Need Help Deciphering This

[Angrboda]

I don't think he's making a point at all. He seems to be setting up the opposing view in order to knock it down. (Which he starts to do in the paragraphs following this one.)


ps. If you're going to ask the meaning of a passage, it helps to quote it sufficiently in full, and preferably provide a reference to the complete work.

The work in question is by William James, being a lecture he gave in 1896. The paragraph cited is in section two of this copy. The point of the lecture may be helpful as well, so that one knows the terrain in advance.

"The Will to Believe" is a lecture by William James, first published in 1896, which defends, in certain cases, the adoption of a belief without prior evidence of its truth. In particular, James is concerned in this lecture about defending the rationality of religious faith even lacking sufficient evidence of religious truth.

James' central argument in "The Will to Believe" hinges on the idea that access to the evidence for whether or not certain beliefs are true depends crucially upon first adopting those beliefs without evidence. As an example, James argues that it can be rational to have unsupported faith in one's own ability to accomplish tasks that require confidence. Importantly, James points out that this is the case even for pursuing scientific inquiry. James then argues that like belief in one's own ability to accomplish a difficult task, religious faith can also be rational even if one at the time lacks evidence for the truth of one's religious belief.