Carefully contrast and compare the positions of Clifford and James concerning the question of believing when we have inadequate evidence. Be careful to distinguish the precise area of disagreement between the two–it may not be as global as it at first seems. Is James right that in certain determinate questions or areas of life, belief without perfectly adequate evidence is justified? Or is Clifford right about such cases, that the most we can do then is withhold judgment? Again, both of these thinkers give reasons for their position. Your job is to do the same as you compare the two positions. Do not just summarize the two positions then arbitrarily choose one over the other.
"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."