Kant just went up a full notch in my eyes.  From The Critique of Pure Reason, via David Gordon, via Wlodek Rabinowicz.

The usual touchstone, whether that which someone asserts is merely
his persuasion — or at least his subjective conviction, that is,
his firm belief — is betting. It often happens that someone
propounds his views with such positive and uncompromising assurance
that he seems to have entirely set aside all thought of possible
error. A bet disconcerts him. Sometimes it turns out that he has
a conviction which can be estimated at a value of one ducat, but
not of ten. For he is very willing to venture one ducat, but when
it is a question of ten he becomes aware, as he had not previously
been, that it may very well be that he is in error. If, in a given
case, we represent ourselves as staking the happiness of our whole
life, the triumphant tone of our judgment is greatly abated; we
become extremely diffident, and discover for the first time that
our belief does not reach so far. Thus pragmatic belief always
exists in some specific degree, which, according to differences in
the interests at stake, may be large or may be small.