e t t h a t i m p o r t a n t d i s t i n c t i o n he made i n The P r i n c i p l e s  o f P s y c h o l o g y between o b j e c t s o f w i l l . a n d o b j e c t s o f b e l i e f . The l a t t e r , he s a y s ( p . 3 2 0 , V o l . I I ) \" a r e t h o s e w h i c h do n o t change a c c o r d i n g as vie t h i n k r e g a r d i n g t h e m . \" I n a l e t t e r t o H . K . K a l l e n ( P e r r y 1 9 4 8 , p . 2 4 9 ) James s a y s \" I t i s u s u a l l y p o o r p o l i c y t o b e l i e v e what i s n ' t v e r i -f i e d ; b u t sometimes t h e b e l i e f p r o d u c e s v e r i f i c a t i o n - - as when i t p r o d u c e s a c t i v i t y c r e a t i v e o f t h e f a c t b e l i e v e d \" . James d i d n o t e l u c i d a t e what he meant by ' a c t i v i t y ' h e r e , 110 b u t i t seems l u d i c r o u s t o t h i n k t h a t a n y t h i n g t h a t man c o u l d c r e a t e w o u l d be deemed an a d e q u a t e o b j e c t o f w o r s h i p \u2014 i . e . G o d . And even James saw t h a t , \" C o n c e p t u a l p r o c e s s e s c a n c l a s s f a c t s , d e f i n e them, i n t e r p r e t t h e m , b u t t h e y do n o t p r o d u c e t h e m \" . (The V a r i e t i e s o f R e l i g i o u s E x p e r i e n c e , p . 4 4 5 ) No r e l i g i o u s p e r s o n c o u l d w o r s h i p a God he knew he had c r e a t e d o r h e l p e d c r e a t e . I f he c o u l d c r e a t e one g o d , t h e n why n o t a n o t h e r ? And a n o t h e r ? The s u g g e s t i o n t h a t G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e depends on our b e l i e f \u2014 i . e . He e x i s t s i f we b e -l i e v e b u t He does n o t e x i s t i f we do n o t - - i s a r e v e r s a l o f t h e t r u t h . The t r u t h i s , o u r b e l i e f depends on H i s e x i s t e n c e - -i f He e x i s t e d , we w o u l d b e l i e v e i n Him ( n o t i f we b e l i e v e d , i n H i m , he w o u l d e x i s t . ) T h e r e seems t o be no a n a l o g y t h e n , between t h e f a c t s a b o u t p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s c i t e d , by James and t h e i s s u e a b o u t r e l i g i o n t h a t c o n c e r n s u s . I f we knew o f G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e , t h e n i t may be t r u e t h a t H i s l i k i n g us w o u l d depend on o u r a t t i t u d e and a c t i o n s . The f a c t i s , h o w e v e r , t h a t G o d ' s e x -i s t e n c e i s what i s b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d , n o t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o u s . And even i n t h e case o f p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s n o t b e l i e f o r f a i t h i n a n o t h e r ' s a p p r o v a l i s r e q u i r e d , b e c a u s e t h i s c o u l d e a s i l y cause o v e r c o n f i d e n c e o r a p a t h y , b u t d e s i r e and a c t i o n b a s e d on t h e b e l i e f t h a t h i s a p p r o v a l may be f o r t h c o m i n g ( i . e . t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e ) i s what i s w a n t e d . The t r u t h i s n o t t h a t \" f a i t h c r e a t e s i t s own v e r i f i c a t i o n \" but t h a t d e s i r e p l u s a c t i o n can b r i n g a b o u t changes i n t h e w o r l d , w i t h i n l i m i t s o f c o u r s e . On page 2 6 James s a y s t h a t \"We cannot escape t h e i s s u e I l l by r e m a i n i n g s c e p t i c a l and w a i t i n g f o r more l i g h t , b e c a u s e , a l t h o u g h we do a v o i d e r r o r i n t h a t way, i f r e l i g i o n be u n -t r u e , we l o s e ' the g o o d , i f i t be t r u e , j u s t as c e r t a i n l y as i f we p o s i t i v e l y chose t o d i s b e l i e v e \" . \" S c e p t i c i s m i s n o t a v o i d a n c e o f o p t i o n \" , he a d d s , \" i t i s o p t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r k i n d o f r i s k . B e t t e r r i s k l o s s o f t r u t h t h a n chance o f e r r o r , t h a t i s y o u r f a i t h v e t o e r ' s e x a c t p o s i t i o n . \" We saw e a r l i e r t h a t t h e o p t i o n i s n o t f o r c e d (see p p . y t f - * * ' ) . One may r e j e c t t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s b e c a u s e i t s t r i k e s one as i n t o l e r -a b l e o r m e a n i n g l e s s o r one may a l r e a d y b e l i e v e t h i n g s w h i c h t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' c o n t r a d i c t s . ; O r , one may s i m p l y see no e v i d e n c e f o r t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o -t h e s i s and r e j e c t i t f o r t h i s r e a s o n . A l s o , one m i g h t r e g a r d r e l i g i o n as a m a t t e r o f t h e h e a r t . One m i g h t see t h a t em-p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e i s t h e r e f o r e n o t r e l e v a n t and d i s c o v e r t h a t one has no e m o t i o n a l n e e d f o r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . F i n a l l y , one may deem t h e r e l i g i o u s ' h y p o t h e s i s ' f a l s e because t h e r e seems f a r more e v i d e n c e a g a i n s t i t t h a n f o r i t , and r e j e c t i t i n t o t o f o r t h i s r e a s o n . T h e r e a r e many n o n r e l i g i o u s s t a n d s p o s s i b l e and I do n o t t h i n k t h a t James can condemn them a l l f o r n o t \" a c c e p t i n g t h i s t r u t h \" . Some r e g a r d t h e whole i s s u e as m e a n i n g l e s s ( l o g i c a l p o s i t i v i s t s ) and o t h e r s see r e l i g i o n ' s v a l u e o n l y as a r t ( K a u f m a n n ) . I t h i n k t h a t s c e p t i c i s m or a g n o s t i c i s m w i t h r e g a r d t o r e l i g i o n i s p o s s i b l e and t h a t i t can be r e s p e c t a b l e . James 112 e q u a t e s a g n o s t i c s t o a t h e i s t s i n t h a t b o t h l o s e t h e good of r e l i g i o n i f i t be t r u e \u2014 one must b e l i e v e i n r e l i g i o n i n o r d e r t o b e n e f i t , s a y s J a m e s . Y e t , i t w o u l d seem t h a t James r e a l l y d i d n o t b e l i e v e a g n o s t i c i s m , t o be p o s s i b l e i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e . He s a i d , as we saw e a r l i e r (1890, pp.' 2 8 8-9), t h a t \" a n y o b j e c t which, r e m a i n s u n c o n t r a d i c t e d i s i p s o f a c t o b e l i e v e d and p o s i t e d as a b s o l u t e r e a l i t y . ' ' ' I f t h i s were t r u e , t h e n t h e r e c o u l d be no a g n o s t i c s . S i n c e t h e y do n o t b e l i e v e i n God and p o s i t h i m as a b s o l u t e r e a l i t y t h e n t h e y must b e l i e v e s o m e t h i n g w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o -t h e s i s - - e l s e t h e y w o u l d b e l i e v e i n God, a c c o r d i n g t o J a m e s . That i s , a c c o r d i n g t o t h i s q u o t a t i o n , one c o u l d n o t deny G o d ' s e x i s t e n c e u n l e s s one a l r e a d y b e l i e v e d s o m e t h i n g w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t e d i t , b u t then~?a:ll n o n b e l i e v e r s w o u l d be a t h e i s t s and t h e r e w o u l d be no a g n o s t i c s . Y e t i n The W i l l t o B e l i e v e James t e l l s t h e a g n o s t i c s t h a t t h e y a r e no b e t t e r t h a n a t h e i s t s . H i s p o s i t i o n h e r e i s n o t c l e a r . As we have m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e , t h e a t t e m p t i s o f t e n made t o make a v i r t u e o f n e c e s s i t y . F o r i n s t a n c e , r e l i g i o n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y deemed i t a v i r t u e t o b e l i e v e w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o t h e e v i d e n c e . I t has even a d m i t t e d t h a t e m p i r i c a l e v i -dence i s n o t r e l e v a n t . James speaks o f h i s \" p a s s i o n a l need o f t a k i n g t h e w o r l d r e l i g i o u s l y \" ( p . 