Pragmatism emphasizes context and experience. It might not have a clear ethical framework or foundational principles. This could result in an absence of idealistic goals or transformational change.In contrast to deflationary theories, pragmatic theories do not deny the notion that statements are correlated to real-world situations. They simply explain the role truth plays in practical endeavors.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to describe things or people that are practical, rational and sensible. It is often used to differentiate between idealistic, which refers to an idea or person that is based on ideals or high principles. A pragmatic person looks at the real-world circumstances and conditions when making decisions, and is focused 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 consequences determine significance, truth or value. It is a third alternative to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founding fathers, pragmatism developed into two competing streams one of which is akin to relativism, the other towards the idea of realism.
The nature of truth is a major issue in pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree that truth is a crucial concept, they are not sure how to define it and how it is used in practice. One approach that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways people deal with problems and make assertions and prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users in determining whether something is true. One method, which was influenced by Rorty's followers, focuses more on the mundane functions of truth, including its ability to generalize, recommend and be cautious, and is less focused on a complicated theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. It is the first to flirt with relativism. Truth is a concept with such a rich and long-standing tradition that it's unlikely that its meaning can be reduced to a few commonplace use as pragmatists would do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems dismiss the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is evident by the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom, who owes much to Peirce & James and are mostly in silence about metaphysics, while Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his extensive writings.
Purpose
The goal of pragmatism is to provide a different perspective to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to initiate its first generation. These pragmatists from the classical period focused on theorizing inquiry as well as the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by a number influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education as well as social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social worker who founded the field also gained from this influence.
In recent times an emerging generation has given pragmatism a new debate platform. A lot of these neopragmatists are not classical pragmatists however they are part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main persona. His work is centered on semantics and philosophy of language, but also draws from the philosophy of Peirce, www.Pragmatickr.Com James, and others.
One of the major distinctions between the classic pragmatics and the neo-pragmatists lies in their understanding of what it takes 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 focus instead on the idea "ideal justified assertionibility," which states 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 perspective. The most frequent criticism is that it could be used to support all kinds of absurd and illogical theories. A simple example is the gremlin hypothesis it is a useful idea, it works in the real world, but it is totally unsubstantiated and most likely untrue. This isn't a huge issue, but it reveals one of the major weaknesses of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for just about anything.
Significance
When making decisions, the term "practical" refers to considering the world as it is and its circumstances. It could be used to refer to a philosophical view that stresses practical implications in the determining of truth, meaning or value. The term"pragmatism" first used to describe this view around a century ago when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into practice in an address at the University of California (Berkeley). James swore he coined the term with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist viewpoint soon gained its own name.
The pragmatists rejected the stark dichotomies in analytic philosophy such as truth and value, thought and experience, mind and body, synthetic and analytic and other such distinctions. They also rejected the notion that truth was something that was fixed or objective, instead treating it as a continuously evolving socially-determined concept.
James used these themes to investigate the truth of religion. A second generation turned the pragmatist view of education, politics and other aspects of social improvement, under the great influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
In recent years, the Neopragmatists have sought to place the pragmatism in a larger Western philosophical framework. They have traced the affinities between Peirce’s ideas and the ideas of Kant, other 19th-century idealists and the new science of evolution theory. They also sought to understand truth's role 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.
Nevertheless, pragmatism has continued to develop, and the a posteriori epistemology that was developed is considered a significant departure from more traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticized for a long time but in recent times it has been receiving more attention. One of them is the notion that pragmatism is ineffective when applied to moral issues and that its claim "what works" is nothing more than relativism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
The epistemological method of Peirce included a practical explanation. Peirce saw it as an opportunity to discredit false metaphysical concepts such as the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty seeking strategies in epistemology.
For many modern pragmatists, the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from the theory of truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification to be valid. They advocate an alternative approach they call "pragmatic explanation". This involves explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in practice and identifying the conditions that must be met to accept the concept as authentic.
This method is often criticized as an example of form-relativism. But it's less extreme than the deflationist alternatives and thus is a great way to get around some of the problems with relativism theories of truth.
In the wake of this, a lot of liberatory philosophical projects like those that are linked to eco-philosophy, feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist traditions. Furthermore, many philosophers of the analytic tradition (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not manage.
It is important to recognize that pragmatism, though rich in the past, has some serious flaws. Particularly, pragmatism fails to provide any meaningful test of truth, and it collapses when applied to moral issues.
Some of the most important pragmaticists, like Quine and Wilfrid Sellars, also criticized the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have revived the philosophy from its obscureness. These philosophers, although not being classical pragmatists themselves have a lot in common with the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. The works of these philosophers are recommended to anyone interested in this philosophy movement.
