Suspension of judgment

Suspension of judgment is a cognitive process and a rational state of mind in which one withholds judgments, particularly on the drawing of moral or ethical conclusions. The opposite of suspension of judgment is premature judgement usually shortened to prejudice. Whereas prejudgement involves drawing a conclusion or making a judgement before having the information relevant to such a judgement, suspension of judgement involves waiting till you have all the facts before making a decision.

Suspension of judgment is a cornerstone of good research methodology. Much of the scientific method is designed to encourage the suspension of judgements until observations can be made, tested, and verified through peer review.

In socio-political situations the suspension of judgment is the cornerstone of a civil society. Rather than prejudging people based on generalizations, preconceptions, or other forms of incomplete information, we should judge individuals only when we have adequate information about that individual.

Within philosophy, the suspension of judgment is typically associated with skepticism and positivism, but its is by no means limited to these areas. The 17th century rationalist Rene Descartes, for example, used it as the cornerstone of his epistemology. In a process that he called methodological skepticism, he asserted that in order to gain a solid foundation when building ones system of knowledge and belief, one must first doubt everything. Only by eliminating preconceptions and prejudgements can one come to know what is true.

Suspension of judgement is also a term used in civil law to indicate a courts decision to nulify a civil judgment.