Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophical system that focuses on experience and context. It might not have a clear ethical framework or foundational principles. This can result in a lack of idealistic aspirations or transformational changes.
Unlike deflationary theories of truth the pragmatic theories of truth don't reject the notion that statements correlate to current events. They merely clarify the role that truth plays in the practical world.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to describe things or people that are practical, logical and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic which refers to an individual or notion that is based upon ideals or high principles. A pragmatic person looks at the real 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, focuses on the importance that practical implications have in determining meaning, truth or value. It is a third alternative philosophy to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. It was developed by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two competing streams of thought, one tending toward relativism and the other toward realism.
The nature of truth is a major issue in the philosophy of pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree truth is a key concept, they differ on how to define it and how it is used in the real world. One method that is influenced by Peirce and James, focuses on the ways people solve problems and make assertions and prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. One method, which was influenced by Rorty's followers, concentrates on the more mundane aspects of truth, including its ability to generalize, praise and be cautious, and is less focused on a complicated 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 tradition that it's unlikely its meaning can be reduced to a few commonplace uses as pragmatists do. The second flaw is that pragmatism also appears to be an approach that denies the existence of truth, at a minimum in its metaphysical sense. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists, such as Brandom (who has an obligation to Peirce and James) are largely silent on questions of metaphysics and Dewey's lengthy writings contain only one mention of the question of truth.
related seeks to offer an alternative to the analytic and continental traditions of philosophy. Its first generation was initiated by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James along alongside their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). The classical pragmatists were focused on the theory of inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by several influential American thinkers like John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied their ideas to education and other aspects of social improvement, as well as Jane Addams (1860-1935) who created social work.
Recently, a new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism more space for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists are not classical pragmatists but they are part of the same tradition. Their main figure is Robert Brandom, whose work focuses on semantics and the philosophy of language but who also draws on 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. The neo-pragmatists instead concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertibility' which says 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 flaws. A common criticism is that it could be used to support any number of ridiculous and illogical ideas. A simple example is the gremlin idea that is a truly useful concept that works in the real world, but it is utterly unfounded and probably absurd. This is not an insurmountable issue, but it does highlight one of the main flaws of pragmatism It can be used to justify almost anything, and this includes many absurd ideas.
Significance
When making a decision, it is important to be pragmatic by taking into account the real world and its surroundings. It could be a reference to the philosophy that focuses on practical considerations in the determining of truth, meaning, or value. William James (1842-1910) first employed the term pragmatism describe this perspective in a lecture at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed to have coined the term along with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist view soon earned its own reputation.
The pragmatists rejected analytic philosophy's sharp dichotomies, such as mind and body, thoughts and experience and synthesthetic and analytic. They also rebuffed the idea of truth as something that is fixed or objective and instead saw it as a continuously evolving socially-determined idea.
James utilized these themes to study truth in religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on a new generation of pragmatists who applied the approach to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.
In recent years, neopragmatists have attempted to place the concept of pragmatism within a larger Western philosophical context. They have analyzed the commonalities between Peirce's ideas and the ideas of Kant and other idealists of the 19th century, and the emerging science of evolution theory. They have also sought to clarify the role of truth in an original a posteriori epistemology and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy which includes an understanding of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.
Despite this the fact that pragmatism is still evolving and the a posteriori method that it came up with is a significant departure from traditional approaches. The people who defend it have had to face a myriad of arguments that are as old as the theory itself, but which have received greater exposure in recent years. They include the notion that pragmatism is a flop when applied to moral issues, and that its claim that "what works" is nothing more than relativism, albeit with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was a crucial part of his epistemological strategy. He saw it as an opportunity to discredit false metaphysical notions like the Catholic understanding transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.
For many contemporary pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from the theory of truth. They generally avoid the deflationist theories of truth that require verification before they are valid. They advocate a different approach they refer to as "pragmatic explanation". This involves describing how the concept is used in the real world and identifying conditions that must be met in order to confirm it as true.
It should be noted that this approach may still be seen as a form of relativism and is often criticised for doing so. But it's more moderate than the deflationist alternatives and thus is a great way of getting around some of the issues associated with relativist theories of truth.
In the wake of this, a variety of liberatory philosophical ideas like those that are linked to feminism, eco-philosophy, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for inspiration in the pragmatist tradition. Additionally, many philosophers of the analytic tradition (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself was unable to attain.
While pragmatism is a rich legacy, it is important to realize that there are also some significant flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, 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. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have reclaimed it from insignificance. These philosophers, while not classical pragmatists, owe much to the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their writings are worth reading for those interested in this philosophy movement.