Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism places emphasis on experience and context. Pragmatic KR might not have a clear ethical framework or a set of fundamental principles. This can lead to the loss of idealistic goals and transformative change.
Unlike deflationary theories of truth the pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements are related to states of affairs. They simply elucidate the roles that truth plays in practical activities.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to refer to people or things that are practical, rational and sensible. It is frequently used to contrast with idealistic, which refers to a person or an idea that is based on ideals or high principles. When making a decision, the sensible person takes into consideration the real world and the conditions. They focus on what is feasible instead of trying to find the ideal course of action.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement that focuses on the importance of practical implications in the determination of meaning, truth or value. It is a third option to the dominant continental and analytic tradition of philosophy. Founded by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two competing streams of thought, one that tended toward relativism and the other toward realism.
The nature of truth is an important issue in the philosophy of pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree that truth is a crucial concept, they are not sure how to define it and how it operates in practice. One method that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways in which people deal with issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. One approach, influenced Rorty's followers, concentrates more on the basic functions of truth, like its ability to generalize, commend and be cautious and is less concerned with a complex theory of truth.
This neopragmatic view of the truth has two flaws. It is the first to flirt with relativism. Truth is a concept with so many layers of rich and long-standing tradition that it's unlikely that its meaning can be reduced to mundane use as pragmatists would do. Another flaw is that pragmatism appears to be a way of thinking that rejects the existence of truth, at least in its metaphysical sense. This is evident by the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce and James, are largely uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has only made one mention of truth in his many writings.
Purpose
The aim of pragmatism is to provide an alternative to the Continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. The first generation was started by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together alongside their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These classical pragmatists focused on the importance of inquiry and meaning as well as the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by many influential American thinkers including John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied these ideas to education and other aspects of social development, and Jane Addams (1860-1935) who founded social work.
Recently, a new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism more space for debate. While they are different from classical pragmatists, many of these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main model. His work is centered on the philosophy and semantics of language, but draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
One of the major distinctions between the classical pragmatists and the neo-pragmatists is 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. The neo-pragmatists instead insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility, which states that an idea is true if the claim made about it can be justified in a specific manner to a specific group of people.
There are, however, some problems with this view. It is often accused of being used to justify illogical and ridiculous theories. The gremlin theory is a prime illustration: It's a good idea that works in practice but is unfounded and probably absurd. This isn't a huge issue however it does highlight one of the biggest flaws in pragmatism that it can be used to justify nearly anything, and that is the case for many ridiculous ideas.
Significance
Pragmatic refers to the practical aspect of a decision, which is related to the consideration of actual world conditions and situations when making decisions. It is also used to refer to a philosophy that focuses on the practical consequences in determining the meaning or truth. The term"pragmatism" first used to describe this viewpoint about a century ago, when William James (1842-1910) pressed into service in an address 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 viewpoint soon gained its own fame.
The pragmatists opposed the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy, such as mind and body, thoughts and experience, as well as analytic and synthesthetic. They also rejected the notion of truth as something that is fixed or objective and instead treated it as a constantly evolving socially-determined notion.
Classical pragmatics primarily focused on the theory of inquiry, meaning, and the nature of truth but James put these themes to work exploring truth in 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 made an effort to place pragmatism in a broader Western philosophical context, tracing the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other 19th century idealists and the emergence of the science of evolutionary theory. They also sought to define the role of truth in an original a priori epistemology and to develop a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic that includes theories of the meaning of language, as well as the nature and the origin of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to evolve and the a posteriori epistemology was developed is considered an important distinction from traditional approaches. Its defenders have been forced to grapple with a number of objections that are as old as the pragmatic theory itself, but have been more prominently discussed in recent times. This includes the notion that pragmatism is a flop when it comes to moral issues, and that its claim that "what is effective" is little more than relativism, albeit with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce the pragmatic explanation of truth was a crucial element of his epistemological plan. He saw it as a way to undermine metaphysical concepts that were false such as the Catholic conception of transubstantiation Cartesian epistemology that relies on certainty-seeking strategies and Kant's concept of a 'thing in itself' (Simson 2010).
For many contemporary pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. They tend to avoid deflationist accounts of truth that require verification in order to be deemed valid. Instead they advocate a different method they refer to as "pragmatic explication". This is about explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in practice and identifying the criteria that must be met to accept the concept as authentic.
It should be noted that this approach could be viewed as a form of relativism, and is often criticised for it. But it is less extreme than the deflationist alternatives, and thus is a great way to get around some of the issues with relativism theories of truth.
In the end, various philosophical liberation projects such as those associated with eco-feminism, feminism, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look to the pragmatist tradition as guidance. Moreover, many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have adopted pragmatism with a level of enthusiasm that Dewey himself was unable to attain.
Although pragmatism has a long history, it is important to realize that there are important flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, pragmatic approach does not provide an accurate test of truth, and it is not applicable to moral issues.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticized the philosophy. Nevertheless it has been brought back from the ashes by a broad range of philosophers, such as Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. While these philosophers are not traditional pragmatists, they owe a great deal to the pragmatism philosophy and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. These works of philosophers are recommended to anyone interested in this philosophy movement.