Realistic Pragmatism - Essay Example

Realistic Pragmatism Pragmatism is a contribution to the American thought that is distinct. It is a movement that has brought a lot of attention in the early 20th century. However, it declined years later and then came back in the last part of the century. A lot of challenges have arisen in defining this term. This is because there are misconceptions of what is the meaning of pragmatism since it was formed. This paper seeks to look into the definition of pragmatism and the various people that have contributed in defining this philosophical truth. Pragmatism can be defined as the rejection of the notion that the role of a thought is to illustrate, describe or depict the actual reality. Pragmatists have instead developed their argument on the notion that a thought acts as an instrument that can predict, solve problems or even act. In addition, they argue that most of the topics in philosophy like concepts, knowledge, meaning, belief, and nature of knowledge as well as science can only be seen in terms of their practical uses and successes instead of how they have been employed to stand for accuracy. As a philosophical movement, pragmatism started in America in the 1870s. The direction of this philosophy was mainly determined by various members of The Metaphysical Club like William James, Chauncey Wright, George Herbert Mead, as well as. This term was first employed in the fiscal year 1898 by William James who credited Pierce for coming up with the term. James considered Peirce’s work of 1877–8 dubbed "Illustrations of the Logic of Science" series as his main basis for his thoughts on pragmatism. Consequently, this made Peirce in turn to write in the fiscal year 1906 that Nicholas St. John Green had been instrumental. He greatly emphasized the significance of applying the definition of belief that Alexander Bain looked into. Bain’s argued that belief meant something that a man stands on when he is prepared to act. Peirce stated that this definition makes pragmatism to become scarcer than a corollary. Pierce saw that this definition made Bain be regarded as the grandfather of pragmatism. William James’s book, dubbed Pragmatism (1907), was able to gather together various lecturers that he had been teaching on the philosophy since the fiscal year 1898. The book was able to launch an interest in pragmatism. Furthermore, a lot of controversy has arisen on what the meaning of pragmatism is. Many critics of the early times saw James as the father of the philosophy. However, Peirce argued that James had not clearly understood his definition in holding the meaning of the philosophy to be the real instead of the conceivable conduct that it was able to produce. The early critics of this philosophy like Emile Durkheim, and Max Horkheimer saw pragmatism as an example of American perception that has been minimized to a mere truth. James expressed this as the monetary value of an action. In addition, there has been a tendency for people to confuse the philosophy with the daily meaning of the word to be practical. Peirce’s pragmatism must be comprehended within the semeiotic conception and of inquiry. This is because this separates it from the practical life. Peirce differed from other pragmatists as he was able to keep that theory from practice. This he did not out of elitism but because in his perception the scientific view is just not enough to run the society or people’s lives. From his angle, decisions that are practical in most instances require to be premised on beliefs and inner convictions. In most instances these feelings produce the definite difference that separates James from other philosophers who have written on the same theory. The philosophy can only be premised on fallible opinions that are always subjected to correction within the unlimited inquiry commission. The meaning or pragmatism is found when it is placed elsewhere not in a specific experiment. However, in experimental phenomena, that occurred to someone who was dead in the past and may occur to anyone in the future who will fulfill specific conditions.”The term “conceivable” is what makes the difference between James and Pierce’s pragmatic notions. In reducing Peirce's notions "conceivable consequences" James did not comprehend why conceivable consequences are not clearly explained by actual instances. In addition, he looks at why in everyday life “pragmatic,” is very different from “practical.” Pragmatism is premised on the philosophy that notions can be tested and retested again. This is because it is only experience that depicts reality. Furthermore, pragmatists also argue that there is no truth that is absolute and no value that exists. David Hume connotes that there is no proof that can be derived from any notion which we are constantly aware of or that which we are certain of. The empiricist arguments that Hume made were the basic foundations of the early thoughts of pragmatism. In reality, there is nothing that is sure and everything that can be sensed must be qualified constantly