Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism emphasizes context and experience. It may lack a clear set of foundational principles or an encapsulated ethical framework. This could result in an absence of idealistic ambitions and a shift in direction.
In contrast to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not deny the idea that statements are correlated to real-world situations. They only define the role that truth plays in practical endeavors.
Definition
The word pragmatic is used to refer to people or things that are practical, logical and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic which is an idea that is based on ideals or principles of high quality. A person who is pragmatic considers the real world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, focusing on what can be realistically accomplished, rather than trying to achieve the best possible outcome.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement, focuses on the importance that practical consequences have in determining what is true, meaning or value. It is a third option to the dominant continental and analytic tradition of philosophy. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founding fathers, pragmatism evolved into two streams of thought, one tending towards relativism, the other towards realism.
The nature of truth is a central issue in the philosophy of pragmatism. Many pragmatists agree that truth is a valuable concept but they differ on how to define it or how it works in the real world. One method that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways in which people solve questions and make assertions. It prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users in determining if truth is a fact. Another method, inspired by Rorty and his followers, concentrates on the comparatively simple functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, commend, and caution--and is less concerned with the full-blown theory of truth.
The first flaw with this neo-pragmatic view of truth is that it stray with relativism, since the notion of "truth" has such a long and rich tradition that it seems unlikely that it can be reduced to the common applications that pragmatists assign it. The second problem is that pragmatism appears to be an approach that denies the existence of truth, at least in its metaphysical and fundamental form. This is reflected by the fact that pragmatists, like Brandom who owe a lot to Peirce and James, are largely silent about metaphysics while Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
The goal of pragmatism is to provide an alternative to the Continental and analytic traditions of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to initiate its first generation. The classical pragmatists were adamant about the importance of inquiry and meaning as well as the nature of truth. Their influence spread to numerous influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education and social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social worker who founded the field was also a beneficiary of this influence.
In recent years, a new generation has given pragmatism a wider platform for discussion. Many of these neopragmatists are not traditional pragmatists, but they consider themselves part of the same tradition. Their most prominent figure is Robert Brandom, whose work is focused on semantics and the philosophy of language but who also draws on the pragmatickr philosophy of Peirce and James.
Neopragmatists have a distinct perception of what is required 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 insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility, which states that an idea is true if the claim made about it can be justified in a particular way to a particular audience.
This viewpoint is not without its flaws. The most frequent criticism is that it can be used to justify any number of ridiculous and illogical ideas. The gremlin theory is a prime example of this: It's an concept that can be applied in real life but is probably unfounded and nonsense. This isn't a huge problem, but it highlights one of the major problems with 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 actual world conditions and situations when making decisions. It could be a reference to the philosophical position that emphasizes practical considerations in the determining of meaning, truth or value. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this view in a speech at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed to have coined the term with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist viewpoint soon gained its own fame.
The pragmatists opposed the sharp dichotomies of analytic philosophy, such as mind and body, thought and experience, as well as synthesthetic and analytic. They also rejected the notion of truth as something that is fixed or objective and instead saw it as a constantly evolving socially-determined idea.
James used these themes to study the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an influential figure on a second generation of pragmatists, who applied the approach to education, politics and other aspects of social improvement.
In recent years, the Neopragmatists have tried to put pragmatism within a wider Western philosophical context. They have analyzed the connections between Peirce's ideas and the ideas of Kant, other 19th-century idealists, and the emerging theory of evolution. They also sought to define truth's role in an original epistemology a priori and develop a pragmatic Metaphilosophy that includes theories of language, meaning, and the nature and origin of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to evolve, and the a posteriori epistemology that it developed is still considered an important distinction from traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for a long time, but in recent years it has attracted more attention. This includes the notion that pragmatism collapses when applied to moral issues, and that its claim that "what works" is little more than relativism with a less-polished appearance.
Methods
Peirce's epistemological strategy included a pragmatic explanation. He saw it as an attempt to debunk false metaphysical notions, such as the Catholic understanding transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is considered to be the most reliable thing one can expect from a theoretical framework about truth. In this sense, they tend to steer clear of deflationist theories of truth that need to be verified in order to be deemed valid. They advocate for a different method they call "pragmatic explanation". This is about explaining the way in which a concept is utilized in the real world and identifying the criteria that must be met in order to recognize that concept as truthful.
It should be noted that this approach could be viewed as a form of relativism, and is often criticized for doing so. But it is less extreme than deflationist alternatives, and is thus a useful way of getting around some of the issues associated with relativist theories of truth.
In the end, a variety of liberatory philosophical projects - such as those associated with feminism, ecology, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look to the pragmatist tradition as direction. Furthermore, many analytic philosophers (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.
Although pragmatism has a long legacy, it is important to recognize that there are significant flaws in the philosophy. Particularly, pragmatism fails to provide any valid test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral issues.
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 insignificance. While these philosophers are not classical pragmatists but they do contribute significantly to the philosophy of pragmatism, and draw upon the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. These philosophers' works are worth reading by anyone interested in this philosophy movement.