Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that is based on the experience and context. It may not have an enlightened ethical framework or foundational principles. This can lead to an absence of idealistic goals or transformative changes.
In contrast to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not deny the idea that statements are connected to real-world situations. They simply clarify the role that truth plays in our daily endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a word used to describe things or people who are practical, rational and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic, which refers to a person or notion that is based upon ideals or principles of high quality. A pragmatic person looks at the real world circumstances and conditions when making decisions, focusing on what can realistically be achieved as opposed to trying to find the most effective theoretical course of action.
Pragmatism is an emerging philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical implications in determining meaning, truth, or value. It is a third alternative in contrast to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. It was founded by Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Josiah Royce, pragmatism developed into two distinct streams of thought, one that tended toward relativism and the other towards realist thought.
The nature of truth is a central issue in the philosophy of pragmatism. While a majority of pragmatists agree that truth is a key concept, they are not sure how to define it and how it is used in the real world. One method, influenced by Peirce and James, focuses on the ways people tackle issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users in determining if something is true. One approach, influenced Rorty's followers, is focused more on the mundane functions of truth, like its ability to generalize, recommend and avert danger, and is less concerned with an elaborate theory of truth.
The primary flaw in this neo-pragmatic view of truth is that it stray with relativism, since the concept of "truth" has such a long and rich tradition that it seems unlikely that it can be reduced to the nebulous applications that pragmatists assign 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 owe a lot to Peirce & James and are mostly in silence about metaphysics, while Dewey has only made one mention of truth in his numerous writings.
Purpose
The aim of pragmatism is to offer an alternative to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to introduce it's first generation. The classical pragmatists were adamant about theorizing inquiry and meaning, as well as the nature of truth. Their influence spread through many 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 created social work.
Recently a new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism a wider platform to discuss. Although they differ from the classic pragmatists these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Their main persona is Robert Brandom, whose work is focused on semantics and the philosophy of language but who also draws on the philosophy of Peirce and James.
One of the main differences between the classic pragmatists and 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. The neo-pragmatists instead concentrate on the concept of 'ideal warranted assertion,' which says that an idea is genuinely true if the claim made about it can be justified in a certain way to a specific audience.
This idea has its flaws. The most frequent criticism is that it can be used to justify any number of ridiculous and absurd ideas. The gremlin hypothesis is an example of this: It's an concept that can be applied in real life but is unfounded and probably nonsense. This isn't a huge issue however, it does point out one of pragmatism's main flaws that it can be used to justify nearly everything, which is the case for many ridiculous ideas.
Significance
Pragmatic means practical, relating to the consideration of real world conditions and situations when making decisions. It could also refer to the philosophy that focuses on practical implications in the determining of meaning, truth or value. The term pragmatism was first used to describe this viewpoint around a century ago when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into practice in an address at the University of California (Berkeley). James claimed to have coined the term with his mentor and friend Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist perspective soon gained its own name.
The pragmatists opposed the stark dichotomies in analytic philosophy, like truth and value, thought and experience, mind and body, synthetic and analytic, and so on. They also rebuffed the idea of truth as something that is fixed or objective, instead describing it as a continuously evolving, socially-determined concept.
Classical pragmatists focused primarily on the theory of inquiry, meaning, and the nature of truth, but James put these concepts to work in examining truth in religion. A subsequent generation applied the pragmatist perspective on education, politics, and other dimensions of social development, under the great influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
In recent decades, the Neopragmatists have sought to place the pragmatism in a larger Western philosophical context. They have traced the commonalities between Peirce's ideas and the ideas of Kant, other 19th-century idealists, and the emerging science of evolution theory. They also have sought to understand the role of truth in an original epistemology of a posteriori, and to develop a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic and includes the concept of meaning, language and the nature of knowledge.
Despite this the pragmatism that it has developed continues to evolve and the a posteriori approach that it developed remains a significant departure from traditional methods. Its defenders have been forced to confront a variety of arguments that are as old as the pragmatic theory itself, but which have gained more attention in recent years. This includes the notion that pragmatism collapses when it comes to moral issues and its assertion that "what works" is little more than relativism with a less-polished appearance.
Methods
Peirce's epistemological approach included a pragmatic explanation. He viewed it as a way to undermine metaphysical concepts that were false such as the Catholic notion of transubstantiation Cartesian epistemology that relies on certainty-seeking strategies and Kant's notion of a 'thing-in-itself' (Simson 2010).
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is the best one can hope for from a theory about truth. In this sense, they tend to steer clear of deflationist theories of truth that require verification to be legitimate. Instead they advocate a different method, which they refer to as "pragmatic explication". This is about explaining how a concept is used in the real world and identifying the requirements to be met in order to recognize that concept as truthful.
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 less extreme than deflationist alternatives, and is an effective method of getting around some of the relativist theories of reality's issues.
In the wake of this, a lot of liberatory philosophical initiatives like those that are linked to eco-philosophy and feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance in the pragmatist tradition. Quine is one example. He is an analytical philosopher who has taken on the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
While 프라그마틱 has a rich history, it is important to realize that there are fundamental flaws with the philosophy. In particular, pragmatism fails to provide any valid test of truth, and it fails when it comes to moral questions.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticized the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among the philosophers who have reclaimed it from obscurity. Although these philosophers aren't 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 writings are worth reading for anyone interested in this philosophy movement.