Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy

Pragmatism is a philosophy that emphasizes the experience and context. It may not have a clear ethical framework or foundational principles. This could lead to the loss of idealistic goals and a shift in direction.

Contrary to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not renounce the notion that statements are connected to actual events. They simply clarify the role that truth plays in everyday endeavors.

Definition

Pragmatic is a term used to describe people or things that are practical, logical, and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic, which refers to an individual or idea that is based on high principles or ideals. When making decisions, the pragmatic person is aware of the world and the current circumstances. They concentrate on what is achievable and realistically feasible instead of attempting to reach the ideal path of action.

Pragmatism, a new philosophical movement, focuses on the importance that practical consequences are crucial in determining the what is true, meaning or value. It is a third alternative in contrast to the dominant continental and pragmatickr.Com analytical traditions. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founders, pragmatism evolved into two competing streams that tended towards relativism and the second toward the idea of realism.

The nature of truth is a central issue in pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree that truth is a crucial concept, they differ on how to define it and how it operates in the real world. One method, that is influenced by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways in which people tackle questions and make assertions. It prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users in determining whether truth is a fact. Another approach that is inspired by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the relatively mundane functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, recommend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with a full-fledged theory of truth.

The primary flaw in this neo-pragmatic approach to truth is that it stray with relativism since the notion of "truth" is a concept with been around for so long and has such a long-standing history that it appears unlikely that it could be reduced to the nebulous applications that pragmatists assign it. In addition, pragmatism seems 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 in silence on metaphysical questions in Dewey's vast writings, whereas his works have just one reference to the question of truth.

Purpose

Pragmatism aims to provide an alternative to the analytic and continental traditions of philosophy. The first generation of pragmatists was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together with their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). The classical pragmatists were focused on the theory of inquiry about meaning, meaning and the nature of truth. Their influence spread through many influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied the theories to education and other aspects of social improvement, and Jane Addams (1860-1935) who established social work.

In recent years, a new generation has given pragmatism an expanded debate platform. Many of these neopragmatists are not traditional pragmatists, but they consider themselves 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 main distinctions between the classical 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. Neo-pragmatists, on the other hand, concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertibility which states that an idea is true if the claim made about it can be justified in a particular way to a specific group of people.

This view is not without its challenges. One of the most common complaints is that it can be used to support all sorts of silly and illogical ideas. One example is the gremlin idea: It is a genuinely useful idea, it works in practice, but it's totally unsubstantiated and most likely untrue. This is not an insurmountable problem however, it does point out one of the main flaws of pragmatism that it can be used to justify nearly anything, and this includes a myriad of absurd theories.

Significance

When making a decision, it is important to be pragmatic by taking into account the real world and its conditions. It could also refer to the philosophical position that emphasizes practical considerations in the determining of truth, meaning, or value. The term"pragmatism" was first used to describe this view about a century ago, when William James (1842-1910) pressed into service in an address at the University of California (Berkeley). James claimed he invented the term with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist viewpoint soon gained its own fame.

The pragmatists resisted the stark dichotomies that are inherent in analytic philosophy, like fact and value thoughts and experiences, mind and body, synthetic and analytic and other such distinctions. They also rejected the idea that truth was something fixed or objective, instead treating it as a dynamic socially-determined notion.

James used these themes to investigate the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on a second generation of pragmatists, who applied the approach to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.

The neo-pragmatists of recent decades have tried to place pragmatism in the larger Western philosophical context, by tracing the affinities of Peirce's ideas with Kant and other idealists from the 19th century, as well as with the emerging science of evolutionary theory. They also have sought to understand the significance of truth in an original epistemology of a posteriori and to formulate a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes a view of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.

However, pragmatism has continued to develop, and the epistemology of a posteriori that was developed is considered an important distinction from traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticized for centuries however, in recent years it has been receiving more attention. Some of these include the idea that pragmatism fails when applied to moral issues and that its claim to "what works" is nothing more than relativism with an unpolished appearance.

Methods

The epistemological method of Peirce included a pragmatic elucidation. He saw it as an opportunity to discredit false metaphysical notions such as the Catholic understanding transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.

For many modern pragmatists, the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. As such, they tend to avoid deflationist accounts of truth that require verification in order to be valid. Instead, they advocate an alternative method which they call "pragmatic explication". This involves explaining the way the concept is used in the real world and identifying criteria that must be met in order to be able to recognize it as valid.

This method is often criticized for being a form of relativism. But it's more moderate than the deflationist alternatives and therefore is a good method of overcoming some of the issues associated with relativist theories of truth.

This has led to many philosophical liberation projects like those relating to eco-feminism, feminism, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look at the pragmatist tradition for direction. Moreover many analytic philosophers (such as Quine) have taken on pragmatism with the kind of enthusiasm that Dewey himself was unable to attain.

While pragmatism has a rich tradition, it is crucial to realize that there are also some significant flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, the philosophy of pragmatism is not an accurate test of truth and is not applicable to moral questions.

Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also critiqued the philosophy. However, it has been reclaimed from obscurity by a diverse variety of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. These philosophers, while not being classical pragmatists themselves are influenced by the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their works are worth reading for those interested in this philosophy movement.