You need to learn this ethical principle. It may save your life or the life of someone you love. By the end of this post you'll recognize the importance of forming well-supported beliefs. This will help you form beliefs you can have confidence in.
As a professor of philosophy, I've helped tons of people think critically about important things. I look forward to helping you do the same.
More...
The Deadly Tire Blowout
Let's start with a scenario. Imagine this. A friend comes to you wanting to borrow your car. She's in a hurry. She needs to get to an interview. You happen to have your car and don't need to use it.
But you noticed the other day that your tires were worn and very cracked. It occurred to you that the tires need replacing and it might not be safe to drive the car. But knowing that fixing the tires would be expensive and an inconvenience, you put those worries out of your mind. You convinced yourself sincerely that the car is totally safe to drive.
You give your friends the keys. She drives on the freeway at normal speeds. One of the tires blows out, causing her to lose control of the car. The car flips and rolls, killing her.
Are you guilty of the death of your friend? Leave "guilty" or "not guilty" in the comments below based on your initial thoughts about the case.
When you handed your friend the keys to the car you sincerely believed your car was safe to drive. But, you didn't believe that based on good evidence. You formed the belief by pushing aside your doubts. You formed the belief based on wishful thinking, desiring it to be true the car is safe and you wouldn't have to buy tires.
What rule of forming good beliefs did you violate?
Clifford's Principle + The Shady Shipowner
William K. Clifford was a mathematician and philosopher living in the 19th century. In his essay "The Ethics of Belief" he proposes this rule or principle of belief-formation:
"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence." —William K. Clifford
The story about your friend and the car is like a story Clifford tells in defending his principle. It's a story involving a shady shipowner. Here's how Clifford tells the tale.
The Shady Shipowner: A shipowner was about to send to sea an emigrant-ship. He knew that she was old, and not overwell built at the first; that she had seen many seas and climes, and often had needed repairs. Doubts had been suggested to him that possibly she was not seaworthy. These doubts preyed upon his mind, and made him unhappy; he thought that perhaps he ought to have her thoroughly overhauled and and refitted, even though this should put him at great expense. Before the ship sailed, however, he succeeded in overcoming these melancholy reflections. He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this trip also. He would put his trust in Providence, which could hardly fail to protect all these unhappy families that were leaving their fatherland to seek for better times elsewhere. He would dismiss from his mind all ungenerous suspicions about the honesty of builders and contractors. In such ways he acquired a sincere and comfortable conviction that his vessel was thoroughly safe and seaworthy; he watched her departure with a light heart, and benevolent wishes for the success of the exiles in their strange new home that was to be; and he got his insurance-money when she went down in mid-ocean and told no tales.
False Beliefs as the Culprit?
I know what you might be thinking. The shipowner was guilty of the death of the people on his ship because he had a false belief. He falsely believed his boat was seaworthy. It was not.
You might think, "As long as my beliefs are true, I'm ethically okay regarding the beliefs I hold." If so, good idea. But, that's not quite right according to Clifford.
Back to the Shady Shipowner
Clifford changes the case in one way.
In the revised shady shipowner case, everything starts out the same. The shipowner has good reasons to doubt the safety of his ship, he sets those good reasons aside, and he confidently believes the ship will make the trip. But, there's one difference. The ship safely makes the trip. No one dies.
The shipowner's belief formed by wishful thinking turns out to be true. Clifford now asks, "Will that diminish the guilt of her owner?"
What do you think? Does the fact that luck intervened to make his belief true relieve the shipowner of wrongdoing? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Clifford's answer is, "Not one jot. When an action is once done, it is right or wrong for ever; no accidental failure of its good or evil fruits can possibly alter that. The man would not have been innocent, he would only have been not found out."
He thinks this shows whether your belief is true or false doesn't matter. It doesn't determine the guilt or innocence of a person for their beliefs. Clifford thinks the question of right or wrong is a matter of how you formed your belief. It's origin matters, not whether it ended up being true or false.
The key question is: Do you have a right to your belief based on the evidence you have?
Returning to the shipowner. Wanting to believe the ship was sound because believing otherwise would make him unhappy, prompt costly repairs, and so on, was a bad basis for his belief the ship was sound. He wished it to be true. The evidence before him didn't support it.
How's Your Belief System Doing?
This returns us to Clifford's principle and why you should care about it. If it is wrong, "always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence," what is the ethical health of your belief system?
Do you hold important beliefs out of comfort or tradition? Do you believe things despite the good evidence before you?
Lastly, and most importantly, is holding beliefs on insufficient evidence a pattern? Are you inclined to believe that way? If so, you may be putting yourself or people in your life at risk of harm.
Recall the case of you sweeping aside your doubts about the safety of your tires. You loaned your friend your car, she got in an accident and died. What harmful situations may you inadvertently expose yourself or others to because the beliefs on which you act are not well-supported by good evidence?
As you can see, Clifford's ethics of belief matters. If you care about having ethically-healthy beliefs or you care about not harming those you love, you'll care whether you're inclined to decide and do things on the basis of beliefs supported by solid evidence, or whether you're inclined to believe whatever is just convenient and comfortable.
Conclusion + Bonus Resources
Recap of the Big Ideas:
- Clifford thinks, "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence."
- Whether your belief is ethically okay depends on how it was formed. It doesn't depend on whether it ended up true or false.
- The ethical health of your belief system matters. If you hold important beliefs on insufficient evidence, you may put yourself or others at risk of harm when you act on the basis of those beliefs.
Next up in this series is William James's counter to Clifford. Stay tuned to take a leap of faith.
For guidance on how to develop good belief-forming habits, check out my posts on intellectual humility and intellectual perseverance.
For a YouTube version of this post, check out the video below. As always, keep thinking critically, believing confidently, and living courageously. Keep living the philosophical life!
In the case of the deadly tire blowout are you guilty of the death of your friend?
Does the fact that luck intervened to make the shady shipowner’s belief true in the revised case relieve the shipowner of guilt for wrongdoing?