The Believing Game By Peter Elbow

In the book, The Westing Game by Ellen Raskin, the conclusion is what summarized the plot of the book. Knowing this, one might agree the way the ending was written was very effective. The owner of the Westing Paper Products Company, Sam Westing, was murdered. Sixteen people are called to Sunset Towers to participate in the reading of the will. Little did they know that the will was only going to unleash the monster in them all. The will of Sam Westing went on to say that one of the sixteen people in the room was a murderer, the same murderer that ended his life. Everyone would be paired into teams. Clues were spread out among the pairs-of-two and the game began. 200 million dollars was offered to the person who uncovered the secrets to

When I look at the title “The Essay, An Exercise in Doubt” I assume that the basis of the writing will be centered around doubt. It is not until I arrive at the midsection of the article that I learned the authors main ideal was influence the audience to except doubt and embrace it

C.S. Lewis one said “Hardships often prepare ordinary people for an extraordinary destiny”. Facing hardships and breaking free from their normal world allows the hero inside of people to come out. Many stories document this journey of a hero through the Hero’s Journey Archetype. In the short story “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell, a man named Rainsford stumbles upon an island where humans are hunted by a crazed man. The hero’s journey archetype is implemented throughout Rainsford’s experiences in the story. Richard Connell used the Hero’s Journey Archetype to structure the plot and develop the theme that with clever thinking and the use of past experiences, one can succeed at anything.

In every story, there are many things to analyze. In “Game” by Donald Barthelme, he shows us the way our minds start to work in stressful situations like how the narrator and Shotwell started to respond while controlling the console for the war. In “Game” the narrator’s name is never told, Shotwell and the narrator do not trust each other, but are left alone together and trusted to kill the other if they start to “behave strangely,” although it is never clarified what counts as strange and what counts as normal. Various literary devices are used throughout the story to show us Barthelme’s intended theme, some used are: repetition, symbolism, irony, and figurative language.

The appeal is first accomplished by the organization of the piece. The essay is divided in nine sections based on the type of lie being discussed. Furthermore, the essay is easier to understand when divided in such a way. Historical context is next used, achieving quite a similar purpose to the organization of the piece. For instance, The Attack on Pearl Harbor is brought up when providing an example for groupthink, a type of lie presented in the piece (pg. 165). Because groupthink may be an unfamiliar, perhaps complex, concept for some, this historical context makes the point of groupthink easier to understand, helping the purpose be more accessible and simple. Similarly, the use of anecdotes assists the author in establishing her objective for writing the essay. . An example can be found when author details a time when she found out that some Jewish teachings tell of a woman in the Garden of Eden before Eve and how she felt that she had been spiritually robbed. She details this when describing a lying technique called omission (pg. 163). Since the author gives anecdotes, she makes her points more relatable and helps the audience better understand the points being

The theme of suffering will be talked about throughout this essay. Even though it isn’t the most pleasant topic to talk about, it is part of our lives. The dictionary defines suffering as “The state of undergoing pain, distress, or hardship.” This essay will examine suffering and how it shows up in different printed sources, as well as in my personal life.

In the short story “The Key Game” the author appeals to the readers’ sense of emotion (pathos) because of the in-depth description of the Jewish family’s unfortunate living arrangements, and because of the method the author uses to explain the various character descriptions, emotions, and dialog throughout the story. This story takes place at some point during the Second World War. The author, Ida Fink, introduces the reader to a small Jewish family consisting of a wife, husband, and their three year old son. They live in a small apartment which she describes as poor, urban, and gloomy. The situation with the war can be shown with the frequent changes in apartments. The purpose of the story is in a “game” made by the parents to prepare the child for his reaction in case the Germans ever come knocking at the door. The author introduces the emotion in this story from the very beginning, when she starts to describe where the story takes place.

