That essay by W.K. Clifford about "The (*) Ethics of" doing this action was challenged in another lecture asking if it was possible to do this action if we are "roaring with rheumatism in bed.
A Walter Kaufman commentary claims that an essay about this title action was an "unwitting compendium of common fallacies and a manual of self-deception." Kaufman instead praises a different lecture discussing this action, which argues that a merchant is "verily guilty of the death of" certain people for not repairing an "emigrant-ship" that went to sea, since the merchant was engaging in this act and saw that his ship "had needed many repairs." That essay by W.K. Clifford about "The (*) Ethics of" doing this action was challenged in another lecture asking if it was possible to do this action if we are "roaring with rheumatism in bed." That lecture ultimately holds that an agent may engage in this action if an option is momentous, forced, and living. Conundrums about the epistemic justification of engaging in this action, such as Pascal's Wager, are often resolved with the view of evidentialism. A lecture by William James discusses "the will to" engage in, for 10 points, what act of holding that a premise is true?
A Walter Kaufman commentary claims that an essay about this title action was an "unwitting compendium of common fallacies and a manual of self-deception.
belief [or believe; accept word forms; prompt on justification or word forms until "justification"] 