2 7 ) , and i n t h e e n t i r e e s s a y he g i v e s t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t i t i s v i r t u o u s t o b e l i e v e , ' e . g . ( p .28) we do t h e u n i v e r s e a s e r v i c e b y o b s t i n a t e l y b e -l i e v i n g ) , As Kaufmann s a y s (p.114) \"The i m p r e s s i o n g i v e n i s s o m e t i m e s . . . . t h a t t h e r e i s a v i r t u e i n b e l i e v i n g , w i t h o u t e v i d e n c e as s u c h . But t h i s w o u l d open t h e f l o o d g a t e t o e v e r y 113 s u p e r s t i t i o n , p r e j u d i c e and m a d n e s s . \" I s u g g e s t t h a t t h e c o u r a g e o u s and v i r t u o u s t h i n g t o do i n s u c h c a s e s i s t o s u s -pend judgement o r , i f a p p r o p r i a t e , d e c l a r e t h e p r o p o s i t i o n f a l s e ( i . e . d i s b e l i e v e i t ) \u2014 p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e d e s i r e T t o b e l i e v e ' seems o v e r w h e l m i n g . As James h i m s e l f s a i d , the power t o s u s p e n d b e l i e f i n t h e p r e s e n c e o f an e m o t i o n a l l y ' e x c i t i n g i d e a i s \" t h e h i g h e s t r e s u l t o f e d u c a t i o n - . I n u n t u t o r e d minds t h e power does n o t e x i s t ( 1 8 9 0 , p . 3 0 8 ) . C o u l d i t be t h a t t h e i d e a o f God. so e x c i t e d James t h a t he d i d n o t know w h e t h e r t o suspend b e l i e f o r n o t ? I n 1898 James w r o t e : \" I b e l i e v e i n a f i n i t e God, i f i n a n y . \" ( P e r r y : 1 9 4 8 , p . 2 1 3 ) . I t w o u l d seem t h a t James h i m s e l f was s c e p t i c a l or u n c e r t a i n , i n r e g a r d t o r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . I t i s s t r a n g e t h a t he s h o u l d c a l l t h e d e c i s i o n f o r c e d when i t seems he h i m s e l f s p e n t y e a r s t r y i n g t o make i t . S c e p t i c i s m w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e e x i s t e n c e o f s o m e t h i n g i s b o t h p o s s i b l e and a d v i s a b l e b e c a u s e o n l y p r o o f o r e v i d e n c e can i n d i c a t e t o us a t h i n g ' s e x i s t e n c e . S c e p t i c i s m w i t h r e s p e c t t o an a t t r i b u t e o f s o m e t h i n g ( e . g . W i l l she l o v e me? W i l l she p r o v e t o be an a n g e l ? (p.26), W i l l he l i k e me?) \u2014 s c e p t i c i s m a b o u t an a t t r i b u t e o f s o m e t h i n g we know a l r e a d y t o e x i s t c a n be an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t m a t t e r . These a r e two e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s and must n o t be c o n f u s e d . I n one c a s e , we may be p o w e r l e s s t o create t h e t h i n g , and i n t h e o t h e r , we may i n d e e d e f f e c t a change i n the t h i n g ( o r p e r s o n ) . Where i t is_ p o s s i b l e f o r us t o c r e a t e o r change s o m e t h i n g , t h e n s c e p t i c i s m c a n be a d e t e r r e n t t o a c t i o n . Where we a r e o b v i o u s l y p o w e r l e s s t o c r e a t e s o m e t h i n g , e . g . God, s c e p t i c i s m seems t o be a g e n e r o u s s t a n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o t h a t t h i n g ' s e x i s t e n c e . G e n e r o u s , b e c a u s e t o s u g g e s t t h a t WE c o u l d o r must h e l p c r e a t e God i s t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h a t He. does n o t MOW e x i s t , and t h i s i s . just what s c e p t i c s b e l i e v e . 115 13. B E L I E F AND FEAR James seems t o t h i n k t h a t h i s l i f e i s a t s t a k e when he makes h i s d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g r e l i g i o n . He s a y s ( p . 2 7 ) t h a t \"My own s t a k e i s i m p o r t a n t enough t o g i v e me t h e r i g h t t o choose my own f o r m o f r i s k . \" He t h i n k s t h a t i f r e l i g i o n be t r u e , t h e n f o r h i m t o d i s b e l i e v e i s \" t o f o r f e i t my s o l e chance i n l i f e o f g e t t i n g upon t h e w i n n i n g s i d e . \" He t h i n k s t h a t , i f we w a i t t o d e c i d e ( p . 3 0 ) \"We do so a t our p e r i l \" j a n d t h a t \"we a c t , t a k i n g our l i f e i n o u r h a n d s . \" He u s e s t h e p h r a s e s \"my own s t a k e \" , \" s o l e change o f g e t t i n g upon t h e w i n n i n g s i d e \" , \" o u r p e r i l \" , and \" t a k i n g o u r l i f e i n o u r h a n d s \" . I t seems more l i k e l y t h a t James e n c o u r a g e s b e l i e f t h r o u g h FEAR t h a t we may s u f f e r ( e t e r n a l l y p e r h a p s ? ) i f r e l i g i o n be t r u e y e t we doubt i t . He s a y s ( p . 27) t h a t we s h o u l d b e l i e v e t h r o u g h hope t h a t r e l i g i o n may be t r u e and n o t y i e l d , to o u r f e a r o f i t b e i n g u n t r u e , b u t f r o m h i s use o f t h e above p h r a s e s i t seems c l e a r t h a t t h e b e l i e v e r } r i e l d s t o t h e f e a r o f what m i g h t happen i f he s h o u l d d i s b e l i e v e . T h i s n o t o n l y r e m i n d s us o f P a s c a l , i t - s o u n d s e x a c t l y l i k e h i m . James seems t o be s a y i n g t h a t i t i s b e t t e r t o b e -l i e v e b e c a u s e l ) i f y o u do so and a r e w r o n g , t h e n y o u have made an e r r o r b u t have r e a l l y l o s t n o t h i n g ; 2) i f y o u do ' n o t b e l i e v e , t h e n y o u have t a k e n y o u r l i f e i n y o u r h a n d s , y o u have a c t e d a t y o u r p e r i l , and y o u have f o r f e i t e d y o u r s o l e change o f g e t t i n g on t h e w i n n i n g s i d e . S i n c e t h e e v i d e n c e i s as y e t i n s u f f i c i e n t , James seems t o s a y , i t i s s a f e r t o b e l i e v e t h a n t o d i s b e l i e v e . The b e l i e v e r s a t l e a s t have a l i b chance t o get on the winning s i d e , the d i s b e l i e v e r s may s u f f e r f o r e v e r . As James says about P a s c a l (p.6), \" I f we were ourselves i n the place of the Deity, we should probably take p a r t i c u l a r pleasure i n c u t t i n g o f f b e l i e v e r s of t h i s p a t t e r n from t h e i r i n f i n i t e reward\". \"Fear of l i f e i n one form or the other i s the great t h i n g to e x o r c i s e ; but i t i s n ' t reason that w i l l ever do i t . Impulse without reason i s enough, and reason without impulse i s a poor makeshift.\" W i l l i a m James, i n a l e t t e r to B. P. Blood (1896) \"No man i s ever l i b e r a t e d from fe a r who dare not see h i s place i n the world as i t i s . \" Bertrand R u s s e l l , S c e p t i c a l Essays \"To endure u n c e r t a i n t y i s d i f f i c u l t , but so are most of the other v i r t u e s . \" Bertrand R u s s e l l , Unpopular Essays Is b e l i e f so personal t h a t we r i s k only ourselves i n b e l i e v i n g something? I f we r e a l l y b e l i e v e d that we had gotten on the \"winning s i d e \" , would we not t r y to persuade our loved ones to do the same? Would we not warn others of t h e i r \" p e r i l \" and encourage them to b e l i e v e as we do i n or-der to save them? Surely we would. But of course we must r e a l i z e that i n encouraging t h i s b e l i e f we could be encouraging people to b e l i e v e erroneously. As f a r as the b e l i e f i t s e l f i s concerned, James seems to t h i n k that there i s as much chance that i t i s f a l s e as there i s that i t i s t r u e . In view of t h i s , we are t a k i n g a 50-50 chance that we are en-couraging people to make an e r r o r . As C l i f f o r d argued (p.l69) \"No one man's b e l i e f i s i n any case a p r i v a t e matter which concerns himself alone.