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 could result in a lack of idealistic aspirations or a radical change.
Contrary to deflationary theories, pragmatic theories do not deny the idea that statements are correlated to real-world situations. They only clarify the role that truth plays in everyday endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term used to describe things or people who are practical, logical, and sensible. It is frequently used to contrast with idealistic, which refers to an idea or a person that is founded on ideals or high principles. A person who is pragmatic looks at the real world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, and is focused on what can be realistically accomplished, rather than seeking to determine the most optimal possible outcome.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement that focuses on the importance of practical consequences in determining the truth, meaning, or value. It is a third option to the dominant continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. It was developed by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two competing streams of thought, one tending towards relativism while the other towards realist thought.
One of the most important issues in pragmatism is the nature of truth. Many pragmatists recognize that truth is a valuable concept, but disagree on the definition or how it is applied in practice. One method, heavily influenced by Peirce & James, concentrates on how people resolve questions and make assertions and focuses on the speech-acts and justifying projects that people use to determine if something is true. Another approach, that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, concentrates on the relatively mundane functions of truth--the way it serves to generalize, admonish and avert danger. It is also less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
The main flaw of this neo-pragmatic approach to truth is that it flirts with relativism since the concept of "truth" is a concept with been around for so long and has such a extensive history that it is unlikely that it could be reduced to the nebulous purposes that pragmatists give it. Another flaw is that pragmatism also appears to be an approach that does not believe in the existence of truth, at the very least in its substantial metaphysical form. This is reflected by the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom who owe a lot to Peirce & James but are silent about metaphysics while Dewey has made only one mention of truth in his many writings.
Purpose
Pragmatism aims to provide an alternative to the continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. The first generation of pragmatists was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together alongside their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These classical pragmatists focused on theorizing inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by many influential American thinkers like John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied their theories to education and other dimensions of social improvement, as well as Jane Addams (1860-1935) who created social work.
In recent times an emerging generation has given pragmatism a wider platform for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists not traditional pragmatists, but they consider themselves part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main model. His work is centered on semantics and philosophy of language, but also draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
Neopragmatists have a distinct perception of what is required 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, insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility which states that an idea is genuinely true if a claim made about it is justified in a specific manner to a specific group of people.
There are, however, some problems with this view. One of the most common complaints is that it can be used to support any number of ridiculous and absurd ideas. A simple example is the gremlin idea it is a useful idea, it works in practice, but it's totally unsubstantiated and most likely nonsense. This is not an insurmountable issue however, it does point out one of the biggest flaws in pragmatism that it can be used to justify almost anything, and that is the case for many ridiculous ideas.
Significance
Pragmatic means practical, relating to the consideration of real situations and conditions when making decisions. It is also used to refer to a philosophy that focuses on the practical consequences when determining meaning or truth. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this view in a lecture at the University of California, Berkeley. James was adamant that the word was invented by his friend and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however the pragmatist perspective soon gained a reputation all its own.
The pragmatists opposed the stark dichotomies in analytic philosophy, such as value and fact thoughts and experiences mind and body, synthetic and analytic, and other such distinctions. They also rejected the notion of truth as something that is fixed or objective, instead describing it as a constantly evolving socially-determined notion.
James used these themes to investigate the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an important influence on the second generation of pragmatists who applied the method to education, politics and other aspects of social improvement.
In recent years, neopragmatists have attempted to place the concept of pragmatism within a larger Western philosophical framework. They have identified the connections between Peirce's views and those of Kant and other idealists of the 19th century, and the emerging science of evolution theory. They also sought to understand the role of truth in an original epistemology of a priori and developed a Metaphilosophy of the practical that includes views of language, meaning, and the nature and origin of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to evolve, and the a posteriori epistemology was developed is considered a significant departure from more traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries, but in recent years it has attracted more attention. Some of them include the notion that pragmatism doesn't work when applied to moral questions, and that its claim "what works" is nothing more than a realism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce the pragmatic explanation of truth was a crucial part of his epistemological strategy. He saw it as a method of undermining spurious metaphysical ideas such as the Catholic notion of transubstantiation Cartesian methods of seeking certainty in epistemology and Kant's concept of a 'thing in itself' (Simson 2010).
For a lot of modern pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. They generally avoid the deflationist theories of truth that require verification before they are valid. Instead they advocate a different method, which they refer to as 'pragmatic explication'. This involves describing how an idea is utilized in practice and identifying conditions that must be met to be able to recognize it as valid.
It should be noted that this method could be viewed as a form of relativism, and indeed is often criticized for it. It is less extreme than deflationist options and can be an effective method of getting past some the relativist theories of reality's issues.
As a result, various philosophical liberation projects like those that are associated with feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - are now looking at the pragmatist tradition for direction. Additionally many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not manage.
Although pragmatism has a long legacy, it is important to note that there are important flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, pragmatism fails to provide any real test of truth, and it is a failure when applied to moral issues.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also critiqued the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have reclaimed the philosophy from its insignificance. These philosophers, despite not classical pragmatists have a lot in common with the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. The works of these philosophers are worth reading by anyone interested in this philosophical movement.