Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Theories of William Clifford and William James
William Clifford and William James are renowned scholars and psychologists who contributed much in their respective fields. Their different theories are explained and compared in this paper.
Clifford, in his evidentialism theory, argues that a belief can only be taken as knowledge when supported by evidence. According to this school of thought, every person has a moral duty to believe claims that are supported sufficiently with evidence. Therefore, if any belief is not fitting with a scientific belief or is not discovered through required scientific practice, it becomes irrational and therefore does not qualify to be relied upon as genuine knowledge (Peter 2). This theory takes evidence as the key point of reference when it comes to believing. This ideology has a ramification as it does not provide the rationale of determining the credibility of the source of evidence. An example is when a ship owner doubts the safety of his ship but stifles the doubt by convincing himself that the ship is in good order and comes to the reality that indeed the ship is not sea worth after it becomes damaged. Such a belief cannot be relied upon as knowledge because if the ship owner had checked the ship to ascertain his belief, he would have prevented the damages that occurred since evidence could have been relied upon. He relied on his belief which was not a product of earnest investigation. He should not have relied on this information but should have taken the initiative of bearing the expense of checking and making appropriate repairs. Therefore, because of self-interest, he is more concerned about his ship as he collects insurance at the expense of the people that die on the ship.
On the other hand, James advanced his theory- the pragmatic theory of truth. He believed in pragmatism and asserted that truth happens to be an idea and is made truth by events or happenings. Truth is therefore viewed as a process, an event that verifies itself. Therefore, he characterizes truth in terms of acceptance and usefulness. According to this theory, truth can be found when it addresses or attends to practical consequences of ideas. Truth is not about facts and agreement of ideas. Consequently, it is not coherence that distinguishes truth and falsehood. Therefore, truth is constructed as people continue living and is not absolute sense (James 19). Truth usually manifests itself as people relate and continue to undertake their activities. Furthermore, beliefs are true if they are important or useful and are applied practically. A belief that does not facilitate interaction is a false belief. An example to illustrate the meaning of this theory is the belief that inanimate objects do not move, which enables the world to be more predictable and easier to live in.
By comparison, Clifford is of the view that it is prudent to question our beliefs to avoid harming others and ourselves. It is important to ensure that before believing in anything, one should investigate to find adequate evidence. This is the only way that people can be able to avoid doing harm to themselves as well as others (Peter 3). Therefore, Clifford insists on being rational and ensuring that one seeks enough evidence before starting to believe. On the other hand, James’ theory and views are flexible. He claimed that some cases or incidences are resolved on non-rational grounds, as a matter of passion or choice, and that an example is religious choice. Another example where it is right to believe even if the supporting evidence is inadequate is when making moral decisions such as solving a conflict between two parties.
Clifford negates all beliefs without evidence in his quest to avoid errors and fails to recognize that some of the decisions are momentous and forced. If a person fails to make a decision, it is still a decision made. It is through these errors that people are able to determine and validate whether they are doing the right thing or not. Beliefs may not be false and evidence is not necessary. However, according to James, religious belief is momentous and forced. This implies that people are obliged to behave in a certain way without necessarily having to understand or be presented with evidence why they do so.
Based on these two theories, I concur with James’ theory about pragmatism. Its concepts are well reasoned and reflect the reality. Truth manifests through events and actions experienced through our lives. Furthermore, beliefs can only be useful if they are applied practically. In situations when there is limited objective evidence (such as in religious aspects) truth is still manifest. These perspectives are contrary to Clifford’s theory who argues that sufficient evidence is the key for a belief to be true. Regardless of these varied viewpoints, I am more convinced by James’ pragmatic theory in acknowledging the importance of truth in our beliefs.

Works Cited
Peter, Krey. The Ethics of Belief: William Clifford versus William James. Web 4 September, 2013.http://peterkrey.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/the-ethics-of-belief-william-clifford- versus-william-james/
James, William. Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. New York: Longman Green and Co., 1907.