\" To b e l i e v e something puts us i n the frame of mind to assent to others a s s o c i a t e d with i t , or l i k e i t , and of course s i g -n i f i c a n t b e l i e f s a f f e c t our actions d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y . Our a c t i o n more often than not a f f e c t s other people, par-t i c u l a r l y those near and dear to us. We set an example f o r our c h i l d r e n and to b e l i e v e and act i n c e r t a i n ways i s to i n f l u e n c e them f o r b e t t e r or worse. I f we make ourselves credulous by b e l i e v i n g and a c t i n g through f e a r , we encourage the same t h i n g i n others. A general p o l i c y of such b e l i e f and a c t i o n could e a s i l y l e a d , as C l i f f o r d warns us, back to savagery i n which, as James says, (1890, p.319) \"The p r i m i -t i v e impulse i s to a f f i r m immediately the r e a l i t y of a l l that i s conceived.\" C l i f f o r d says that the road from c r e d u l i t y to dishonesty i s w e l l paved. To lose the h a b i t of doubting and t e s t i n g t h i n g s i s to l o s e respect f o r t r u t h i n one's own mind. To l o s e respect f o r t r u t h i n one's own mind e a s i l y leads to l o s s of respect f o r i t i n the minds of others. I f _I am c a r e l e s s about what I b e l i e v e then why should others bother to t e l l me the t r u t h , i f i t should be to t h e i r advantage not to do s o l In other xrords^the r i s k one takes i n b e l i e v i n g something i s not a l t o g e t h e r personal. Our b e l i e f s i n f l u e n c e our d e s i r e s , i n t e n t i o n s and a c t i o n s , hence are l e s s personal 113 t h a n t h e y a r e p u b l i c . Though we do n o t h o l d p e o p l e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r what t h e y b e l i e v e we do t r y t o a l t e r t h e i r b e l i e f s i f t h e s e have l e d , o r may l e a d , t o h a r m f u l a c t i o n s . The r i g h t . t o b e l i e v e may be a p r e c i o u s one b u t i t i s n o t l i c e n c e t o b e l i e v e . T h i s w i l l l e a d o n l y t o c r e d u l i t y , d i s h o n e s t y and p e r h a p s even s a v a g e r y . I t i s a l i b e r t y w h i c h i r r e s p o n s i b l e abuse can l e a d t o i r r e s p o n s i b l e a c t i o n . As R u s s e l l s a y s ( p .95) \" C o m p l e t e b e -l i e f , i f t h e i s s u e i s s u f f i c i e n t l y momentous, w i l l j u s t i f y p e r s e c u t i o n . \" As James h i m s e l f s a y s i n r e g a r d t o t h e I n q u i -s i t i o n ( p p . 1 6 - 1 7 ) , c e r t a i n t y s h o u l d be d i s c o u r a g e d i f i t l e a d s t o i n j u s t i c e s . We have s e e n t o what l i m i t s men w i l l go when t h e y a r e c o n v i n c e d t h a t a l l n o n b e l i e v e r s a r e f o r -f e i t i n g t h e i r s o l e chance o f g e t t i n g on the w i n n i n g s i d e . As we s a i d b e f o r e , i t i s James who seems t o be m o t i v a t e d by f e a r . He s a y s (1931, p .228) t h i s i n r e g a r d t o our m e t a -p h y s i c a l and r e l i g i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e s : \"We have b u t one l i f e \u2022 i n w h i c h t o t a k e up o u r a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e m , no i n s u r a n c e company i s t h e r e t o c o v e r u s , and i f we a r e w r o n g , o u r e r r o r , t h o u g h i t be n o t as g r e a t as t h e o l d h e l l - f i r e t h e o l o g y p r e t e n d e d , may y e t be momentous .\" But i t i s n o t j u s t f e a r o f what may o c c u r i n t h e n e x t l i f e t h a t w o r r i e s J a m e s . There i s t h e . f e a r t o expose t h e b e l i e f t o any s o r t o f t e s t j u s t i n c a s e i t may be p r o v e d f a u l t y . One g r a s p s a t an i n v i s i b l e s t r a w . ( T h e r e i s n o t h i n g f o r us t o squeeze and t h e n r e l e a s e t o show t h a t t h e \" r e l i g i o u s s u n d a e \" o r soda i s an empty o n e . ) As A . K . R o g e r s says ( p . 4 0 1 ) , \" b e l i e f s i n f l u e n c e d by f e e l i n g o r s t r o n g d e s i r e h a v e , where I t i s p o s s i b l e t o v e r i f y t h e m , so o f t e n been p r o v e d t o be i n the w r o n g ; a n d . . . . t h e r e i s t h e t e n d e n c y w h i c h e m o t i o n shows t o a t t a c h i t s e l f t o m a t t e r s where p r o o f and d i s p r o o f a r e a l i k e i m p o s s i b l e o r v e r y d i f f i c u l t , and so t o evade t h e t e s t s t h a t e l sewhere , have been f o u n d u s e f u l i n k e e p i n g b e l i e f w i t h i n s a f e b o u n d s . One f e e l s s a f e w i t h a r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f \u2014 b o t h i n t h e s e n s e t h a t one f e e l s s a v e d f r o m t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f e t e r n a l s u f f e r i n and t h a t o n e ' s b e l i e f i s s a f e f r o m d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n o r d i s -p r o o f b e c a u s e i t i s n o t s u s c e p t i b l e o f e m p i r i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n I t i s n o t a case o f \" d u p e r y t h r o u g h hope\" t h a t r e l i g i o n be t r u e o r \" d u p e r y t h r o u g h - f e a r \" t h a t i t i s f a l s e , as James s a y s . I t i s a case o f 1) b e l i e v i n g t h r o u g h f e a r f o r o n e ' s p e r s o n a l s a f e t y and w i t h t h e s e c u r i t y t h a t o n e ' s b e l i e f i s s a f e f r o m d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n p_r 2) s u s p e n d i n g judgement upon o r d e n y i n g t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s w i t h t h e c o u r a g e r e q u i r e d t o c h a l l e n g e t h e m a j o r i t y (who dp_ b e l i e v e ) and t o f a c e t h e p r o s p e c t o f e t e r n a l p u n i s h m e n t f o r b e l i e v i n g upon t h e e v i -d e n c e . T h e r e i s more c o u r a g e r e q u i r e d , i t seems t o me, t o f a c e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f e t e r n a l p u n i s h m e n t t h a n t o s u b m i t t o o n e ' s f e a r s o f i t . As D . S. M i l l e r s a y s ( p . 1 8 5 ) , \" i n t h e e x a c t measure i n w h i c h f a i t h i s p r e s e n t , c o u r a g e i s n o f ' n e e d -e d . \" He who has f a i t h b e l i e v e s what he wants t o b e l i e v e , he who has c o u r a g e \u2022 b e l i e v e s d e s p i t e what he may want t o b e -l i e v e . We have a r g u e d t h a t i t i s more c o u r a g e o u s t o s u s p e n d judgement u p o n , o r t o d e n y , t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s t h a n t o b e l i e v e i t t h r o u g h f e a r . We have a l s o a r g u e d t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s n o t m e r e l y a p e r s o n a l m a t t e r . 120 \" I f r e l i g i o n were an a l t o g e t h e r p r i v a t e a f f a i r , t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e r e l a t i o n o f t h e c h u r c h t o t h e s e c u l a r a u t h o r -i t i e s w o u l d be c o m p a r a t i v e l y s i m p l e . The f a c t t h a t i t em-b r a c e s a m o r a l c r e e d , and t h a t i t i s even t o d a y a f t e r t h e n o t a b l e d e c l i n e o f i t s i n f l u e n c e , a m a j o r i n s t r u m e n t o f m o r a l e d u c a t i o n , g i v e s i t an I m p o r t a n t r o l e i n p u b l i c , a f f a i r s . \" P e r r y ( 1 9 5 4 , p . 4 7 4 ) M o s t r e l i g i o n i s o r g a n i z e d r e l i g i o n a n d , as s u c h , i t may make p r o n o u n c e m e n t s on b i r t h c o n t r o l , mercy k i l l i n g , a b o r t i o n and r a c i a l p r e j u d i c e \u2014 o r i t may f a i l t o make p r o -nouncements on t h e s e . R e l i g i o n i s n o t j u s t a p e r s o n a l a f f a i r - - i t can and does a t t e m p t t o i n f l u e n c e p u b l i c o p i n i o n on i m p o r t a n t m a t t e r s . A d h e r e n c e t o i t can and does a f f e c t o n e ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l and p h y s i c a l c o n d u c t \u2014 w h i c h i n t u r n a f f e c t s t h a t o f o t h e r s . T-he r i s k t a k e n i s n o t m e r e l y p e r s o n a l . We owe i t n o t o n l y t o o u r s e l v e s but a l s o t o o t h e r s t o t r e a t b e l i e f w i t h r e s p e c t and n o t embrace i t upon e v e r y f l i r t a t i o n . I n a f o o t n o t e , > ( p . 2 9 ) , James s a y s t h a t \"The w h o l e d e -f e n c e o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h h i n g e s upon a c t i o n . \" On t h e n e x t p a g e , he adds i n t h e f o o t n o t e t h a t \" t h e r e l i g i o u s h y p o t h e s i s g i v e s t o t h e w o r l d a n e x p r e s s i o n w h i c h s p e c i f i c a l l y d e t e r -mines o u r r e a c t i o n s , and makes them i n a l a r g e p a r t u n l i k e what t h e y m i g h t be on a p u r e l y n a t u r a l i s t i c scheme o f b e l i e f . \" H e r e a g a i n James seems t o o p e r a t e i n r e v e r s e . We u s u a l l y d e f e n d an a c t i o n by a d d u c i n g arguments ( o r b e l i e f s ) o r r e a s o n s f o r d o i n g i t . That i s , we j u s t i f y a c t i o n by o u r 1 2 1 b e l i e f s . B u t James s a y s t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s j u s t i f i e d by t h e a c t i o n s ( o r r e a c t i o n s ) w h i c h f o l l o w f r o m i t . U s u a l l y a b e l i e f i s j u s t i f i e d by a p p e a l t o e v i d e n c e . The TRUTH o f what i s b e l i e v e d i s shown by p r o o f , arguments o r e v i d e n c e . To a t t e m p t t o d e f e n d a b e l i e f by a p p e a l t o a c t i o n s o r r e a c -t i o n s w h i c h f o l l o w f r o m h o l d i n g i t , i s t o a t t e m p t t o show t h e U T I L I T Y o f t h a t b e l i e f , n o t t h e t r u t h o f what i s b e l i e v e d . The v a l u e o r u s e o f what i s b e l i e v e d i s shown by how i t a f f e c t s us and o u r a c t i o n s \u2014 n o t t h e t r u t h o f what i s b e l i e v e d i n . One can a c t e i t h e r on a f a l s e h o o d o r a t r u t h ; i t i s b e l i e v i n g i t (deeming i t t r u e ) w h i c h e n a b l e s one t o a c t i n a c e r t a i n way. E v e n i f t h e a c t i o n s o r r e a c t i o n s c o u l d be e f f e c t e d i n no o t h e r way t h a n by b e l i e v i n g A , t h i s does n o t mean t h a t A i s t r u e o n l y t h a t i t i s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e s e a c t i o n s o r r e a c t i o n s . .The o n l y way we c a n show t h a t a b e l i e f i s o f what i s t r u e , i s t o adduce p r o o f , e v i d e n c e o r arguments \u2014 t h e r e I S no o t h e r way ( i f ' b e l i e f ' and ' t r u e ' a r e t o r e t a i n any o f t h e i r meaning ) . We have a l r e a d y s e e n t h a t m o r a l d e c i s i o n s o r a c t i o n s a r e n o t l o g i c a l l y l i n k e d t o r e l i g i o n . P e o p l e can and do d e c i d e (and a c t ) on m o r a l i s s u e s w i t h o u t b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a God. James h i m s e l f s a y s t h a t t o f o l l o w t h e w i l l of God w o u l d be d i f f i c u l t , i f n o t i m p o s s i b l e , s i n c e i t i s a ' v a g u e and u n a s c e r t a i n a b l e ' c r i t e r i o n o f goodness ( p . 2 0 1 ) . James does n o t e l a b o r a t e on t h i s s t a t e m e n t a b o u t a c t i o n s and r e -a c t i o n s b u t we s u s p e c t t h a t he has i n mind t h e i n c r e a s e i n z e s t , p e a c e , s e c u r i t y and a f f e c t i o n s w h i c h r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s supposed t o e f f e c t . M a c i n t y r e s u g g e s t s ( p . 2 1 0 ) t h a t \"To b e l i e v e i s t o b e -have d i f f e r e n t l y b e c a u s e i t i s t o see t h e w h o l e o f o n e ' s l i f e i n a new and d i f f e r e n t l i g h t . . . . I t i s t o l i v e by a m o r a l i t y , n o t o f r u l e s , b u t o f e x a m p l e s . \" When one a d o p t s a r e l i g i o n , one u s u a l l y a d o p t s a w h o l e s e t o f b e l i e f s , n o t j u s t b e l i e f i n G o d . One may f i n d t h e new d e s i r e t o l i v e as J e s u s d i d o r as one o f t h e s a i n t s d i d , e t c . I t h i n k t h a t t h i s i s p r o b a b l y what James has i n m i n d when he t a l k s a b o u t a c t i o n s and r e -a c t i o n s b e i n g d i f f e r e n t w i t h r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f . But even i f we g r a n t t h a t some p e o p l e need r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i n o r d e r t o behave m o r a l l y - - t o a i m h i g h e r \u2014 t h i s s t i l l does n o t mean t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s J U S T I F I E D - - o n l y t h a t i t i s u s e f u l i n c e r t a i n c a s e s . And even i f i t is_ u s e f u l i n c e r t a i n c a s e s , i t may be u s e l e s s i n most c a s e s , o r even h a r m f u l ( t o o n e s e l f OR o t h e r s ) . I t may have been a d i s t r a c t i o n f r o m our r e a l p r o b l e m s . I t may have r e t a r d e d s c i e n t i f i c o r m o r a l p r o g r e s s . I t may be t h a t t h e t i m e , e f f o r t and money s p e n t i n t h e name o f r e l i g i o n w o u l d h a v e been more w i s e l y s p e n t a i d i n g ' u n d e r -d e v e l o p e d ' n a t i o n s , e t c . That i s , what l i t t l e good t h e b e -l i e f may have done m i g h t be g r e a t l y o v e r w e i g h e d by t h e e v i l i t p r o d u c e s \u2014 hence i t may be r e j e c t e d on g r o u n d s o f i t s d i s u t i l i t y . As we s a i d e a r l i e r ( p p . 1 9 - 2 0 ) , when a p e r s o n cannot p o s s i b l y a c t on t h e b e l i e f , i t does n o t m a t t e r so much what he b e l i e v e s . O t h e r w i s e i t d o e s . We a r g u e d t h a t a c t i o n s b a s e d on m i s c o n c e p t i o n s a r e more l i k e l y t o t h w a r t us t h a n t o e n a b l e us t o a c h i e v e o u r g o a l s . B e l i e f s w h i c h r e s u l t i n c e r -t a i n r e a c t i o n s , e m o t i o n a l s t a t e s e t c . may n o t be. s u s c e p t i b l e of e m p i r i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n . We w i l l c a l l these, with W. R. Wells (pp.654-655), 'metaphysical b e l i e f s ' . Wells d i s t i n g u i s h e s between s c i e n t i f i c b e l i e f s which, i f t r u e , w i l l make an o b j e c t i v e d i f f e r e n c e and metaphysical b e l i e f s where (p.655) \"the e f f e c t i s of a s u b j e c t i v e s o r t , and i s independent of the o b j e c t i v e t r u t h . \" S c i e n t i f i c be-l i e f s must be of what i s true i f they are t o be u s e f u l , he says,' but metaphysical b e l i e f s can be u s e f u l even when f a l s e ( s u b j e c t i v e l y u s e f u l or s a t i s f y i n g ) . Let us examine the view that r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f , whether t r u e or not, possesses s u b j e c t i v e value. Just what sort of e f f e c t does i t have? James says ( 1 9 2 9 , p.498) that \"there i s a c e r t a i n u n i -form d e l i v e r a n c e i n which r e l i g i o n s a l l appear to meet. ... 