Trauma is an experience of such intensity, that it overwhelms the boundaries of the self. The intensity of trauma might indeed overwhelm psychological resources, fragmenting the idea of the ego and altering the ability to sense self, and distinguish reality from fragmented reality. From such trauma many issues may arise, including psychosis. Psychosis is characterised by an impaired relationship with reality and can be seen through a depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness or paranoia, withdrawal from family and friends, and hallucinations. Psychosis could mean a complete loss in being able to distinguish between truth and reality, and losing a sense of self. Literary works, through different literary elements can shape the meaning of

Elbow wrote many things for this game, detailing how one cannot doubt, and must take each idea one at a time. The assertions are not challenging each other. In order to correctly get inside the head of those who have a belief, and see it from their perspective, one must have “an act of self-insertion, self-involvement- an act of projection.”(lines 45-46) Unlike with the doubting game, which you make logical transformations, with the believing game, one must make “metaphorical extensions, analogies, and associations.”(lines 48-49) By following these rules, an individual could yield greater power by know how to consider all assertions in search for the truth. Using the believing game the correct way, follow the rules Elbow has determined, give the individual an opportunity to see every assertion available, and by being able to determine the correct one, yielding an intellectual

James(1897) argues that certain actions and convictions need pre-existing beliefs which do not require sufficient evidence. He uses Pascal’s Wager as an example – James (1897) argues Pascal’s Wager may force individuals in choosing to either believe in God or not, regardless of there being sufficient evidence to prove the existence of the former or latter. However, James (1897) argues that different propositions

In his lecture, “The Will to Believe,” William James addresses how one adopts a belief. There is a hypothesis and an option, where you choose between two live hypotheses. An option has the characteristics to be live or dead, forced or avoidable, and momentous or trivial. In his thesis, James argues how “our passional nature” must make our decisions about our beliefs when they cannot be certainly determined on “intellectual grounds,” however, this is not the case, we can always make the decision based on intellectual grounds. One can use Bayesian probability to gain some grasp of the situation and eventually to make a decision.

During the time James was writing his paper, another professor, William Kingdom Clifford was backing the opposite. He believed that belief without evidence is immoral. He wrote an essay called the ‘The Ethics of Belief’; he wrote ‘It’s wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence’. He first used this statement to explain all aspects of life but he later applied it specifically to religious belief. The will to believe was written after the ethics of belief and was written to combat the arguments and plays off all the failures in

William Clifford argues that we should never “believe anything on insufficient evidence” (Philosophy of Religion, p. 103)1 and if we do decide to believe in God without any evidence it would be considered “wrong,” however, William James’ The Will to Believe essay argues, in response to Cliffords essay, that believing anything without sufficient evidence is “an irrational rule” (James, p. 109)2. James’ essay suggests that there is some level of truth to the fact that no one can decide what it is that you truly believe in because if that were to be true somewhere along the way someone else probably forced those beliefs on you, either directly or indirectly. He suggests that your true beliefs are the ones that you have without any rhyme or reason. James goes to say that it is better to believe in something wholly, even if there is no evidence to prove it because that may be the only way to find your true faith, while Clifford believes that it is safer to believe in nothing until you have clear evidence so you do not have to run the risk of possibly believing in a inauthentic belief.

Since the 19th century, William Clifford and William James have been the foremost religious theorist and have attempted to answer significant creation and theological mysteries. However, Clifford and James have varying views on the belief debate, each formulating a rational argument of what the basis for belief should be. Clifford’s, Ethics of Belief and James’ The Will to Believe outline their respective arguments which are vastly similar and but have marked differences. Both articles will be examined for these similarities and difference and stated within this paper.

When people hear the term “ethics,” most of their minds turn to dilemmas discussed by figures such as Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, Aristotle, and other famous philosophers. These men debated what is considered to be morally good and how a person can become ethical. Operating under normative ethics, these philosophers did not question whether or not ethics even existed, but rather if they exist, what are they? The branch of ethics that questions the foundation of ethics and morality is metaethics. There are three standpoints when debating metaethics: moral realism, moral relativism, and moral skepticism. I will be discussing my argument for moral realism and contend that moral relativism and skepticism are inaccurate. I will prove the