Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that focuses on experience and context. It might not have a clear ethical framework or a set of fundamental principles. This can lead to a loss of idealistic aspirations and transformative change.
Unlike deflationary theories of truth the pragmatic theories of truth do not deny the idea that statements relate to the state of affairs. They simply elucidate the roles that truth plays in everyday activities.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to describe people or things that are practical, logical and sensible. It is frequently used to contrast with idealistic, which is an idea or a person that is based on ideals or principles of high quality. A pragmatic person looks at the real-world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, and is focused on what is realistically achieved as opposed to trying to achieve the best possible outcome.
Pragmatism, a brand new philosophical movement, emphasizes the importance that practical implications have in determining what is true, meaning or value. It is a third alternative to the dominant continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. Founded by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two distinct streams of thought, one that tended towards relativism, the other toward the idea of realism.
The nature of truth is an important issue in the philosophy of pragmatism. While many pragmatists agree truth is a crucial concept, they differ on what it means and how it operates in the real world. One approach that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways in which people tackle issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. One of the approaches, influenced by Rorty's followers, is focused on the more mundane aspects of truth, like its ability to generalize, praise and be cautious, and is less concerned with an elaborate theory of truth.
This neopragmatic interpretation of truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept that has so many layers of rich and long-standing history that it's unlikely that its meaning can be reduced to a few commonplace uses as pragmatists do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems deny the existence of truth in its metaphysical aspect. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists, such as Brandom (who is owed a debt to Peirce and James) are largely silent on questions of metaphysics and Dewey's lengthy writings have only one reference to the question of truth.
Purpose
The aim of pragmatism is to provide a different perspective to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. Its first generation was initiated by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, as well as 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 through several influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied their ideas to education and other aspects of social improvement, and Jane Addams (1860-1935) who founded social work.
In recent years the new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism a wider platform for debate. While they are different from traditional pragmatists, a lot of these neo-pragmatists consider 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.
One of the major distinctions between the classical pragmatists and the neo-pragmatists is 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 instead focus on the idea "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 issues with this perspective. A common criticism is that it can be used to support any number of ridiculous and absurd ideas. The gremlin theory is a prime example of this: It's an idea that is effective in practice but is probably unfounded and absurd. This isn't a major issue, but it reveals one of the main weaknesses of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for almost everything.
Significance
Pragmatic means practical, relating to the consideration of real world conditions and circumstances when making decisions. It can also refer to the philosophy that focuses on practical implications in the determining of truth, meaning, or value. William James (1842-1910) first employed the term pragmatism describe this viewpoint in a speech he delivered at the University of California, Berkeley. James confidently claimed 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 resisted analytic philosophy's sharp dichotomies like mind and body, thoughts and experience, and synthesthetic and analytic. They also rejected the idea that truth was something fixed or objective, and instead viewed it as a continuously evolving, socially determined concept.
James utilized these themes to explore the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on a new generation of pragmatists who applied the method to education, politics and other aspects of social improvement.
The neo-pragmatists of recent years have tried to put pragmatism into the larger Western philosophical context, and have traced the affinities of Peirce's ideas with Kant and other 19th century idealists and the new science of evolutionary theory. They have also attempted to understand the role of truth in an original epistemology that is a posteriori and to create a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic and includes a view of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.
However the pragmatism that it has developed continues to evolve and the a posteriori method that it developed remains distinct from the traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries, but in recent years it has received more attention. Some of these include the idea that pragmatism fails when applied to moral questions and that its claim "what works" is nothing more than a realism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
The epistemological method of Peirce included a pragmatic elucidation. He viewed it as a way of undermining spurious metaphysical ideas such as the Catholic understanding 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 a theory of truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification before they are valid. They advocate a different approach they refer to as "pragmatic explanation". This involves explaining the way an idea is utilized in the real world and identifying conditions that must be met in order to be able to recognize it as valid.
This method is often criticized for being 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.
This has led to a variety of philosophical ideas that are liberatory, like those relating to feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - are now looking at the pragmatist tradition for direction. Quine for instance, is an philosophical analyticist who has embraced the philosophy of pragmatism in a manner that Dewey could not.
While pragmatism is a rich tradition, it is crucial to realize that there are also some important flaws in the philosophy. In particular, the pragmatism does not provide an objective test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral questions.
무료 프라그마틱 , Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also critiqued the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have reclaimed the philosophy from its obscureness. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do owe a great deal to the philosophy of pragmatism and draw upon the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their writings are worth reading for anyone interested in this philosophy movement.