Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophical system that is based on the experience and context. It may not have an enlightened ethical framework or fundamental principles. This can lead to a loss of idealistic aspirations and transformative change.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth, pragmatic theories of truth don't reject the idea that statements relate to states of affairs. They simply define the role that truth plays in practical endeavors.
Definition
Pragmatic is a term that is used to describe things or people who are practical, logical and sensible. It is frequently used to differentiate between idealistic, which refers to a person or an idea that is founded on ideals or high principles. When making decisions, a pragmatic person considers the real world and the circumstances. They focus on what is feasible rather than trying to achieve the ideal outcome.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement that focuses on the importance of practical implications in determining truth, meaning or value. It is an alternative in contrast to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. 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 towards realist thought.
One of the major problems in pragmatism is the nature of truth. While many pragmatists agree truth is a key concept, they disagree about how to define it and how it is used in practice. One approach, influenced heavily by Peirce & James, focuses on how people solve questions and make assertions and focuses on the speech-acts and justification projects language-users use in determining if something is true. Another approach, influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the comparatively simple functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, recommend, and caution--and is less concerned with a complete theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. It is the first to flirt with relativism. Truth is a concept with so many layers of rich and long-standing history that it's unlikely that its meaning could be reduced to everyday uses as pragmatists do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems deny the existence of truth in its metaphysical aspect. This is reflected in the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom (who has an obligation to Peirce and James) are generally silent on questions of metaphysics in Dewey's vast writings, whereas his works contain only one mention of the issue of truth.
Purpose
Pragmatism aims to provide an alternative to the analytic and continental philosophical traditions. 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 theory of inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth. 프라그마틱 추천 grew to a number influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education and social improvement in different dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work, also benefited from this influence.
More recently a new generation of philosophers has given pragmatism more space for debate. Although they differ from the traditional pragmatists, a lot of these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main figure. He focuses his research on the philosophy and semantics of language, but also draws from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
One of the major distinctions between the classical pragmatists and neo-pragmatists is their understanding of what it takes 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, on the other hand, insist on the notion of 'ideal warranted assertibility' which says that an idea is genuinely true if a claim made about it is justified in a particular way to a particular audience.
This idea has its flaws. It is often criticized as being used to support unfounded and ridiculous theories. A simple example is the gremlin theory it is a useful concept, and it is effective in practice, but it's utterly unfounded and probably untrue. It's not a major problem however, it does point out one of the main flaws of pragmatism It can be used to justify nearly everything, which is the case for many ridiculous ideas.
Significance
Pragmatic refers to the practical aspect of a decision, which is related to the consideration of actual world conditions and circumstances when making decisions. It may be a reference to the philosophical view that stresses practical consequences in the determination of truth, meaning or value. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this viewpoint in a speech he delivered at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed he invented the term along with his mentor and colleague Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist perspective soon gained its own reputation.
The pragmatists resisted the sharp dichotomies in analytic philosophy, such as mind and body, thought and experience and analytic and synthesthetic. They also rejected the notion that truth was a fixed or objective, and instead treated it as a dynamic socially-determined notion.
James utilized these themes to study the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an important influence on a second 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 place pragmatism in a broader Western philosophical context, by tracing the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other idealists of the 19th century and the new science of evolutionary theory. They also sought to clarify the role of truth in an original epistemology of a priori and develop a pragmatic Metaphilosophy that includes views on the meaning of language, as well as the nature and origin of knowledge.
However, pragmatism has continued to evolve, and the epistemology of a posteriori that it developed is still regarded as a significant departure from more traditional methods. The pragmatic theory has been criticised for centuries however, in recent years it has received more attention. This includes the notion that pragmatism collapses when applied to moral issues and its assertion that "what works" is nothing more than relativism, albeit with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce, pragmatic elucidation of truth was a crucial element of his epistemological plan. He saw it as an attempt to debunk false metaphysical notions, such as the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation and Cartesian certainty searching strategies in epistemology.
For many contemporary pragmatists the Pragmatic Maxim is all that one can reasonably expect from an understanding of truth. They are generally opposed to false theories of truth that require verification to be valid. Instead they advocate a different method, which they refer to as 'pragmatic explication'. This is the process of explaining how a concept is used in real life and identifying requirements to be met in order to accept the concept as truthful.
This method is often criticized as a form relativism. But it is less extreme than the alternatives to deflationism, and therefore is a good method of overcoming some of the issues with relativist theories of truth.
This has led to various philosophical liberation projects like those that are associated with ecological, feminism Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - are now looking to the pragmatist tradition as guidance. Quine for instance, is an analytical philosopher who has taken on the pragmatist tradition in a way Dewey could not.
It is crucial to realize that pragmatism, though rich in history, also has some serious shortcomings. Particularly, the pragmatic approach does not provide an accurate test of truth, and it fails when applied to moral issues.
Quine, Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticised the philosophy. Richard Rorty and Robert Brandom are among philosophers who have brought it from insignificance. While these philosophers are not classical pragmatists, they do contribute significantly to the philosophy of pragmatism, and draw on the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their writings are worth reading for anyone interested in this philosophy movement.