1 . the uneasiness...that there i s something wrong about us as we n a t u r a l l y stand. 2 . The s o l u t i o n i s a sense that we  are saved.-from the wrongness by making proper connection with the highest powers.\" Much i s made, i n the C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n at any r a t e , of the need t o 'save one's s o u l ' . I t i s d i f -f i c u l t , I f i n d , to determine e x a c t l y what we need to be saved FROM and what we are to be saved FOR. I t may be s a i d t h a t we r e q u i r e s a l v a t i o n from 'sin'.. But then we are t o l d t h a t t h i s s i n i s i n h e r i t e d from people l i v i n g c enturies ago. who passed i t on from generation t o generation. We may regard t h i s view as both l u d i c r o u s and unhealthy. Then we may be t o l d that we need to be saved f o r e t e r n a l l i f e i n heaven. But, as Perry says ( 1 9 5 4 , p.4 7 6 - 4 7 7 ) \"the pleasures of heaven are so e x a l t e d above the pleasures of earth as t o be meaning-l e s s . ...There are mansions i n heaven, but what does one do t h e r e ? . . . I n s h o r t , a heaven i n h e a v e n has l e s s t o o f f e r t h a n a h e a v e n on e a r t h . \" I t i s n o t so e a s y , t h e r e f o r e , t o see what t h i s ' w r o n g n e s s ' i s and how we a r e ' s a v e d ' f r o m i t . The p r o m i s e o f h e a v e n c o u l d c r e a t e more p r o b l e m s t h a n i t s o l v e s . As P e r r y s a y s (1954, p .470) , \" a way o f s a l v a t i o n a d o p t e d as a r e l i e f f r o m w o r l d l y a n x i e t i e s may b e g e t a n o t h e r and more i n t e n s e a n x i e t y , n a m e l y , a n x i e t y c o n c e r n i n g t h e s a l -v a t i o n o f o n e ' s s o u l . \" One may be b e t t e r o f f w o r r y i n g a b o u t t h e h e l l on t h i s e a r t h t h a n an abode o f e t e r n a l p u n i s h m e n t . As P e r r y s a y s (1954, p .475) , \" R e l i g i o n may be t h e p r o j e c t i o n o f a m o r b i d c o n s c i e n c e w h i c h t o r t u r e s man w i t h a sense o f g u i l t and i m p e n d i n g d o o m . \" L e t us suppose t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s b e l i e v e r t h i n k s t h a t w i t h God, a l l t h i n g s a r e p o s s i b l e - - a l l m a n ' s i d e a l s w i l l be r e a l i z e d \u2014 a l l o u r e f f o r t s a r e n o t i n Vain. Says P e r r y (1954, p .479), \" a s s u m i n g t h a t G o d ' s power g u a r a n t e e s t h e s u c c e s s f u l p u r s u i t o f m a n ' s i d e a l s , i t may be a r g u e d t h a t i t i s b e t t e r f o r man n o t t o know i t , f o r he may t h e n be d i s p o s e d t o r e l a x h i s e f f o r t s . \" We must n o t assume t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f has o n l y p o s i t i v e s u b j e c t i v e v a l u e . I t may a f f e c t men i n numerous w a y s . I n many c a s e s t h e i n d i v i d u a l m i g h t be h e a l t h i e r and h a p p i e r n o t b e l i e v i n g ^ t h a n he i s b e l i e v i n g . B e l i e f i n God i s no g u a r a n t e e o f a s u c c e s s f u l , happy and m o r a l l i f e . One who l e a d s s u c h a l i f e t h r o u g h what he c l a i m s i s h i s r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f may w e l l have done b e t t e r w i t h o u t i t . We see t h a t i t i s n o t e a s y t o say w h e t h e r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s u s e f u l o r n o t and even more d i f f i c u l t t o s a y w h e t h e r i t w i l l h e l p o r harm t h e i n d i v i d u a l i n t h e l o n g r u n , a s s u m i n g 1^ 5 t h a t i t does a f f e c t h i s r e a c t i o n s and a c t i o n s . I t may be more d i f f i c u l t t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a b e l i e f i s u s e f u l (and what d i r e c t i o n t h i s use w i l l t a k e ) , t h e n i t w o u l d be t o d e -t e r m i n e i f t h e b e l i e f i s o f what i s t r u e . (See R u s s e l l , p.139) Even were we s u r e t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s were u s u a l l y h e l p e d r a t h e r t h a n harmed by t h e i r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f , t h i s w o u l d mean o n l y t h a t i t was u s e f u l on t h e l e v e l o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l . Whether i t i s u s e f u l on a s o c i a l l e v e l c o u l d be a n o t h e r s t o r y . I t c o u l d be s a i d t h a t r e l i g i o n e n c o u r a g e s ' t o g e t h e r n e s s ' o f p e o p l e . But t h i s t u r n s o u t t o be a t o g e t h e r n e s s o f s e p a r a t e g r o u p s , n o t o f a l l p e o p l e , ( o r even a l l r e l i g i o u s p e o p l e ) . I t c o u l d be s a i d t h a t r e l i g i o n has g e n e r a l l y c a u s e d d i s s e n s i o n among v a r i o \\ i s g r o u p s \u2014 a war o f each r e l i g i o n a g a i n s t a l l o t h e r r e l i g i o n s and o f a l l r e l i g i o n s a g a i n s t t h e n o n r e l i g i o u s . I t may be t h a t r e l i g i o n p r o d u c e s more p r e j u d i c e among p e o p l e t h a n i t d i s s o l v e s . I t may be s a i d t h a t r e l i g i o n r e t a r d e d s c i e n t i f i c p r o g r e s s f o r many y e a r s . I am n o t t r y i n g t o show t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f i s more h a r m f u l t h a n any o t h e r . I am m e r e l y t r y i n g t o show t h a t t h e r e i s a g r e a t d e a l o f g r o u n d c o v e r e d by s u c h words as ' a c t i o n ' and ' r e a c t i o n s ' , as u s e d by J a m e s . I t c a n n o t be a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t argument t h a t a l l o r most a c t i o n s (and r e a c t i o n s ) due t o r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f a r e good o n e s . S i n c e James does n o t o f f e r any a r g u m e n t s , n o r even c l a r i f y what he means by ' a c t i o n ' and ' r e a c t i o n s ' , and s i n c e I have shown t h a t many o f t h e e f f e c t s o f r e l i g i o u s b e -l i e f may n o t be g o o d , I t h i n k we can r e j e c t t h e d e f e n c e o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h t h a t James s a y s h i n g e s upon a c t i o n . T h r o u g h o u t The W i l l t o B e l i e v e and o t h e r s o f James ' 126 w o r k s , as we have s e e n , he seems t o t h i n k t h a t u n l e s s p e o p l e b e l i e v e , t h e y a r e p o w e r l e s s \"to a c t . He seems t o t h i n k t h a t a c t i o n i s n o t p o s s i b l e when one i s i n doubt o r i s n o t c e r t a i n o f s u c c e s s . I t h i n k t h a t James i s wrong h e r e . \" I t i s a w i d e s p r e a d f a l l a c y t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e f i r m f a i t h t h a t we p o s s e s s t h e t r u t h must be weak i n d e c i s i o n . I t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e t o a c t w i t h v i g o r , r e a l i z i n g t h a t one m i g h t be w r o n g . \" (Kaufmann, p . 1 1 7 ) P e o p l e can and do a c t d e c i s i v e l y , e v e n t h o u g h t h e y have a s t r o n g s u s p i c i o n t h a t t h e y a r e m i s -t a k e n . As L a i r d says ( p . 