Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophical system that emphasizes the experience and context. It might not have a clear set of fundamental principles or a cohesive ethical framework. This could result in a lack of idealistic aspirations or transformational change.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth the pragmatic theories of truth don't reject the idea that statements are related to current events. They merely define the role that truth plays in everyday endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term used to describe things or people who are practical, rational, and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic which refers to a person or concept that is based on high principles or ideals. A person who is pragmatic considers the real world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, and is focused on what can realistically be accomplished rather than trying to achieve the best possible outcome.
Pragmatism is an emerging philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical implications in determining the meaning, truth or value. It is a third option to the dominant continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. Founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founding fathers, pragmatism developed into two streams of thought that tended towards relativism and the second toward realism.
The nature of truth is an important issue in pragmatism. Many pragmatists agree that truth is a valuable concept however, they disagree on the definition or how it functions in practice. One approach, influenced heavily by Peirce & James, focuses on how people solve questions and make assertions and gives priority to the speech-acts and justifying projects that users of language use to determine if something is true. Another method that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the relatively mundane functions of truth--the way it serves to generalize, recommend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept with an extensive and long-standing history that it's unlikely that its meaning could be reduced to a few commonplace use as pragmatists would do. Second, pragmatism appears to deny the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce and James but are uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
The aim of pragmatism is to provide an alternative to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to introduce it's first generation. These classical pragmatists emphasized theorizing inquiry and meaning, and the nature of truth. Their influence grew to many influential American thinkers, such as John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education as well as social improvement in other dimensions. Read Even more (1860-1935) was the social worker who founded the field was also a beneficiary of this influence.
In recent times an emerging generation has given pragmatism an expanded forum for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists not classical pragmatists but they believe that they belong to the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main persona. He focuses his work on the philosophy and semantics of language but also draws from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
Neopragmatists have an entirely different conception of what it takes for an idea to be real. The classical pragmatists focused on a concept called 'truth-functionality,' which states that an idea is genuinely true if it is useful in practice. Neo-pragmatists focus instead on the concept of "ideal justified assertibility," which says that an idea is true if it is justifiable to a certain audience in a certain way.
This view is not without its challenges. It is often accused of being used to justify illogical and ridiculous concepts. The gremlin hypothesis is a good example of this: It's an concept that can be applied in real life but is unfounded and probably nonsense. This is not a major issue, but it reveals one of the biggest weaknesses of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for almost anything.
Significance
Pragmatic refers to the practical aspect of a decision, which is related to the consideration of actual situations and conditions when making decisions. It is also used to refer to a philosophy that focuses on the practical consequences in determining the meaning, truth or values. William James (1842-1910) first used the term "pragmatism" to describe this viewpoint in a speech he delivered at the University of California, Berkeley. James was adamant that the word was coined by his friend and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914), but the pragmatist outlook soon gained a reputation all its own.
The pragmatists resisted the stark dichotomies in analytic philosophy, like value and fact as well as experience and thought mind and body synthetic and analytic, and so on. They also rejected the notion of truth as something that is fixed or objective and instead saw it as a constantly evolving socially-determined idea.
James utilized these themes to study the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on the second generation of pragmatists who applied this approach to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.
The neo-pragmatists from recent times have attempted to place pragmatism in the larger Western philosophical context, tracing the affinities of Peirce's ideas with Kant and other idealists of the 19th century as well as the emerging science of evolutionary theory. They also sought to define the role of truth in an original epistemology of a priori and to develop a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic that includes theories of language, meaning, and the nature and the origin of knowledge.
Nevertheless, pragmatism has continued to develop and the a posteriori epistemology that it developed is still regarded as an important departure from more traditional methods. The people who defend it have had to confront a variety of objections that are just as old as the theory itself, yet have gained more attention in recent years. These include the idea that pragmatism simply implodes when it comes to moral issues, and that its claim that "what works" is nothing more than relativism, albeit with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was an essential element of his epistemological plan. He believed it was a way to undermine false metaphysical concepts like the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation, and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.
For a lot of modern pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. In this sense, they tend to steer clear of deflationist theories of truth that require verification in order to be deemed valid. They advocate an alternative approach they call "pragmatic explanation". This involves explaining how a concept can be used in the real world and identifying the conditions that must be met in order to recognize that concept as authentic.
It is important to remember that this approach may still be viewed as a type of relativism, and indeed is often criticized for it. However, it is more moderate than the alternatives to deflationism, and therefore is a good way of getting around some of the issues with relativism theories of truth.
As a result of this, a lot of liberatory philosophical ideas like those that are linked to feminism, eco-philosophy, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist tradition. Quine for instance, is an philosophical analyticist who has embraced the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
It is crucial to realize that pragmatism is a rich concept in history, also has some serious shortcomings. Particularly, philosophy of pragmatism is not a meaningful test of truth and is not applicable to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also critiqued the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among philosophers who have brought the philosophy from the obscurity. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do owe a great deal to the philosophy of pragmatism and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. These philosophers' works are well worth reading by anyone interested in this philosophical movement.