Blog: William Clifford

Based on last paragraph of Pg 6

1. Having power is the ability of knowing factual/proven knowledge.
2. Such knowledge is better for society.
3. Knowledge with no sound basis is harmful to society.
4. It is dutiful for society to filter out all unproven knowledge.

C. Therefore all unapproved knowledge is not beneficial to society and must be weeded out for the toxin it is.

I understand Clifford’s main argument is to instill the readers with the idea that all beliefs without sufficient evidence is a sin and harms the integrity of man. But there are two reasons why I find this to be a fallacy. The first reason is that his argument is counter intuitive because he writes, “No man holding a strong belief on one side of a question, or even wishing to hold a belief on one side, can investigate it with such fairness and completeness as if he were really in doubt and unbiased; so that the existence of a belief not founded on fair inquiry unfits a man for the performance of this necessary duty” (Pg. 3).

This statement creates a problem because by following this logic, he simply admits that his own belief is flawed and unaccredited. Then according to his argument, his own argument should be disregarded as there is no sufficient evidence to support his claim. Especially when it involves his idea claiming its “man’s duty” to cleanse unproven ideas.

The second reasoning is that there are good actions being done even if the belief if yet to be proven. Take religion for example, (Disclaimer: I’m not trying to offend anyone’s religion) the basis of most religions follow a god or a important person, but the stories of those entities are generally farfetched and have yet to be proven, such as Jesus’ revival or the Buddha’s indefinite time sitting under a tree for the answers of life. Despite people believing in something that is not proven, it still brings them good to them and to the society. Is the phrase “Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself” automatically bad because it stems from an unproven religion?

Following Clifford’s logic once more, this would mean all the wise teachings from religion is also not good because the religion itself is unproven.

Word Count: 382