Intellectual responsibility
Intellectual responsibility , also epistemic responsibility , is a concept from philosophy . People therefore have a responsibility to only believe things for which they have evidence and not to pass judgment while this evidence is pending. If the proof is pending, a person is ethically obliged not to take over the dormer.
Emergence
William Kingdon Clifford
The mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford defined intellectual responsibility in terms of a brief narrative and definition.
The story describes a ship owner who sells tickets for the transatlantic crossing. He learns that the ship may have defects. Knowing that the inspection would result in significant costs and delays in departure, the shipowner postpones the inspection. Since there is no evidence that the ship is defective, he himself believes that the ship is seaworthy and sells the tickets. When the ship goes down on the high seas, he receives the money for the ship from the insurance company.
According to Clifford, the shipowner is responsible for the deaths of the sailors and passengers because he should have questioned his belief that the ship was okay and should have carried out the inspection.
"It is wrong always, and, everywhere for anyone, to beliefe anything upon insufficient evidence."
"It is always and everywhere and for everyone wrong to believe something without having sufficient evidence."
Clifford goes even further and defines that the shipowner is guilty even if the crossing had been made without problems.
"He was guilty of accepting a belief without sufficient evidence [...] and whether that actually leads to harm or not, he still has done wrong, epistemically and morally."
“He was guilty of accepting a belief without sufficient evidence. Whether and how this led to damage or not, he did something wrong, epistemically and morally. "
Freedom of belief is therefore irresponsible and morally wrong. This also applies to “private faith” which, according to Clifford, does not exist.
“There is no such thing as a private belief. Because we all talk about our beliefs — some of us do it a lot — and it causes our beliefs to spread. ”
“There is no such thing as“ private belief ”. Since we all talk about our beliefs - some of us even a lot - our beliefs spread. "
This can be seen, for example, in sexism : Even if a person does not verbally express the belief that women are inferior to men, the belief influences the actions of this person, which has an impact on the environment. In particular, when it comes to a person in a position of power, this behavior is also adopted.
Clifford goes even further, arguing that religious beliefs are irresponsible too.
"Belief in a god, whose existence can't be proven was simply" blind faith "and blind faith leads a person to ignore other facts and arguments, causing them to live an unexamined, unthoughtful life."
“Believing in a God whose existence cannot be proven is“ blind faith ”. Blind faith leads a person to ignore other facts and arguments, leading to an unexplored and reckless life. "
William James
The psychologist and philosopher William James argued against Clifford's thesis that it is immoral to believe in God. James argued that a belief leads to possibilities for action which would not be possible without that belief, and the nature of the effects of the actions determines moral legitimacy. Therefore, since James believed in the positive effects of religion, he found religious belief acceptable.
However, on the other hand, religious belief also has negative effects, in particular on the environment and other people. In particular, if necessary actions - due to trust in an already positive development - are omitted (e.g. philanthropy , environmental protection or vaccinations ), or negative actions are taken to defend the faith (e.g. proselytizing or, in extreme cases, a Suicide bombing ).
Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky argues in his essay The Responsibility of Intellectuals that intellectuals have a responsibility to seek the truth and to expose lies. A whistleblower therefore follows his ethical and moral responsibility.
Peter Van Inwagen
The philosopher Peter van Inwagen defined a variant of Clifford's definition:
"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to ignore evidence that is relevant to his beliefs, or to dismiss relevant evidence in a facile way."
"It is always, everywhere and for everyone, to ignore evidence that is important to one's beliefs and ideas, or to discard them in a wrong way."
References
- ↑ a b The Ethics of Belief. In: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved March 12, 2017 (English).
- ^ Noam Chomsky: The Responsibility of Intellectuals. February 23, 1967, accessed March 12, 2017 .