Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that focuses on experience and context. It may lack a clear set of foundational principles or a coherent ethical framework. This can lead to a lack of idealistic aspirations or transformational change.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth the pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements are related to the state of affairs. They merely clarify the role that truth plays in everyday endeavors.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to refer to people or things that are practical, rational and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic which refers to a person or notion that is based upon 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 realistically be achieved as opposed to trying to find the most effective theoretical course of action.
Pragmatism, a new philosophical movement, stresses the importance that practical implications determine significance, truth or value. It is an alternative to the dominant analytical and continental traditions. It was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two competing streams of thought, one that tended towards relativism, the other to realism.
One of the most important issues in pragmatism is the nature of truth. While many pragmatists agree that truth is a key concept, they differ on what it means and how it functions in practice. One approach that is inspired by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways in which people deal with issues and make assertions. 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 -act and justification processes of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. Another approach that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, concentrates on the comparatively simple functions of truth--the way it serves to generalize, admonish and avert danger. It is also less concerned with a full-fledged theory of truth.
The first flaw with this neo-pragmatic view of truth is that it flirts with relativism, as the concept of "truth" has such a long and long-standing history that it appears unlikely that it could be reduced to the mundane purposes that pragmatists give it. Furthermore, pragmatism seems deny the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is evident by the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce and James and are mostly uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
The goal of pragmatism is to provide an alternative to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. Its first generation was initiated by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together as well as their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). The classical pragmatists were adamant about the importance of inquiry and meaning as well as the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by numerous influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their theories to education and social improvement in other dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935), who founded social work also gained from this influence.
In recent times, a new generation has given pragmatism an expanded forum for discussion. Although they differ from the classic pragmatists these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main persona. He focuses his research 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 says that an idea is genuinely true if the claim made about it is justified in a certain way to a particular audience.
This view is not without its problems. It is often criticized for being used to support unfounded and silly concepts. The gremlin theory is a prime example: It's a useful idea that is effective in practice but is unsubstantiated and likely nonsense. This isn't a major issue, but it does highlight one of the biggest flaws of pragmatism: it can be used as a justification for just about anything.
Significance
When making decisions, pragmatic means taking into account the actual world and its surroundings. It can also be used to refer to a philosophical perspective that emphasizes the practical implications when determining the meaning or truth. William James (1842-1910) first used the term "pragmatism" to describe this viewpoint in a speech at the University of California, Berkeley. James confidently claimed that the term was coined by his colleague and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however, the pragmatist view quickly earned a name of its own.
The pragmatists resisted the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy such as fact and value as well as experience and thought mind and body, analytic and synthetic and other such distinctions. They also rejected the notion that truth was a fixed or objective, and instead viewed it like a constantly-evolving, socially determined concept.
Classical pragmatists focused primarily on theorizing inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth, but James put these themes to work by exploring the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was a major influence on a new generation of pragmatists who applied this approach to education, politics and other aspects of social improvement.
In recent years, neopragmatists have attempted to place the pragmatism in a larger Western philosophical context. They have traced 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 understand the significance of truth in a traditional a posteriori epistemology and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes an understanding of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.
However the fact that pragmatism is still evolving and the a posteriori method that it developed remains distinct from the traditional approaches. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries but in recent times it has received more attention. Some of these include the notion that pragmatism is ineffective when applied to moral issues and that its assertion of "what works" is nothing more than relativism that has an unpolished appearance.
Methods
The epistemological method of Peirce included a practical explanation. Peirce saw it as a means to undermine metaphysical concepts that were false such as the Catholic notion of transubstantiation Cartesian certainty-seeking strategies in epistemology and Kant's notion of a 'thing in itself' (Simson 2010).
For many contemporary pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from a theory of truth. In this sense, they tend to avoid deflationist claims of truth that require verification in order to be deemed valid. Instead, they advocate an alternative method they refer to as "pragmatic explication". This involves describing how the concept is used in real life and identifying the conditions that must be met to be able to recognize it as valid.
It is important to note that this approach may still be viewed as a form of relativism and is often criticized for doing so. It is not as extreme as deflationist alternatives, and is an effective method of getting out of some the problems of relativist theories of reality.
In the end, various philosophical liberation projects like those that are associated with feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - are now looking to the pragmatist tradition for direction. Additionally, many analytic philosophers (such as Quine) have adopted pragmatism with a level of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.
It is important to recognize that pragmatism, though rich in history, also has some serious flaws. In particular, pragmatism fails to provide any valid test of truth, and it is a failure when applied to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticized the philosophy. Nevertheless it has been brought back from the ashes by a broad variety of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. These philosophers, while not being classical pragmatists themselves have a lot in common with the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their works are worth reading for those who are interested in this philosophical movement.