Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that is based on the experience and context. It could be lacking a clear set of fundamental principles or an encapsulated ethical framework. This can result in an absence of idealistic goals or a radical change.
In contrast to deflationary theories about truth and pragmatic theories of truth do not reject the idea that statements are related to the state of affairs. They simply explain the roles that truth plays in everyday tasks.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to refer to people or things that are practical, logical and sensible. It is often used to distinguish between idealistic which is an idea or person that is based on high principles or ideals. 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 possible outcome.
Pragmatism is an emerging philosophical movement that stresses the importance of practical consequences in the determination of value, truth or value. It is a third alternative philosophy to the dominant analytical and continental traditions. It was 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 to realist thought.
One of the most important issues in pragmatism concerns the nature of truth. While many pragmatists agree that truth is an important concept, they disagree about what it means and how it is used in the real world. One approach that is that is influenced by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways in which people deal with issues and make assertions. It also prioritizes the speech-act and justification processes of language-users in determining if something is true. Another method, that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the comparatively simple functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, admonish, and caution--and is less concerned with a full-fledged theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept that has an extensive and long-standing history that it's unlikely that its meaning could be reduced to a few commonplace applications as pragmatists do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems dismiss the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is reflected by the fact that pragmatists like Brandom who owe a lot to Peirce & James but are silent about metaphysics while Dewey has only made one reference to truth in his many writings.
Purpose
The purpose of pragmatism was to offer an alternative to analytic and Continental traditions of philosophy. The first generation was started by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James together as well as their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1855-1916). These classical pragmatists emphasized the concept of meaning and inquiry, and the nature of truth. Their influence grew to many influential American thinkers, including John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their ideas to education as well as social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work also gained from this influence.
More recently a new generation of philosophers have given pragmatism more space for debate. While they are different from traditional pragmatists, a lot of these neo-pragmatists consider themselves to be part of the same tradition. Their principal persona is Robert Brandom, whose work is focused on semantics and the philosophy of language, but also draws upon the philosophy of Peirce and James.
Neopragmatists have a distinct understanding of what it takes 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 instead focus on the idea "ideal justified assertionibility," which declares that an idea is truly true if it is justifiable to a certain audience in a certain manner.
This view is not without its problems. It is often criticized as being used to support unfounded and silly concepts. One example is the gremlin theory that is a truly useful concept that works in practice, but it is utterly unfounded and probably absurd. This isn't a huge issue however, it does point out one of the biggest flaws in pragmatism: it can be used to justify nearly everything, which includes many absurd ideas.
Significance
When making a decision, it is important to be pragmatic by considering the real world and its circumstances. It is also used to refer to a philosophy that emphasizes the practical implications when determining meaning values, truth or. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this view in a lecture at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed he invented the term along with his mentor and friend Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist perspective soon gained its own fame.
The pragmatists rejected the stark dichotomies that are inherent in analytic philosophy such as truth and value, thought and experience mind and body, analytic and synthetic, and so on. They also rebuffed the idea of truth as something that is fixed or objective, instead describing it as a dynamic socially-determined notion.
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 utilized these themes to investigate the truth of religion. John Dewey (1859-1952) was an important influence on a new generation of pragmatists who applied the method to politics, education and other aspects of social improvement.
The neo-pragmatists from recent times have made an effort to place pragmatism in an overall Western philosophical context, and have traced the affinities of Peirce's theories with Kant and other idealists from the 19th century, as well as with the new science of evolutionary theory. They also have sought to clarify the role of truth in an original epistemology of a posteriori and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes a view of language, meaning and the nature of knowledge.
However the fact that pragmatism is still evolving and the a posteriori approach that it has developed is an important departure from conventional approaches. The pragmatic theory has been criticized for centuries, but in recent years it has attracted more attention. Some of them include the notion that pragmatism is ineffective when applied to moral questions and that its assertion of "what works" is nothing more than a realism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce his pragmatic understanding of truth was a crucial part of his epistemological strategy. Peirce saw it as a means to undermine metaphysical concepts that were false like the Catholic understanding of transubstantiation, Cartesian methods of seeking certainty in epistemology and Kant's notion of a 'thing in itself' (Simson 2010).
The Pragmatic Maxim, according to many modern pragmatists, is considered to be the best one can expect from a theory about truth. They generally avoid deflationist theories of truth which require verification to be valid. They advocate an alternative approach they call "pragmatic explanation". This is about explaining how a concept is used in the real world and identifying the conditions that must be met to accept the concept as true.
This method is often criticized for being an example of form-relativism. But it's less extreme than deflationist alternatives, and is thus a useful way to get around some of the problems with relativist theories of truth.
In the wake of this, a variety of liberatory philosophical initiatives that are related to eco-philosophy, feminism, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for inspiration in the pragmatist tradition. Additionally, many philosophers who are analytic (such as Quine) have embraced pragmatism with a degree of enthusiasm that Dewey himself could not muster.
While pragmatism is a rich history, it is important to realize that there are also some fundamental flaws with the philosophy. Particularly, the pragmatism does not provide a meaningful test of truth and is not applicable to moral issues.
Some of the most prominent pragmatists, such as Quine and Wilfrid Sellars, also criticised the philosophy. Nevertheless it has been reclaimed from obscurity by a wide range of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. These philosophers, despite not being classical pragmatists have a lot in common with the philosophy and work of Peirce James and Wittgenstein. Their works are worth reading for those who are interested in this philosophy movement.