Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism places emphasis on experience and context. It may not have a clear ethical framework or a set of fundamental principles. This can lead to the absence of idealistic goals or transformational change.
In contrast to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not reject the notion that statements are related to actual states of affairs. They merely explain the role truth plays in everyday endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term used to describe things or people who are practical, logical, and sensible. It is often used to distinguish between idealistic which is a person or an idea that is based on high principles or ideals. A person who is pragmatic looks at the real world circumstances and conditions when making decisions, and is focused on what can be realistically accomplished rather than trying to achieve the best possible outcome.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement, stresses the importance that practical consequences determine what is true, meaning or value. It is a third alternative to the dominant analytic and continental tradition of philosophy. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founders, pragmatism evolved into two competing streams that tended towards relativism and the second toward the idea of realism.
The nature of truth is a central issue in pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree truth is an important concept, they are not sure what it means and how it is used in the real world. One approach, influenced heavily by Peirce & James, is focused on how people solve questions and make assertions and focuses on the speech-acts and justification projects that users of language use to determine the truth of an assertion. Another method that is that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the comparatively simple functions of truth, namely its ability to generalize, recommend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
This neopragmatic interpretation of truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept with an extensive and long-standing tradition that it's unlikely its meaning could be reduced to a few commonplace applications as pragmatists do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems dismiss the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom who owe a lot to Peirce & James and are mostly uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
Pragmatism aims to provide an alternative to the analytic and continental tradition of philosophy. Its first generation was initiated by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together alongside their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These pragmatists from the classical period focused on theorizing inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth. Their influence grew to a number influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education and social improvement in other dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work, also benefited from this influence.
In recent times, a new generation has given pragmatism a new debate platform. While they are different from classical pragmatists, many of these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Their main figure is Robert Brandom, whose work is centered around semantics and the philosophy of language, but also draws upon the philosophy of Peirce and James.
The neopragmatists have a different perception of what is required 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. Neo-pragmatists, on the other hand, concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertion,' which says that an idea is true if the claim made about it can be justified in a certain way to a specific group of people.
There are, however, a few issues with this theory. It is often accused of being used to justify illogical and absurd concepts. The gremlin hypothesis is an illustration: It's a good concept that can be applied in real life but is unfounded and probably untrue. This isn't a major problem, but it highlights one of the major problems with pragmatism. It can be used as a justification for nearly anything.
Significance
When making decisions, the term "practical" refers to considering the world as it is and its conditions. It may be used to refer to a philosophy that focuses on practical implications in the determining of meaning, truth or value. 프라그마틱 무료 (1842-1910) first employed the term pragmatism describe this viewpoint in a speech at the University of California, Berkeley. James was adamant that the word was coined by his colleague and mentor Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however, the pragmatist view quickly gained a name of its own.
The pragmatists rejected the sharp dichotomies in analytic philosophy, such as mind and body, thoughts and experience, as well as analytic and synthesthetic. They also rejected the notion that truth was something fixed or objective, and instead treated it as a continuously evolving socially-determined notion.
Classical pragmatics primarily focused on theorizing inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth though James put these themes to work in examining truth in religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on the second generation of pragmatists, who applied the method to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.
The neo-pragmatists of recent years have attempted to place pragmatism in an overall Western philosophical context, by tracing the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other 19th century idealists, as well as with the new science of evolutionary theory. They have also attempted to understand the significance of truth in an original epistemology that is a posteriori and to formulate a pragmatic metaphilosophy which includes the concept of meaning, language, and the nature of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to evolve and the epistemology of a posteriori that it developed is still regarded as an important departure from more traditional approaches. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries but in recent times it has attracted more attention. Some of these include the idea that pragmatism fails when applied to moral issues and that its claim to "what works" is nothing more than relativism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was a crucial element of his epistemological plan. He saw it as a way of undermining spurious metaphysical ideas such as the Catholic notion of transubstantiation Cartesian methods of seeking certainty 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 an understanding of truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification to be valid. Instead, they advocate an alternative method they refer to as "pragmatic explanation". This is the process of explaining how a concept can be used in practice and identifying the requirements to be met in order to recognize that concept as authentic.
This method is often criticized as a form relativism. It is less extreme than deflationist alternatives, and is a useful way to get around some of the problems of relativist theories of reality.
In the wake of this, a lot of liberatory philosophical projects that are related to eco-philosophy, feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist tradition. Furthermore, many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have adopted pragmatism with a level of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.
It is important to recognize that pragmatism, while rich in historical context, has some serious shortcomings. Particularly, the pragmatism does not provide an objective test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral questions.
Some of the most prominent pragmaticists, like Quine and Wilfrid Sellars, also criticized the philosophy. However it has been brought back from obscurity by a wide range of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. While these philosophers are not classical pragmatists but they do contribute significantly to the philosophy of pragmatism and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their works are worth reading for those who are interested in this philosophy movement.