1 5 2 ) , \" d o u b t and i n q u i r y may be v e r y l i v e t h i n g s i n d e e d . . . . T h e y may a l s o be e m o t i o n a l l y most d i s t u r b i n g . I n s h o r t , t h e o p p o s i t e o f b e l i e f , r e g a r d e d as t h e ' l i v e ' p a r t o f u s , i s i n d i f f e r e n c e and n o t d o u b t . \" I n o t h e r w o r d s , t o c a r e a b o u t t h e outcome i s t h e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g . One need n o t b e l i e v e t h a t one w i l l s u c c e e d , one need o n l y be c o n c e r n e d t h a t one w i l l . As we have s a i d b e f o r e , b e l i e f t h a t one w i l l s u c c e e d can e a s i l y l e a d t o o v e r c o n f i d e n c e and t h u s f a i l u r e . S u c c e s s f u l a c t i o n i s b a s e d on d e s i r e and e f f o r t , n o t n e c e s s a r i l y on b e l i e f . I f James s e e s v a l u e i n r e a c t i n g o r a c t i n g i n c e r t a i n w a y s , t h e n why s h o u l d t h e r e be a need f o r u n s u p p o r t e d b e l i e f s t o e f f e c t them? I f t h e r e a c t i o n s and a c t i o n s a r e t r u l y v a l u a b l e t h e n p e o p l e w i l l d e s i r e them i n t h e i r own r i g h t and w i l l need no ' m e t a p h y s i c a l b e l i e f s ' t o m o t i v a t e t h e m . F o r my own p a r t , I do n o t see how r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f h e l p s us s o l v e i m p o r t a n t m o r a l p r o b l e m s . C a t h o l i c s a r e t o l d t h a t a r t i f i c i a l b i r t h c o n t r o l i s wrong and n o n - C a t h o l i c C h r i s t i a n s t h a t i t i s not w r o n g . How do we d e c i d e t h i s i s s u e ? 127 Could they both be r i g h t ? Which one of t h e i r a u t h o r i t i e s c a r r i e s more weight? Such problems cannot be solved by appeals to any a u t h o r i t y . As Perry (1954, p.4^8) puts i t , \"There are two ways i n which an a u t h o r i t y can be j u s t i f i e d ; e i t h e r by t r u s t , which i s equivalent to accepting i t without a u t h o r i t y ; or by proving i t t rustworthy. An a u t h o r i t y i s proved trustworthy, when there i s reason to b e l i e v e that i t s utterances are t r u e ; but then the a u t h o r i t y i s t e s t e d by the dogma, and not the dogma by the a u t h o r i t y , and the dogma:, having been proved t r u e , i s no longer a dogma.\" P l a t o put i t more s u c c i n c t l y i n h i s dialogue Euthyph.ro. To paraphrase h i s question: \"Are the laws j u s t because the gods approve them, or do the gods approve them because they are j u s t ? \" I t turns out that we do not need the gods to support m o r a l i t y because the argument from a u t h o r i t y i s a f a l l a c y . I f m o r a l i t y i s i d e n t i -f i e d w i t h the w i l l of God, then that w i l l must not be \"vague and u n a s c e r t a i n a b l e \" . I f the standard of m o r a l i t y i s indepen-dent of God or His w i l l , then we do not need Him to show us the way. In e i t h e r case, whether God's w i l l i s made the standard of m o r a l i t y or whether He i s supposed only to r e -cognize m o r a l i t y when Me sees i t , man himself must decide 'which' God to f o l l o w or which system of e t h i c s i s the best one. In the l a s t a n a l y s i s , man i s l e f t w i t h only h i s con-science to guide him. But at l e a s t i t i s not u s u a l l y \"vague and unascertainable\" -- when i t i s heard, i t i s heard loud and c l e a r . James concludes h i s essay by quoting F i t z James Stephen 128 thus (p.31): \"What must we do? 'Be strong and of good cour-age'. Act f o r the best, hope f o r the best, and take what comes... I f death ends a l l , we cannot meet death b e t t e r . \" I have.argued that the course of courage i s to face r e a l i t y r a t h e r than pretend i t i s something other than i t i s , to r e a l i z e that we have l i m i t a t i o n s and. that our b e l i e f and w i l l and a c t i o n s can i n f l u e n c e only a l i m i t e d sphere of t h i n g s , to suspend judgement upon or f l a t l y deny any 'hypothesis' which seems more c a l c u l a t e d to s a t i s f y our needs than to cor-respond to r e a l i t y . James seems at times to have swallowed the h e l l - f i r e theology, despite the f a c t t h a t he i m p l i e s d i s b e l i e f . I have argued th a t i t takes more courage to be-l i e v e what seems true but may d i s a p p o i n t , than to b e l i e v e what seems f a l s e yet s a t i s f i e s . I t i s not courage but naivete t o suggest that we could create God. I am one of those who b e l i e v e , w i t h Wells (p.6 5 8 ) , that \"The t r u t h of a b e l i e f i n God i s t e s t e d by seeking the object denoted by the word 'God' \". 3fn a l e t t e r to H. K. K a l l e n (Perry: 1948, p.249), James wrote th a t \"In any case the v e r i f i c a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s w i l l to b e l i e v e may f i r s t occur long a f t e r he i s dead \u2014 yet f o r him i t may be the best p o l i c y \" . I do not t h i n k that we can count on the p o s s i b i l i t y of v e r i f i c a t i o n a f t e r death to j u s t i f y b e l i e v i n g something while we are a l i v e . I f v e r i -f i c a t i o n were to occur long a f t e r death, then we would be j u s t i f i e d i n b e l i e v i n g ( i . e . a f t e r death). At any r a t e , v e r i f i c a t i o n , would only be p o s s i b l e a f t e r death i f there were an a f t e r - l i f e , and as we have st a t e d , t h i s i s the p o i n t at 129 i s s u e , where the r e l i g i o u s 'hypothesis-' i s concerned. Any b e l i e f might be regarded as j u s t i f i a b l e i f v e r i f i c a t i o n were p o s s i b l e a f t e r death. This would open the floodgates to s u p e r s t i t i o n and propaganda of the most heinous s o r t . The only sort of v e r i f i c a t i o n which means anything to l i v i n g men i s the s o r t which they could see. Any other s o r t of v e r i -f i c a t i o n i s not v e r i f i c a t i o n but the mere hope of v e r i f i c a t i o n . This i s not enough to j u s t i f y b e l i e f . To b e l i e v e ( i . e . to deem true) on the mere chance th a t one may be r i g h t would be to pervert b e l i e f and render the words 'true' and ' f a l s e ' meaningless. In The V a r i e t i e s of R e l i g i o u s Experience, James says that \"God i s r e a l since he produces r e a l e f f e c t s \" . I t h i n k that James r e a l l y means here that b e l i e f i n God produces r e a l e f f e c t s . B e l i e f i n many things produces r e a l e f f e c t s --e.g. the d e v i l , supremacy of the white race, e t c . \u2014 but they are no more r e a l or t r u e f o r t h i s . We must d r i v e a wedge between what i s b e l i e v e d and what a c t u a l l y e x i s t s  a d i s t i n c t i o n James a l l too often ignores. I t i s a d i s t i n c -t i o n which he was l o a t h to acknowledge. In the P r i n c i p l e s  of Psychology (p.294) James says \" i n the s t r i c t and u l t i m a t e sense of the word existence, everything which can be thought of at a l l e x i s t s as some so r t of object, whether myt h i c a l o b j e c t , i n d i v i d u a l t h i n k e r ' s o b j e c t , or object i n outer space and f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e at l a r g e . E r r o r s , f i c t i o n s , t r i b a l be-l i e f s , are parts of the whole great Universe which God has made, and He must have meant a l l these things to be i n i t , each i n i t s r e s p e c t i v e place.