Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that emphasizes experience and context. It might not have an explicit set of fundamental principles or a coherent ethical framework. This can lead to a lack of idealistic aspirations or transformative change.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth and pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements are related to states of affairs. They simply explain the role that truth plays in everyday activities.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term used to describe things or people who are practical, logical, and sensible. It is often used to distinguish between idealistic, which is an idea or person that is based upon high principles or ideals. When making decisions, the pragmatic person considers the real world and the circumstances. They are focused on what is realistically achievable instead of attempting to reach the ideal outcome.
Pragmatism is an emerging philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical implications in determining the truth, meaning, or value. It is a third option to the dominant analytic and continental tradition of philosophy. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founders, pragmatism evolved into two distinct streams one of which is akin to 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 but they differ on how to define it or how it works in the actual world. One method that is influenced by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways people solve questions and make assertions. It prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users in determining if truth is a fact. One approach, influenced Rorty's followers, focuses on the more mundane aspects of truth, including its ability to generalize, recommend and avert danger, and is less concerned with a complex theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. It firstly, it flings with relativism. Truth is a concept with such a rich and long-standing history that it's unlikely that its meaning could be reduced to everyday applications as pragmatists do. Second, pragmatism appears to reject the existence of truth in its metaphysical aspect. This is evident by the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce and James and are mostly silent about metaphysics while Dewey has made only one reference to truth in his extensive writings.
Purpose
The goal of pragmatism is to offer an alternative to the analytic and Continental styles of philosophy. The first generation of pragmatists was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, with their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These pragmatists from the classical period focused on theorizing inquiry, 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 different dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935), who founded social work was also a beneficiary of this influence.
In recent years the new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism a larger platform for discussion. Although they differ from classic pragmatists these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main figure. He focuses his work on semantics and pragmatickr the philosophy of language, but draws from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
Neopragmatists have an entirely different understanding 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 concentrate on the idea 'ideal justified assertibility', which says that an idea is true if it can be justified to a specific audience in a specific way.
There are however some issues with this theory. One of the most common complaints is that it could be used to support any number of ridiculous and illogical theories. One example is the gremlin hypothesis it is a useful concept, and it is effective in practice, but it is utterly unfounded and probably nonsense. This isn't a major issue, but it does highlight one of the major problems with pragmatism. It can be used as a justification for just about everything.
Significance
Pragmatic means practical, relating to the consideration of actual world conditions and circumstances when making decisions. It may be a reference to the philosophy that focuses on practical consequences in the determination of truth, meaning, or value. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this view in a lecture at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed to have coined the term with his mentor and friend Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist view soon earned its own fame.
The pragmatists rejected the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy, such as mind and body, thought and experience, as well as synthesthetic and analytic. They also rejected the notion of truth as something fixed or objective and instead treated it as a constantly evolving, socially-determined concept.
Classical pragmatists were focused on the theory of inquiry, meaning, and the nature of truth, though James put these concepts to work exploring truth in religion. A second generation shifted the pragmatist view of education, politics, and other dimensions of social development, under the great influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
The neo-pragmatists of recent decades have tried to place pragmatism in a broader Western philosophical context, and have traced the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other 19th century idealists and the emerging science of evolutionary theory. They have also attempted to understand the role of truth in a traditional epistemology that is a posteriori and to create a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic and includes the concept of language, meaning and the nature of knowledge.
Despite this the pragmatism that it has developed continues to evolve and the a posteriori method that it has developed is distinct from the traditional approaches. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries but in recent times it has been receiving more attention. They include the notion that pragmatism is a flop when applied to moral questions and its assertion that "what is effective" is nothing more than relativism with a less-polished appearance.
Methods
Peirce's epistemological approach included a pragmatic explanation. He saw it as a way to undermine false metaphysical ideas such as 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 the theory of truth. They generally avoid deflationist theories of truth which require verification before they are valid. Instead, they advocate an alternative method, which they refer to as 'pragmatic explication'. This is the process of explaining how a concept is applied in the real world and identifying conditions that must be met in order to recognize it as true.
It is important to remember that this method could be seen as a form of relativism, and indeed is often criticized for doing so. However, it is more moderate than the deflationist alternatives, and is thus a useful way to get around some of the issues associated with relativism theories of truth.
As a result of this, a variety of liberatory philosophical projects that are related to feminism, eco-philosophy, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist traditions. Quine for instance, is an analytic philosopher who has embraced the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
Although pragmatism has a long tradition, it is crucial to recognize that there are significant flaws in the philosophy. In particular, the pragmatic approach does not provide an objective test of truth and fails when applied to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticised the philosophy. However, it has been reclaimed from obscurity by a diverse 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 philosophy of pragmatism and draw upon the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their works are worth reading for anyone interested in this philosophy movement.