Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that emphasizes experience and context. It may not have an enlightened ethical framework or a set of fundamental principles. This could lead to a loss of idealistic aspirations and a shift in direction.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth the pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements relate to the state of affairs. They merely define the role that truth plays in practical endeavors.
Definition
The word pragmatic is used to describe people or things that are practical, logical and sensible. It is often used to distinguish between idealistic, which refers to an idea or a person that is founded on ideals or high principles. When making decisions, the pragmatic person considers the real world and the circumstances. They concentrate on what is realistically achievable instead of attempting to reach the ideal course of action.
Pragmatism is an emerging philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical consequences in the determination of value, truth or value. It is a third option to the dominant analytic and continental traditions of philosophy. It was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two distinct streams of thought, one inclining towards relativism, the other towards realism.
One of the central issues in pragmatism is the nature of truth. Many pragmatists acknowledge that truth is a valuable concept however, they disagree on how to define it or how it functions in the actual world. One approach, influenced heavily by Peirce & James, focuses on how people solve issues and make assertions, and focuses on the speech-acts and justifying projects that users of language use to determine if something is true. Another approach, that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the comparatively simple functions of truth--the way it serves to generalize, recommend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
The first flaw with this neo-pragmatic approach to truth is that it flirts with relativism, since the notion 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. Second, pragmatism appears to reject the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists like Brandom, who owes much to Peirce & James, are largely uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has only made one mention of truth in his extensive writings.
Purpose
Pragmatism aims to provide an alternative to the continental and analytic philosophical traditions. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to start its first generation. These classical pragmatists emphasized the concept of meaning and inquiry, and the nature of truth. Their influence spread to many 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 work pioneer who created social work, also benefited from this influence.
More recently the new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism more space for discussion. Although they differ from classic pragmatists the neo-pragmatists claim to be part of the same tradition. Their principal figure is Robert Brandom, whose work is focused on semantics and the philosophy of language, however, he also draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce and James.
One of the major distinctions between the classic pragmatics and the neo-pragmatists lies in their understanding of what it means 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 concept of 'ideal justified assertibility', which states that an idea is truly true if it can be justified to a specific audience in a certain manner.
There are, however, a few problems with this view. It is often accused of being used to support unfounded and silly ideas. The gremlin hypothesis is a good example: It's a useful idea that is effective in practice but is probably unfounded and absurd. This isn't a huge issue, but it does highlight one of the major flaws of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for almost anything.
Significance
When making decisions, the term "practical" refers to taking into consideration the actual world and its circumstances. It can be used to refer to a philosophical position that emphasizes practical consequences in the determination of truth, meaning or value. The term"pragmatism" was first utilized to describe this perspective around a century ago when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into practice in a speech at the University of California (Berkeley). James confidently claimed that the term was coined by his friend and mentor 프라그마틱 코리아 Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) however the pragmatist perspective quickly gained a name of its own.
The pragmatists opposed analytic philosophy's sharp dichotomies, such as mind and body, thoughts and experience, and analytic and synthesthetic. They also rejected the idea that truth was something fixed or objective, and instead viewed it as a dynamic, socially determined concept.
James used these themes to explore the truth of religion. A second generation turned the pragmatist approach to education, politics and other dimensions of social development, under the great influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
The neo-pragmatists from recent times have tried to put pragmatism into a broader Western philosophical context, and have traced the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other idealists of the 19th century and the emergence of the science of evolutionary theory. They also have sought to understand the role of truth in a traditional epistemology of a posteriori, and to develop a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic and includes the concept 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 a significant departure from traditional methods. The defenders of pragmatism have had to confront a variety of objections that are as old as the pragmatic theory itself, yet have been more prominently discussed in recent years. They include the notion that pragmatism simply implodes when applied to moral questions and its assertion that "what works" is nothing more than relativism, albeit with a less-polished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce, pragmatic elucidation of truth was a key element of his epistemological plan. Peirce saw it as a method of destroying false metaphysical notions such as the Catholic conception of transubstantiation Cartesian epistemology that relies on certainty-seeking strategies and Kant's concept of a 'thing-inself' (Simson 2010).
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists is the most reliable thing one can hope for from a theory about truth. They tend to avoid deflationist accounts of truth that need to be verified in order to be deemed valid. Instead, they advocate an alternative method which they call 'pragmatic explication'. This is about explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in practice and identifying the criteria that must be met in order to determine whether the concept is true.
This approach is often criticized as a form of relativism. It is not as extreme as deflationist alternatives, and is an effective method of getting past some relativist theories of reality's problems.
In the end, a variety of philosophical ideas that are liberatory, like those relating to feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look to the pragmatist tradition as guidance. Quine is one example. He is an analytical philosopher who has taken on the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
It is crucial to realize that pragmatism, though rich in history, also has a few serious shortcomings. Particularly, pragmatism fails to provide any real test of truth, and it is a failure when applied to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticised the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have revived the philosophy from its obscureness. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do contribute significantly to the pragmatism philosophy and draw on the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their writings are worth reading for those interested in this philosophy movement.