\" 1 3 0 To v a r y t h e q u o t a t i o n f r o m R u s s e l l a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s p a p e r , \" I t i s o n l y when p e o p l e have g i v e n up t h e hope o f p r o v i n g t h a t an o b j e c t e x i s t s i n a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d s e n s e t h a t t h e y s e t t o work t o p r o v e t h a t i t \" e x i s t s \" i n some new-f a n g l e d s e n s e \" . Even i f we use words so c a r e l e s s l y as t o say t h a t e v e r y t h i n g e x i s t s ( i n some sense\"), we w o u l d s t i l l say t h a t t h e y ' e x i s t 1 i n v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t ways-. The c a s h i e r ' s cheque f o r a m i l l i o n d o l l a r s w r i t t e n out t o me, w h i c h I now e n v i s a g e , e x i s t s i n a v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t way f r o m t h e few d o l l a r s i n my w a l l e t . We u s u a l l y make the d i s t i n c t i o n by s a y i n g t h a t my few d o l l a r s r e a l l y e x i s t s and t h e cheque :. does n o t r e a l l y e x i s t . P e o p l e who seek God w i l l n e v e r be s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e y have f o u n d o n l y t h e i d e a ( o r ' m y t h i c a l r o b j e c t ' o r j. i n d i v i d u a l t h i n k e r ' s o b j e c t ' ) o f God - - t h e y w i l l n e v e r f e e l s e c u r i t y , peace and z e s t f r o m b e l i e f i n what t h e y know i s b u t an i d e a or c o n c e p t . I f t h e r e i s no o b j e c t d e n o t e d by t h e word ' G o d ' , t h e n t h e r e i_s no G o d . And i f James r e a l l y b e l i e v e d t h a t God must have meant e v e r y e r r o r t o e x i s t , t h e n f o r James, God must have meant t h a t t h e r e be a g n o s t i c s , a t h e i s t s a n d s c e p t i c s . But I do n o t t h i n k t h a t James a l w a y s knew what he b e l i e v e d . He seems a t t i m e s t o be a l m o s t s c e p t i c a l h i m s e l f . He s a y s ( 1 9 2 9 , p p . 4 3 5 - 6 ) t h a t , \" I f . . . w e a p p l y t h e p r i n c i p l e o f p r a g m a t i s m t o G o d ' s m e t a p h y s i c a l a t t r i b u t e s . . . I t h i n k t h a t , even were we f o r c e d by c o e r c i v e l o g i c t o b e l i e v e them, we s t i l l s h o u l d h a v e t o c o n f e s s them t o be d e s t i t u t e o f a l l i n t e l l i g i b l e s i g n i f i c a n c e . \" I t i s p o s s i b l e , o f c o u r s e , f o r a man t o a l t e r h i s v i e w s d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e , b u t I do n o t 131 t h i n k t h a t James changed h i s mind as o f t e n as h i s w r i t i n g s seem t o s u g g e s t . I f a man r a d i c a l l y a l t e r s h i s v i e w s and i s aware o f t h i s , he u s u a l l y e x p l a i n s why t h i s happened when he expounds h i s new v i e w s . I have o f t e n q u o t e d James f r o m v a r i o u s o f h i s w o r k s t o show t h a t he h e l d i n c o m p a t i b l e v i e w s . I t h i n k t h a t t h i s was a c a s e o f one n o t b e i n g s u r e what he b e -l i e v e d r a t h e r t h a n one who a l t e r s h i s v i e w s w i t h o u t e x p l a n a -t i o n . I make t h i s judgement on t h e b a s i s o f a g e n e r a l s u r -v e y o f h i s w r i t i n g s and n o t any s p e c i f i c w o r k . I a d m i t t h a t i t i s no more t h a n s p e c u l a t i o n . But I t h i n k t h a t t h i s s p e c -u l a t i o n i s j u s t i f i e d b e c a u s e James was so o f t e n vague about w h e t h e r o r n o t he b e l i e v e d s o m e t h i n g ( w h i c h I c a n o n l y i n t e r -p r e t as a s i g n t h a t he d i d n o t r e a l l y know what i t was he b e l i e v e d ) . F o r e x a m p l e , P e r r y s a y s ( 1 9 4 8 , p . 3 5 6 ) t h a t \"as <. James grew o l d e r he came t o b e l i e v e i n i m m o r t a l i t y . I n 1904 he had a c q u i r e d a f e e l i n g o f i t s ' p r o b a b i l i t y ' . A l t h o u g h he d i d n o t f e e l a ' r a t i o n a l n e e d ' o f i t , he f e l t a g r o w i n g ' p r a c t i c a l n e e d ' . \" I c a n n o t t e l l f r o m t h i s w h e t h e r i n 1 9 0 4 James b e l i e v e d i n i m m o r t a l i t y o r m e r e l y f e l t t h e need f o r i t . The l a c k o f a ' r a t i o n a l n e e d ' w o u l d seem t o be l a c k o f r e a s o n s f o r the b e l i e f . P e r h a p s James c o u l d b e l i e v e what he needed w i t h o u t r e a s o n s \u2014 or p e r h a p s he f e l t t h a t need t o b e l i e v e ( i . e . o v e r w h e l m i n g d e s i r e or need t o deem s o m e t h i n g as t r u e , i . e . , have i t be t h e case) was r e a s o n e n o u g h . P e r r y d e s c r i b e s James ( 1 9 4 8 , p . 3 5 9 ) as h a v i n g \" s y m p a t h y w i t h e v e r y p e r s o n a l b e l i e f w h i c h b r o u g h t t o an i n d i v i d u a l t h e c o n s o l a t i o n o r t h e i n c e n t i v e t h a t he n e e d e d \" . I t w o u l d be n i c e i f e v e r y man could , b e l i e v e what c o n s o l e d h i m o r gave 132 him i n c e n t i v e . I do not wish to destroy i n c e n t i v e or under-mine c o n s o l a t i o n . But to make i t a general r u l e that every-one should be f r e e to b e l i e v e what consoles him or\/and gives him i n c e n t i v e , i s to open those f a m i l i a r floodgates and to lo s e completely the meaning of the word ' b e l i e f . I t would open the floodgates because some people take c o n s o l a t i o n i n the f a c t t h a t , e.g. Negroes are i n f e r i o r to them and be-cause people have found i n c e n t i v e i n other b e l i e f s p e r n i -cious to others. Unfortunately, i t seems that some people's c o n s o l a t i o n and i n c e n t i v e are incompatible with that of others. This i s why b e l i e f must be proportioned t o the evidence, not to one's needs. -the end-BIBLIOGRAPHY 133 C l i f f o r d , W . K . F i n d l a y , J . N . G r a n t , C . K . G r i f f i t h s , A . P , Hampshire\" , S . H o b h o u s e , L . T . James, W i l l i a m Kaufmann, W. L a i r d , J . L e c t u r e s and E s s a y s . V o l J I . M a c m i l l a n & C o . ( c h a p t e r : \"The E t h i c s o f B e l i e f \" and \"The E t h i c s o f R e l i g i o n \" ) 1901 V a l u e s and I n t e n t i o n s . George A l l e n & U n w i n L t d . 1961 B e l i e f and A c t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y o f Durham. I 9 6 0 \"On B e l i e f \" . P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y . 1962-63 Thought a n d A c t i o n . C h a t t & Windus L o n d o n , 1959 \" F a i t h and t h e W i l l t o B e l i e v e \" o f t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y . P r o c e e d i n g s 1 9 0 3 - 0 4 The P r i n c i p l e s o f P s y c h o l o g y . V o l . 1 1 . H e n r y H o l t & C o . , N . Y . ' I 8 9 O The W i l l t o B e l i e v e and o t h e r e s s a y s i n p o p u l a r p h i l o s o p h y , and Human I m m o r t a l i t y . Dover P u b l i c a t i o n s I n c . 1956 ( F i r s t p u b l i s h e d New Y o r k , Longmans G r e e n & C o . 1897) The V a r i e t i e s o f R e l i g i o u s E x p e r i e n c e . Modern L i b r a r y . 1929 ( F i r s t p u b l i s h e d New Y o r k , Longmans G r e e n & C o . 1902) S e l e c t e d P a p e r s on P h i l o s o p h y . J . M . Dent & Sons L t d . 1961 ( F i r s t p u b l i s h e d i n t h i s e d i t i o n 1917) Some P r o b l e m s o f P h i l o s o p h y . Longmans G r e e n & C o . 1931 C r i t i q u e o f R e l i g i o n and P h i l o s o p h y . A n c h o r . 