Against always proportioning belief to evidence

If beliefs are proportioned to evidence, commitments are proportioned to evidence.

(Commitments either are beliefs or have them as an essential principle)

If commitments are proportioned to evidence, we can’t take vows or have otherwise in-principle unbreakable commitments. Prudence also becomes impossible, along with everything that requires prudence: politics, virtue, happiness, etc.

(No degree of evidence justifies an unbreakable future commitment, as we have almost no evidence about future states at all. Prudence requires commitments in the face of the intrinsically uncertain, i.e. the non-evident)

We must take vows, form in-principle unbreakable commitments, and be prudent.

(Human life requires principled and absolute commitments to, e.g. spouses, nations, children, truth, God, religion, human progress, science, ideologies [like demands for ‘evidence’]…

The need for prudence is per se nota.) 

Therefore, we must not always proportion belief to evidence. 

%d bloggers like this: