1,166

Rustle in the Bush

Forum Link

“Those who criticize without creating, those who are content to defend the vanished concept without being able to give it the forces it needs to return to life, are the plague of philosophy.”

Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guatarri-‘What is Philosophy, 1991

Home-brewed joyful affects.

Will to Believe

I.

Hypthesis – anything that may be proposed to belief

Live or dead 

Live – A real possiblity of accepting the given hypothesis

E/g/ Jesus coming back is a real possibility to chrsitians not to muslims

Therefore alive and deadness relate to individual thinker

“Measured by his willingness to act”

A decision between to hypothesis is an option. 

Options:

(a) living or dead

(b) forced or avoidable

(c) Momentous or trivial

A genuine option is one which is alive, forced, and momentous

(a) Both hypothesis are alive. Theoshopist or muslim would not be, but agonstic or christian will make a small apeal to your belief in a way the others wont

(b) Take an umbrella or don’t isn’t fotrced beacuse you can stay inside. But “Accept this truth or don’t” is forced and one must asszent to an option

(c) Monumentous is in the name. It is a once in a life time choice, something imperative with a chance of losing out on something

II. NJext is to look at the p[sychology of human opinion

It appears as if passion lies at the bottom when we look at certain facts, and at others, the intellect has its primary sway whoch determines how we can feel about facts. 

Intellect first – Can we will contrary to opinions we hold? Can we relive believe Lincoln didn’t exist? No we follow hume in saying some objects of inquiry are simply matters of fact. We can say it but intellectual uprightness rejects these beliefs unless we’re delusional

So we should disagree with pascal and say that we don’t actually believe or disbelive at will. And that we shouldnt becasuse we cant

III.

James raises the proboek of b nelief in terms of the dominant intellecutl climate.

Our willingnesst oassent to truth is the desire to believe in truth backed up by social structure and sentiment. The phyroonian sketpics are correct but totally innocuous in their assessment, truths lowercase t still have uses

“As a rule we disbelieve all facts and theories for which we have no use.”

IV. Our passional nature must, and lawfully may, decide an option between propositions, whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds; for to say, under such circumstances, “Do not decide but leave the question open,” is itself a passional decision, just like deciding “yes” or “no,” and is attended with the same risk of losing the truth

V. 

So we’re not skeptic we believe in truth in two ways:

Empiricist – We can attain truths of a kind. We can know a thing but to be certain that we know is different

Abolutist – We can know the way to truth and know when we have arrived at it

E’s usually go to sceince and philsophy to a. These ystms must come as closed systems.

We believe in ‘objective evidence’ – but then james goes on to give a faulty account of atheism and evidence by suggesting non-Christians presuppose in theier world view that chrisitanity is wrong. That its a dead hypothesis. There is somethingbetween life and death, and iuts indeterminability and an allegience/probablity that one may be more likely.

VI. 

“We’re all abslutisits by instinct” Wrong he misundertads cliffors and probably assenting to propositions.

We shoiuld treat this as a weakness (Though i disagree about his opinions on clifford). So all the systematic philsophies we should disagree with.

So we’re empiricists only heuristically. Fair enoiugh. It is dogmatic to assert objective truth but this is an ancillary thought to the process of science. 

“Our great difference from the scholastic lies in the way we face”

“It matters not to an empiricist from what quarter an hypothesis may come to him; he may have acquired it by fair means or by foul; passion may have whispered or accident suggested it; but if the total drift of thinking continues to confirm it, that is what he means by its being true” 

VII. 

Jame’s chooses being at risk of error in the gaining turth 

  • Stance #1: avoid error at all costs, even if it means sometimes missing out on the truth
  • Analogy: a general tells keeps his soldiers out of battle forever so they don’t risk getting wounded – but in doing so, the soldiers miss out on actually fighting the battle; Sam never asks Alex out for fear of rejection – but in doing so, Sam misses out on the fact that Alex might say yes.
  • Stance #2: seek the truth, even if it means sometimes risking error
  • Analogy: the goal of winning the battle is so important that the general sends his soldiers into battle, even though that means they risk getting wounded; its important enough to Sam to figure out if Alex is interested, so Sam asks Alex out even though it means risking rejection.

I think James is making a false equivalncy here. And he’s uncharitably painting Cliffoprd’s position and misrepresenting science. Hey, maybe Clifford was an ass about it but I think his thought experiment about the sinking ship is a lot more salient and pragmatic. James reminds me of when Spinoza says “To avoid this evil [of inconstancy], immense zeal si brought to
bear to embellish religion whether true or false-with ceremony and
pomp, so that it wil be considered weightier than every jother] influ-
ence and always worshiped by everyone with the utmost deference. The
Turks have succeeded so well at this that they consider it asacrilege
even ot discuss (matters of religion] and they fil everyone’s judgment
with so many prejudices that they leave no room in the mind for sound
reason even to suggest a doubt.” From the preface of the Theological-Political Treatise, Bruder [9].

James is making some kind of special excuse for religious feelings. He’s eating a big ol’ nothing burger and just appealing to religious sentiments. it’s like Christopher Hitchens said:

I’m perfectly happy for people to have these toys and to play with them at home and hug them to themselves and share them with other people who come around to play with their toys. So that’s absolutely fine. They are not to make me play with these toys. I will not play with the toys. Don’t bring the toys to my house, don’t say my children must play with these toys, don’t say my toys…are not allowed by their toys.

Let’s leave these toys outside rational inquiry, and yeah, you can keep your telepathy James.



Leave a comment