1961 K n o w l e d g e , B e l i e f a n d O p i n i o n . The C e n t u r y C o . ' 1930 M e t a p h y s i c a l B e l i e f s . SCM P r e s s L t d . M a c i n t y r e , A . w i t h y * ' 1957 T o u l m i n , S. and H e p b u r n , R. M a c l v e r , A . M . \" K n o w l e d g e \" . P r o c . o f the A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y S u p p l e m e n t a r y V o l u m e . 1958\" 134 Mayo, B. \" B e l i e f and C o n s t r a i n t \" . Proc. of The A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y . 1963-64 M i l l e r , D.S. \"The W i l l to Be l i e v e and the Duty to Doubt\". I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of E t h i c s . V o l . 9. 1898-99 Perry, R.B. The Thought and Character of W i l l i a m James. Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. 1948 Realms of Value. Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press. 1954 P r i c e , H.H. \" B e l i e f and W i l l \" . Proc. of the A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y , Supplementary Volume. 1954 Rogers, A.K. \" B e l i e f and the C r i t e r i o n of Truth\". J o u r n a l of Philosophy, V o l . 13, 1916 R u s s e l l , B. P h i l o s o p h i c a l Essays. Longmans Green & Co. ' 1910 S c h i l l e r , F.C.S. Problems of B e l i e f . B i l l i n g and Sons, L t d . 1924 Toulmin, S. Foresight and Understanding. Indiana U n i v e r s i t y Press. 196l V e t t e r , G.B. Magic and R e l i g i o n . P h i l o s o p h i c a l L i b r a r y . . 1958 Wells , W.R. \"Two Common F a l l a c i e s i n the Logic of Re-l i g i o n \" . J o u r n a l of Philosophy. V o l . 14, 1917 ","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2009\/08\/skos-reference\/skos.html#note","classmap":"oc:AnnotationContainer"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2009\/08\/skos-reference\/skos.html#note","explain":"Simple Knowledge Organisation System; Notes are used to provide information relating to SKOS concepts. There is no restriction on the nature of this information, e.g., it could be plain text, hypertext, or an image; it could be a definition, information about the scope of a concept, editorial information, or any other type of information."}],"Genre":[{"label":"Genre","value":"Thesis\/Dissertation","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/hasType","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"edm:hasType"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/hasType","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; This property relates a resource with the concepts it belongs to in a suitable type system such as MIME or any thesaurus that captures categories of objects in a given field. It does NOT capture aboutness"}],"IsShownAt":[{"label":"DOI","value":"10.14288\/1.0104968","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/isShownAt","classmap":"edm:WebResource","property":"edm:isShownAt"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/isShownAt","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; An unambiguous URL reference to the digital object on the provider\u2019s website in its full information context."}],"Language":[{"label":"Language","value":"eng","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/language","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:language"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/language","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; A language of the resource.; Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as RFC 4646 [RFC4646]."}],"Program":[{"label":"Program (Theses)","value":"Philosophy","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeDiscipline","classmap":"oc:ThesisDescription","property":"oc:degreeDiscipline"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#degreeDiscipline","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Indicates the program for which the degree was granted."}],"Provider":[{"label":"Provider","value":"Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/provider","classmap":"ore:Aggregation","property":"edm:provider"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/provider","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; The name or identifier of the organization who delivers data directly to an aggregation service (e.g. Europeana)"}],"Publisher":[{"label":"Publisher","value":"University of British Columbia","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/publisher","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:publisher"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/publisher","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; An entity responsible for making the resource available.; Examples of a Publisher include a person, an organization, or a service."}],"Rights":[{"label":"Rights","value":"For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms_of_use.","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/rights","classmap":"edm:WebResource","property":"dcterms:rights"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/rights","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; Information about rights held in and over the resource.; Typically, rights information includes a statement about various property rights associated with the resource, including intellectual property rights."}],"ScholarlyLevel":[{"label":"Scholarly Level","value":"Graduate","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#scholarLevel","classmap":"oc:PublicationDescription","property":"oc:scholarLevel"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#scholarLevel","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Identifies the scholarly level of the author(s)\/creator(s)."}],"Title":[{"label":"Title ","value":"William James and the will to believe","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/title","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:title"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/title","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; The name given to the resource."}],"Type":[{"label":"Type","value":"Text","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/type","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:type"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/type","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; The nature or genre of the resource.; Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the DCMI Type Vocabulary [DCMITYPE]. To describe the file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource, use the Format element."}],"URI":[{"label":"URI","value":"http:\/\/hdl.handle.net\/2429\/37972","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#identifierURI","classmap":"oc:PublicationDescription","property":"oc:identifierURI"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#identifierURI","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Indicates the handle for item record."}],"SortDate":[{"label":"Sort Date","value":"1964-12-31 AD","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/date","classmap":"oc:InternalResource","property":"dcterms:date"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/date","explain":"A Dublin Core Elements Property; A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource.; Date may be used to express temporal information at any level of granularity. Recommended best practice is to use an encoding scheme, such as the W3CDTF profile of ISO 8601 [W3CDTF].; A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource.; Date may be used to express temporal information at any level of granularity. Recommended best practice is to use an encoding scheme, such as the W3CDTF profile of ISO 8601 [W3CDTF]."}]}