Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophical system that emphasizes the experience and context. It may not have a clear ethical framework or a set of fundamental principles. This could result in an absence of idealistic ambitions and transformative change.
In contrast to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not renounce the notion that statements are correlated to actual states of affairs. They merely explain the role truth plays in everyday endeavors.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to describe things or people that are practical, rational and sensible. It is often used to differentiate between idealistic which is an idea or person that is based on 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 accomplished, rather than trying to find the most effective practical course of action.
Pragmatism, a brand new philosophical movement, focuses on the importance that practical implications determine meaning, truth or value. It is a third alternative philosophy to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. 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 toward realist thought.
One of the central problems in pragmatism is the nature of truth. While a majority of pragmatists agree that truth is an important concept, they are not sure how to define it and how it is used in the real world. One approach that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways people deal with issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users in determining if something is true. Another approach that is that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the comparatively simple functions of truth, namely its ability to generalize, admonish and warn--and is not concerned with a full-fledged theory of truth.
This neopragmatic interpretation of truth has two flaws. It is the first to flirt with relativism. Truth is a concept with such a rich and long-standing tradition that it's unlikely its meaning can be reduced to a few commonplace applications as pragmatists do. Another flaw is that pragmatism also appears to be a way of thinking that denies the existence of truth, at least in its metaphysical and fundamental form. This is evident in the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom (who has an obligation to Peirce and James) are mostly absent from metaphysics-related questions in Dewey's vast writings, whereas his works have only one reference to the issue of truth.
Purpose
Pragmatism seeks to offer an alternative to the continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. Pragmatic KR was started by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James along as well as their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These classical pragmatists focused on theorizing inquiry and meaning, as well as the nature of truth. Their influence spread to many influential American thinkers, such as John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their theories to education and social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work, also benefited from this influence.
In recent years the new generation has given pragmatism an expanded forum for discussion. A lot of these neopragmatists are not classical pragmatists but they believe that they belong to the same tradition. Their most prominent model is Robert Brandom, whose work focuses on semantics and the philosophy of language however, he also draws inspiration from 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, insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility' which says that an idea is genuinely true if the claim made about it can be justified in a certain way to a particular audience.
There are, however, some issues with this theory. It is often criticized as being used to justify illogical and silly theories. An example of this is the gremlin hypothesis that is a truly useful concept that works in the real world, but it is completely unsubstantiated and likely to be untrue. This isn't a huge issue, but it does highlight one of the main flaws of pragmatism: it can be used as a justification for just about everything.
Significance
Pragmatic refers to the practical aspect of a decision, which is related to the consideration of real world conditions and circumstances when making decisions. It can be a reference to the philosophical position that emphasizes practical consequences in the determination of meaning, truth or value. The term"pragmatism" was 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 he invented the term along with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist viewpoint soon gained its own reputation.
The pragmatists resisted the stark dichotomies that are inherent in analytic philosophy, such as fact and value thoughts and experiences, mind and body, analytic and synthetic and other such distinctions. They also rejected the idea that truth was something that was fixed or objective, and instead viewed it as a dynamic, socially determined concept.
James used these themes to investigate truth in religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an important influence on a new generation of pragmatists who applied this method to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.
The neo-pragmatists of recent decades have tried to place pragmatism in the larger Western philosophical context, by tracing 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 have also sought to understand the significance of truth in an original a posteriori epistemology and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes the concept of language, meaning and the nature of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to develop, and the a posteriori epistemology that it developed is still considered an important distinction from traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticized for a long time, but in recent years it has attracted more attention. These include the idea that pragmatism is a flop when applied to moral questions and its assertion that "what works" is nothing more than a form of relativism with a less-polished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was a key part of his epistemological strategy. He saw it as a means of destroying false metaphysical notions such as the Catholic notion of transubstantiation Cartesian epistemology that relies on certainty-seeking strategies and Kant's concept of a 'thing in itself' (Simson 2010).
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is considered to be the most accurate thing you can expect from a theoretical framework about 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 explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in the real world and identifying the conditions that must be met in order to determine whether the concept is truthful.
It should be noted that this method could be viewed as a form of relativism and is often criticized for doing so. However, it is more moderate than the deflationist alternatives, and is thus a useful method of overcoming some of the issues with relativism theories of truth.
This has led to various liberatory philosophical projects - like those that are associated with feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - are now looking at the pragmatist tradition for direction. Moreover many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.
It is important to acknowledge that pragmatism, while rich in history, also has some serious flaws. In particular, pragmatism is unable to provide any meaningful test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral issues.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also critiqued the philosophy. Yet it has been brought back from obscurity by a wide range of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. These philosophers, although not being classical pragmatists are influenced by the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their works are worth reading for those interested in this philosophy movement.