Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that emphasizes experience and context. It could be lacking an explicit set of fundamental principles or an encapsulated ethical framework. This can result in the absence of idealistic goals or a radical change.
Unlike deflationary theories of truth the pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements are related to current events. They simply elucidate the role that truth plays in practical endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term that is used to describe things or people who are practical, rational and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic, which refers to an individual or concept that is based on ideals or principles of high quality. A person who is pragmatic considers the real-world circumstances and conditions when making decisions, focusing on what can be realistically accomplished, rather than seeking to determine the most optimal practical course of action.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical implications in determining the truth, meaning or value. It is a third alternative philosophy in contrast to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. Founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founders, pragmatism developed into two streams of thought one of which is akin to relativism, the other towards the idea of realism.
The nature of truth is a central issue in pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree truth is a key concept, they differ on what it means and how it operates in the real world. One approach, influenced heavily by Peirce & James, concentrates on how people resolve issues and make assertions, and gives precedence to speech-acts and justification projects users of language use to determine whether something is true. Another method, influenced by Rorty and his followers, concentrates on the comparatively simple functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, admonish, and caution--and is less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
The primary flaw in this neo-pragmatic view of truth is that it flirts with relativism, since the notion of "truth" is a concept with been around for so long and has such a extensive history that it is unlikely that it can be reduced to the nebulous purposes that pragmatists give it. Another flaw is that pragmatism also seems to be a method that rejects the existence of truth, at a minimum in its substantial metaphysical form. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom who owe a lot to Peirce and James and are mostly in silence about metaphysics, while Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his numerous writings.
Purpose
The aim of pragmatism is to provide a different perspective to the analytic and Continental styles of philosophy. The first generation was started by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, alongside their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). The classical pragmatists were adamant about the concept of meaning and inquiry, and the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by a number of influential American thinkers including John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied these theories to education as well as other aspects of social improvement, and Jane Addams (1860-1935) who established social work.
In recent times, a new generation has given pragmatism a new debate platform. While they are different from traditional pragmatists, a lot of these neo-pragmatists consider themselves to be part of the same tradition. Their most prominent persona is Robert Brandom, whose work focuses on semantics and the philosophy of language, however, he also draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce and James.
One of the primary differences between the classic pragmatists and the neo-pragmatists is their understanding of what it means for an idea to be true. 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 concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertion, which states that an idea is genuinely true if a claim made about it can be justified in a specific manner to a specific group of people.
This view is not without its challenges. It is often criticized as being used to justify illogical and ridiculous ideas. An example of this is the gremlin idea it is a useful concept that works in practice, but it is utterly unfounded and probably untrue. This isn't a major issue, but it does highlight one of the major weaknesses of pragmatism: it can be used as a reason for almost everything.
Significance
Pragmatic means practical, relating to the consideration of real world conditions and situations when making decisions. It can also be used to refer to a philosophical perspective that emphasizes the practical implications when determining the meaning, truth or values. The term"pragmatism" was first utilized to describe this perspective about a century ago, when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into practice in a speech at the University of California (Berkeley). James swore he coined the term along with his mentor and friend Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist view soon earned its own name.
The pragmatists rejected analytic philosophy's sharp dichotomies like mind and body, thoughts and experience, and analytic and synthesthetic. They also rejected the notion that truth was something that was fixed or objective, and instead viewed it as a continuously evolving, socially determined concept.
Classical pragmatists focused primarily on the theory of inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth though James put these concepts to work by exploring the truth of religion. A second generation shifted the pragmatist view of politics, education and other facets of social improvement, under the great influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
In recent decades, the Neopragmatists have tried to put pragmatism within a wider Western philosophical context. They have analyzed the connections between Peirce's ideas and those of Kant, other 19th-century idealists and the new science of evolution theory. They have also attempted to clarify the role of truth in an original epistemology that is a posteriori and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes the concept of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.
Yet, pragmatism continues to evolve and the epistemology of a posteriori that it developed is still considered a significant departure from more traditional methods. The defenders of pragmatism have had to grapple with a number of objections that are just as old as the pragmatic theory itself, yet have received greater exposure in recent years. Some of these include the idea that pragmatism fails when applied to moral questions, and that its assertion of "what works" is nothing more than a realism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce, pragmatic elucidation of truth was a crucial element of his epistemological plan. Peirce saw it as an attempt to debunk false metaphysical concepts like the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty seeking strategies in epistemology.
For many contemporary pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification in order to be valid. They advocate a different approach they refer to as "pragmatic explanation". This involves explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in practice and identifying the conditions that must be met in order to recognize that concept as true.
It is important to remember that this approach could be seen as a form of relativism, and indeed is often criticized for doing so. It is less extreme than deflationist options and can be a useful way to get out of some the relativist theories of reality's issues.
In the wake of this, a number of liberatory philosophical ideas like those that are linked to eco-philosophy, feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for inspiration in the pragmatist tradition. Quine, for example, is an philosophical analyticist who has embraced the philosophy of pragmatism in a manner that Dewey could not.
While pragmatism is a rich history, it is important to note that there are fundamental flaws with the philosophy. In particular, pragmatism fails to provide any meaningful test of truth, and it collapses when it comes to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticized the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among philosophers who have brought the philosophy from its obscureness. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do have a lot in common with the philosophy of pragmatism and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. The works of these philosophers are worth reading by anyone who is interested in this philosophical movement.