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 lead to an absence of idealistic ambitions and a shift in direction.
In contrast to deflationary theories, pragmatic theories do not deny the notion that statements are correlated to actual states of affairs. They simply elucidate the role that truth plays in our daily endeavors.
Definition
The word pragmatic is used to describe things or people that are practical, rational and sensible. It is frequently used to differentiate between idealistic, which refers to an idea or a person that is based on ideals or high principles. When making decisions, a pragmatic person considers the real world and the current circumstances. They concentrate on what is achievable and realistically feasible instead of trying to find the ideal path of action.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical consequences in the determination of value, truth or value. It is a third alternative in contrast to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. Founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founders, pragmatism grew into two distinct streams that tended towards relativism, the other towards realist thought.
One of the major issues in pragmatism is the nature of truth. While a majority of pragmatists agree that truth is an important concept, they differ on how to define it and how it is used in practice. One method that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, focuses on the ways in which people deal with issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. Another method, inspired by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the relatively mundane functions of truth--the way it serves to generalize, commend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
This neopragmatic interpretation of truth has two flaws. It is the first to flirt with relativism. Truth is a concept that has so many layers of rich and long-standing tradition that it's unlikely that its meaning could be reduced to mundane uses as pragmatists do. The second flaw is that pragmatism also appears to be an approach that rejects the existence of truth, at least in its metaphysical and fundamental form. This is evident by the fact that pragmatists like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce & James but are silent about metaphysics while Dewey has made only one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
Pragmatism is a philosophy that aims to provide an alternative to the analytic and continental philosophical traditions. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to start its first generation. The classical pragmatists were focused on theorizing inquiry as well as the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by several influential American thinkers including John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied the theories to education as well as other aspects of social development, and Jane Addams (1860-1935) who established social work.
In recent years an emerging generation has given pragmatism an expanded platform for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists not traditional pragmatists, but they believe that they belong to the same tradition. Their most prominent persona is Robert Brandom, whose work is focused on semantics and the philosophy of language however, he also draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce and James.
The neopragmatists have a 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 insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility' which says that an idea is true if a claim made about it is justified in a particular way to a specific audience.
There are however some issues with this perspective. It is often criticized for being used to support unfounded and silly ideas. A simple example is the gremlin hypothesis it is a useful concept, and it is effective in practice, but it is completely unsubstantiated and likely to be untrue. This isn't a huge issue, but it does highlight one of the biggest flaws of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for nearly anything.
Significance
When making a decision, it is important to be pragmatic by taking into account the actual world and its circumstances. It can also be used to refer to a philosophical perspective that emphasizes the practical implications when determining meaning or truth. The term"pragmatism" first used to describe this viewpoint about a century ago, when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into service in an address at the University of California (Berkeley). James was adamant that the word had been invented by his friend and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however the pragmatist perspective quickly earned a name of its own.
The pragmatists rejected the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy like mind and body, thought and experience and synthesthetic and analytic. They also rejected the idea that truth was something that was fixed or objective, and instead viewed it like a constantly-evolving, socially determined concept.
Classical pragmatics primarily focused on the theory of inquiry, meaning, and the nature of truth though James put these concepts to work in examining truth in religion. A subsequent generation applied the pragmatist view of politics, education and other dimensions of social development under the influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
In recent years, Neopragmatists have sought to place the pragmatism in a larger Western philosophical framework. They have traced the connections between Peirce's ideas and those of Kant and other idealists of the 19th century, and the emerging theory of evolution. They also sought to understand the role of truth in an original a priori epistemology and develop a pragmatic Metaphilosophy that includes views of the meaning of language, as well as the nature and origin of knowledge.
Nevertheless, pragmatism has continued to develop and the a posteriori epistemology it developed is still considered a significant departure from more traditional approaches. The pragmatic theory has been criticized for centuries however, in recent years it has received more attention. They include the notion that pragmatism is a flop when applied to moral issues and its assertion that "what is effective" is nothing more than relativism, albeit with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce, pragmatic elucidation of truth was an essential part of his epistemological strategy. Peirce saw it as an attempt to debunk false metaphysical ideas like the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation, and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is considered to be the best one can expect from a theoretical framework about truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification in order to be valid. Instead they advocate a different method they refer to as "pragmatic explication". This is the process of explaining how a concept is used in practice and identifying the conditions that must be met to recognize that concept as authentic.
It is important to remember that this method could be viewed as a type of relativism, and indeed is often criticised for doing so. However, it is less extreme than deflationist alternatives and therefore is a good way to get around some of the issues with relativism theories of truth.
In the end, a variety of philosophical liberation projects such as those associated with feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look to the pragmatist tradition for guidance. Quine for instance, is an analytic philosopher who has embraced the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
While pragmatism is a rich legacy, it is important to recognize that there are also some significant flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, philosophy of pragmatism is not a meaningful test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral issues.
Some of the most prominent pragmaticists, like Quine and Wilfrid Sellars, also criticized the philosophy. Highly recommended Web-site and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have revived it from obscurity. These philosophers, despite not classical pragmatists are influenced by the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their works are worth reading for those interested in this philosophical movement.