It is not the case that for any given proposition, we either believe it to be true (believe it), or believe it to be false (disbelieve it). We may simply have no attitude towards it, either because it has never come to our attention, or because we choose not to consider the question. Or we may have an attitude that is midway between belief and disbelief: we may suspend judgement, because we find upon reflection that we lack sufficient evidence to make the judgement. This happens when we lack an argument either for or against that proposition that is rationally persuasive for us. The issue of the existence of a single deity who is said to have created the world provides a good example with which to illustrate the point. Consider the claim,
5 See Louis Pojman's essay 'Ethical Relativism versus Ethical Objectivism1 in his, Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings (Belmont: Wadsworth, 1991) for an excellent critical analysis of moral relativism and a convincing case for a version of moral objectivism. This very accessible paper is aimed at beginning Philosophy students.
Was this article helpful?