William James: The Will to Believe Study Notes
Introduction to William James and the Context of "The Will to Believe"
Biographical Context of William James (1842–1910): * William James was an American philosopher and psychologist born in New York City. * He was educated at Harvard and was the brother of the famous novelist Henry James. * Throughout his life, James struggled with ill health and was deeply troubled by doubts regarding the existence of God and the freedom of the will. * He developed the philosophy of pragmatism partly as a response to these personal and intellectual difficulties. * His principal works include The Principles of Psychology (1890), The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902), and The Will to Believe (1897).
Core Objective of the Essay: * This essay serves as the classic response to W.K. Clifford’s "Ethics of Belief." * James argues that life would be significantly impoverished if human belief were confined to the "Scrooge-like epistemology" proposed by Clifford. * He contends that in everyday life, where evidence for critical propositions is often unclear, humans must live by faith or cease to act entirely. * While we cannot make leaps of faith at random, practical considerations sometimes force decisions on propositions whose truth values are not immediately apparent.
Definitions of Hypotheses and Options
Hypothesis: * James defines a hypothesis as anything that may be proposed to our belief. * Live Hypothesis: One which appeals as a real possibility to the person to whom it is proposed. It is characterized by an "electric connection" with one's nature and possesses credibility. It is measured by a person's willingness to act; the maximum of liveness means a willingness to act irrevocably. * Dead Hypothesis: One that holds no appeal or credibility for the individual. * Relational Property: Liveness and deadness are not intrinsic properties of a hypothesis but are relations to the individual thinker. * Example: For a modern Westerner, the idea of believing in the Mahdi is a dead hypothesis. However, for an Arab, it might be a live hypothesis among the mind's possibilities.
Option: * An option is the decision between two hypotheses. Options are categorized into several kinds: 1. Living or Dead: A living option is one where both hypotheses are live. (e.g., "Be an agnostic or be a Christian"). A dead option is one where neither hypothesis is live (e.g., "Be a theosophist or be a Mohammedan"). 2. Forced or Avoidable: An option is forced when there is no standing place outside of the alternative. It is usually based on a complete logical disjunction. It is avoidable if the decider can remain indifferent or decline to offer a judgment. (e.g., choosing to go out with or without an umbrella is not forced because one can simply stay home). 3. Momentous or Trivial: An option is momentous when the opportunity is unique, the stake is significant, or the decision is irreversible. It is trivial when the opportunity is not unique, the stake is insignificant, or the decision is reversible.
The Genuine Option: * James defines a "genuine option" as one that is simultaneously forced, living, and momentous.
The Psychology of Human Opinion and Volition
Limitations of the Will: * James acknowledges that we cannot modify our opinions at will regarding matters of fact or obvious relations between ideas. * We cannot simply will ourselves to believe that Abraham Lincoln's existence is a myth or that the portraits of him in magazines are of someone else. * We cannot will ourselves to feel healthy when "roaring with rheumatism in bed," nor can we believe that two one-dollar bills equal one hundred dollars.
Pascal’s Wager: * Blaise Pascal attempted to force individuals into Christianity by treating truth as a game of chance. * The Logic: If you stake everything on God's existence and win, you gain "eternal beatitude." If you lose, you lose nothing. Even if the probability of God existing were miniscule, the possibility of infinite gain justifies the risk of finite loss. * James’s Critique: James argues that a faith adopted willfully through such "mechanical calculation" lacks the "inner soul of faith’s reality." He suggests that if he were the Deity, he might cut off believers who chose him based on such a calculation. * The Dead Hypothesis Problem: Pascal’s argument only works if the option is already a "living option." For a Turk or a Protestant, the specific Catholic practices Pascal suggests (holy water, masses) might be "foregone impossibilities."
The Scientific Veto and the "Ethics of Belief"
The School of Science: * Modern science is built on disinterestedness, the postponement of preference, and submission to the "icy laws of outer fact." * Science appears as an impersonal, vast, and august edifice. * Scientific thinkers (like Huxley and Clifford) often view "sentimentalist" voluntary belief as "besotted and contemptible."
