Intellectual responsibility: Difference between revisions
From Religions Wiki
(Created page with "{{stub}} {{wikipedia}} {{crashcourse|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v{{=}}AYkhlXronNk|Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility}} William Kingdon Clifford...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{crashcourse|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v{{=}}AYkhlXronNk|Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility}} | {{crashcourse|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v{{=}}AYkhlXronNk|Anti-Vaxxers, Conspiracy Theories, & Epistemic Responsibility}} | ||
William Kingdon Clifford argued that "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence." This position is called '''intellectual responsibility'' or '''epistemic responsibility'''. He argued that false beliefs were harmful. This is relevant to religion because of the lack of evidence for God and the possibility that [[religion is harmful to society]]. | William Kingdon Clifford argued that "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence." This position is called '''intellectual responsibility''' or '''epistemic responsibility'''. He argued that false beliefs were harmful. This is relevant to religion because of the lack of evidence for God and the possibility that [[religion is harmful to society]]. | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Latest revision as of 03:32, 25 June 2019
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:
For more information, see the Crash Course video:
William Kingdon Clifford argued that "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence." This position is called intellectual responsibility or epistemic responsibility. He argued that false beliefs were harmful. This is relevant to religion because of the lack of evidence for God and the possibility that religion is harmful to society.
