Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy

Pragmatism is a philosophical system that emphasizes the experience and context. It may not have an enlightened ethical framework or fundamental principles. This can lead to an absence of idealistic goals or transformative change.

In contrast to deflationary theories about truth, pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the notion that statements correlate to current events. They simply clarify the role that truth plays in our daily 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 high principles. A pragmatic person looks at the actual world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, focusing on what is realistically accomplished, rather than trying to achieve the best possible outcome.

Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement, stresses the importance that practical consequences are crucial in determining the what is true, meaning or value. It is a third alternative to the dominant analytic and continental tradition of philosophy. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founding fathers, pragmatism developed into two competing streams that tended towards relativism, the other towards the idea of realism.

One of the most important problems in pragmatism is the nature of truth. Many pragmatists recognize that truth is a valuable concept, however, they disagree on the definition or how it works in the actual world. One method, inspired by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways people deal with questions and make assertions. It prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users in determining if truth is a fact. Another method, influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the relatively mundane functions of truth, namely its ability to generalize, admonish, and caution--and is less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.

This neopragmatic interpretation of truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept that has so many layers of rich and long-standing history that it's unlikely its meaning can be reduced to everyday applications as pragmatists do. Second, pragmatism appears to deny the existence of truth in its metaphysical form. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom (who has a debt to Peirce and James) are mostly silent on questions of metaphysics, while Dewey's extensive writings have only one reference to the issue of truth.

Purpose

The purpose of pragmatism was to provide a different perspective to the analytic and Continental styles of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to start its first generation. These classical pragmatists focused on theorizing inquiry as well as the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by numerous influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their theories to education and social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work was also a beneficiary of this influence.

More recently, a new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism a wider platform for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists are not traditional pragmatists, but they believe that they belong to the same tradition. Their main model is Robert Brandom, whose work focuses on semantics and the philosophy of language but who also draws on the philosophy of Peirce and James.

One of the main differences between the classic pragmatics and the neo-pragmatists lies in 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. The neo-pragmatists instead concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertion,' which says that an idea is genuinely true if a claim made about it is justified in a particular way to a specific audience.

This viewpoint is not without its problems. It is often accused of being used to support unfounded and absurd theories. The gremlin hypothesis is an example of this: It's an idea that works in practice but is unfounded and probably absurd. This isn't a huge issue, but it does highlight one of the major problems with pragmatism. It can be used as a reason for almost everything.

Significance

Pragmatic is a term that refers to practical, and relates to the consideration of real world conditions and situations when making decisions. It can also refer to the philosophical position that emphasizes practical considerations in the determining of truth, meaning, or value. William James (1842-1910) first used the term "pragmatism" to describe this perspective in a speech he delivered at the University of California, Berkeley. James scrupulously swore that the word had been coined by his colleague and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however, the pragmatist view soon gained a reputation all its own.

The pragmatists resisted the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy like mind and body, thought and experience, and analytic and synthesthetic. They also rebuffed the idea of truth as something that is fixed or objective and instead treated it as a constantly evolving socially-determined notion.

Classical pragmatists focused primarily on the theory of inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth however James put these themes to work by exploring the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on a new generation of pragmatists who applied the method to education, politics and other aspects of social improvement.

In recent years, Pragmatickr.Com Neopragmatists have sought to place the concept of pragmatism within a larger Western philosophical context. They have analyzed the affinities between Peirce’s ideas and those of Kant, other 19th-century idealists and the emergence of the science of evolution theory. They have also sought to understand the significance of truth in a traditional epistemology that is a posteriori, and to develop a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes the concept of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.

Yet, pragmatism continues to evolve, and the a posteriori epistemology it developed is still considered a significant departure from more traditional approaches. The defenders of pragmatism have had to confront a variety of objections that are as old as the theory itself, but which have been more prominently discussed in recent times. They include the notion that pragmatism collapses when applied to moral issues, and that its claim that "what is effective" is nothing more than a form of relativism with an unpolished appearance.

Methods

For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was a key part of his epistemological approach. He believed it was an opportunity to discredit false metaphysical concepts such as the Catholic understanding transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.

The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is the best one can expect from a theory about truth. As such, they tend to avoid deflationist claims of truth that need to be verified in order to be deemed valid. Instead they advocate a different method, which they refer to as 'pragmatic explication'. This involves explaining how a concept is used in real life and identifying criteria that must be met in order to accept the concept as true.

It is important to remember that this approach could be viewed as a type of relativism and is often criticised for doing so. It is not as extreme as deflationist alternatives and can be an effective method of getting out of some the relativist theories of reality's issues.

In the wake of this, a lot of liberatory philosophical ideas that are related to eco-philosophy, feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist traditions. Moreover many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have taken on pragmatism with the kind of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.

While pragmatism is a rich tradition, it is crucial to recognize that there are also some fundamental flaws with the philosophy. Particularly, pragmatism does not provide a meaningful test of truth and it fails when applied to moral questions.

Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticised the philosophy. Yet, it has been reclaimed from obscurity by a wide range of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. Although these philosophers aren't traditional pragmatists, they have a lot in common with the pragmatism philosophy and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their writings are worth reading for those interested in this philosophy movement.