The Moral Argument of W.K. Clifford: * Clifford famously states: "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for every one, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." * He views belief on insufficient evidence as a "stolen pleasure" and a "sin" against one's duty to mankind, comparing such beliefs to a "pestilence" that may infect society.
The Influence of the "Willing Nature"
Non-Intellectual Factors: * James argues that pure reason is rarely what settles our opinions. Our "willing nature" consists of non-deliberate factors: fear, hope, prejudice, passion, imitation, partisanship, and the "circumpressure of our caste and set." * Authority: James cites Mr. Balfour, who uses the term "authority" to describe the intellectual climate that makes hypotheses possible or impossible, alive or dead. * Prestige: Most people believe in molecules, the conservation of energy, democracy, or the Monroe Doctrine not due to intellectual insight, but due to the prestige of those opinions. * James claims that for of us, our reason is satisfied if it can find a few arguments to recite if our credulity is criticized. Our faith is often "faith in some one else's faith."
The Two Great Commandments of Knowledge
James posits that there are two separate laws for the would-be knower: 1. We must know the truth. 2. We must avoid error.
The Conflict: * These are not two ways of saying the same thing; they are separable. * One can prioritize the "chase for truth" as paramount, viewing the risk of error as secondary. * Alternatively, one can prioritize the "avoidance of error" as more imperative (Clifford's view), choosing to keep the mind in suspense forever rather than risk believing a lie.
James’s Stance: * James finds Clifford's prioritization of error-avoidance "fantastic." He compares it to a general telling soldiers that it is better to stay out of battle entirely than to risk a single wound. * He argues that our errors are not so "awfully solemn" and that a "certain lightness of heart" is healthier for the empiricist philosopher.
When Passional Nature Lawfully Decides
The Thesis: * Our passional nature not only lawfully may, but must, decide an option between propositions whenever it is a genuine option that cannot, by its nature, be decided on intellectual grounds. * In these cases, saying "do not decide" is itself a passional decision—it is essentially deciding to risk losing the truth for fear of error.
Scientific vs. Human Questions: * In most scientific questions, the options are not momentous. We can afford to wait for objective evidence because there is no urgent need to act. * However, in matters of discovery, James notes that the most useful investigator is one who has an eager interest in one side, balanced by a keen nervousness about being deceived.
Moral and Personal Questions: * Moral Questions: Science can tell us what exists, but it cannot tell us what is good. Solutions to moral questions cannot wait for sensible proof; they require consulting the "heart." * Personal Relations: In social situations (e.g., "Do you like me?"), faith in a fact can help create the fact. If one waits for objective evidence of liking before acting friendly, the liking may never materialize. Desiring a certain truth brings about that truth's existence.
The Religious Hypothesis as a Genuine Option
Generic Definition of Religion: 1. The best things are the more eternal things; perfection is eternal. 2. We are better off even now if we believe the first affirmation to be true.
Religion as a Genuine Option: 1. Momentous: We are supposed to gain a vital good by belief and lose it by non-belief. 2. Forced: We cannot escape the issue by remaining skeptical. If religion is true and we wait for more light, we lose the good just as surely as if we had chosen to disbelieve. James compares this to a man who hesitates to marry a woman because he isn't sure she's an angel; he cuts himself off from the possibility regardless.
The Personal Nature of the Universe: * In religion, the universe is not an "It" but a "Thou." * Evidence may be withheld from us unless we meet the hypothesis halfway. Just as a "churlish" person who requires proof for every social concession is cut off from social rewards, a person who shuts himself in "snarling logicality" might be cut off from the possibility of knowing the gods.
Conclusion: The Ethics of Mental Freedom
James argues that a rule of thinking that would absolutely prevent one from acknowledging certain kinds of truth (if they were there) is an irrational rule.
He advocates for for "inner tolerance" and the "intellectual republic."
The Mountain Pass Metaphor (Fitz-James Stephen): * James concludes with a quote comparing the human condition to standing on a mountain pass in a blinding snowstorm. * Paths are deceptive, and to stand still is to freeze to death. * We do not know for certain if there is a right road, but we must "be strong and of a good courage" and act for the best. * Even if death ends all, we cannot meet death better than by acting with courage and hope.