for it to find a place in the society. Hume’s stand in deciding our reality follows the school by not basing their argument on any ideal that is conclusive. Thus, his perception on empiricism blends with his level of determining the existence of an individual. This thought differs from Pierce and James definition of pragmatism. Hume’s doctrine can be said to be pragmatic as it can be said all-encompassing. It goes beyond pure knowledge in defining what the self is. Hume employs experiences of every kind as an influence of how the real life perpetuates a state of progress. He further takes on the protocol of pragmatism by denying any form of religion that believes in an all-knowing entity. Hume’s efforts to relate the mind to a theatre broke down the concept of identity in a very simple way. Hume argues that the mind is more of a theatre and has many ideas passing through them successfully. These ideas may glide away and blend in an infinite variety of circumstances as well as postures. Hume believes that all concepts can be said to be complicated, greater and an intricate combination of other simpler forms. Like every ingredient that may be employed in baking a cake, all things can be broken down into smaller bits that are easier to comprehend. All these notions fit together to form a perception. Consequently, an identity is formulated and it must evolve constantly to become pragmatic. It is clear that Hume would more likely to belong to a school of thought that has a formula that is more developed. However, Hume looks as if he had his foundations premised on the theories of empiricist theories. From the beginning, pragmatists wanted to reform philosophy and bring it more in line with the scientific method like they comprehended it. They connoted that both philosophies of idealism and realism have the tendency of presenting human knowledge as something that is beyond human comprehension(Hickman 496). The philosophies later on resulted in other notions inspired by other philosophers like Kant on the knowledge and truth theories. Pragmatists have been known to be critics of previous theories and later on became the correspondence of facts that can’t be analyzed. Pragmatism attempts to explain biological, psychological as well as biological relations between the one who knows and other known works in the world. In the fiscal year1868, C.S. Peirce connoted that intuition has no power in cases where cognition is unconditioned by inference. Furthermore, there is no introspection or intuitive power and that the consciousness of the internal world is mostly through hypothetical inference from external facts (Peirce 324). Intuition and introspection were staple tools employed in philosophy from the period that Descartes existed. He connoted that there can be no first cognition that is absolute in ant process of cognition. There is an argument that such a process always has a beginning and may be analyzed into finer stages of cognition. This is what is referred to as introspection and it has not ability to give privileged entry on the mind. In this case, the self as a concept is derived from the normal interaction that people have with their external world. At the same time Pierce believed that both epistemology and pragmatism could not be derived from psychological principles. It had to be comprehended as a scientific topic. This means that what people think or do differs from what they ought to think. In his series dubbed "Illustrations of the Logic of Science,” Peirce came up with the fact that both pragmatism and principles of statistics are in general scientific methods. Consequently, this resulted in a lot of criticism from other pragmatics who advocates that pragmatism is more related to naturalism or psychology. As of such, pragmatism is a distinct thought that has been discussed differently by various philosophers. Despite the various arguments, it is clear that they all agree on one point. Pragmatism does not see any difference between theoretical and practical reason or between facts and values. It believes that a thought acts as an instrument that can predict, solve problems or even act. Work cited Peirce, Charles Sanders. “How to Make Our Ideas Clear” (1878), in The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 1 (1867-1893). Edited by Nathan Houser and Christian Kloesel. Bloomington: Indiana University Press., 1992 James, William. The Writings of William James: A Comprehensive Edition. Lundin, Roger. From Nature to Experience: The American Search for Cultural Authority Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2006 Edited, with an Introduction by John J. McDermott. Chicago: University of Chicago Press., 1977 Hickman, Larry 2004. "On Hugh T. Miller on 'Why old pragmatism needs an upgrade." Administration & Society 36(4):496–499. Rescher, N. Realistic Pragmatism. Albany: SUNY Press, 2000. William, James. (1907), Pragmatism, A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, Popular Lectures on Philosophy, Longmans, Green, and Company, New York, NY. Read More