Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophical system that emphasizes experience and context. It could be lacking a clear set of fundamental principles or a coherent ethical framework. This could result in the loss of idealistic goals and a shift in direction.
Contrary to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not deny the notion that statements are connected to actual states of affairs. They simply elucidate the roles that truth plays in practical activities.
Definition
The term "pragmatic" is used to refer to people or things that are practical, rational and sensible. It is often used to contrast with idealistic which is an idea or person that is based on ideals or principles of high quality. When making decisions, a pragmatic person considers the real world and the conditions. They focus on what is feasible rather than trying to achieve the ideal path of action.
Pragmatism, a new philosophical movement, stresses the importance that practical consequences determine significance, truth or value. It is a third 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 while the other to the idea of realism.
One of the major 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 functions in practice. One approach that is inspired by Peirce and James, is focused on the ways people solve problems and make assertions and prioritizes the speech-act and justification projects of language-users in determining if truth is a fact. One method, which was influenced by Rorty's followers, concentrates on the more mundane aspects of truth, including its ability to generalize, commend and avert danger, and is less focused on a complicated theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. First, it flirts with relativism. Truth is a concept that has so many layers of rich and long-standing history that it's unlikely its meaning can be reduced to a few commonplace uses as pragmatists do. Furthermore, pragmatism seems dismiss the existence of truth in its metaphysical sense. This is reflected in the fact that pragmatists, such as Brandom (who has a debt to Peirce and James) are largely silent on questions of metaphysics and Dewey's lengthy writings contain only one mention of the question of truth.
Purpose
Pragmatism seeks to offer an alternative to the continental and analytic philosophical traditions. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to introduce it's first generation. 프라그마틱 추천 focused on theorizing inquiry and meaning, and the nature of truth. Their influence spread to numerous influential American thinkers, such as John Dewey (1860-1952), who applied their theories to education and social improvement in various dimensions. Jane Addams (1860-1935) was the social work pioneer who created social work was also a beneficiary of this influence.
In recent times an emerging generation has given pragmatism a wider debate platform. Although they differ from the traditional pragmatists, a lot of these neo-pragmatists believe themselves to be part of the same tradition. Their most prominent figure is Robert Brandom, whose work focuses on semantics and the philosophy of language but who also draws on the philosophy of Peirce and James.
One of the major distinctions between the classic pragmatics and the neo-pragmatists lies in 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 focus instead on the concept of 'ideal justified assertibility', which states that an idea is true if it is justified to a particular audience in a certain manner.
This idea has its problems. It is often criticized for being used to support unfounded and silly ideas. An example of this is the gremlin theory it is a useful idea, it works in practice, but it's totally unsubstantiated and most likely absurd. This isn't a huge issue, but it does highlight one of the major flaws of pragmatism: it can be used as a rationalization for nearly anything.
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 is also used to refer to a philosophy that emphasizes the practical implications when determining meaning, truth or values. The term"pragmatism" first used to describe this view about a century ago, when William James (1842-1910) pressed it into service 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 view soon earned 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 something fixed or objective, and instead viewed it as a continuously evolving socially-determined notion.
James used these themes to investigate 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 within the larger Western philosophical context, and have traced the affinities of Peirce's ideas with Kant and other 19th century idealists as well as the emerging science of evolutionary theory. They have also attempted to understand the significance of truth in a traditional epistemology of a posteriori and to create a pragmatic metaphilosophy that includes an understanding of meaning, language, and the nature of knowledge.
Yet, pragmatism continues to develop, and the epistemology of a posteriori that it developed is still considered an important distinction from traditional methods. The defenders of pragmatism have had to grapple with a number of objections that are as old as the pragmatic theory itself, but which have gained more attention in recent years. Some of these include the idea that pragmatism fails when applied to moral issues, and that its claim "what works" is nothing more than a realism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
For Peirce, pragmatic elucidation of truth was a key part of his epistemological strategy. Peirce saw it as a way to undermine 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 best one can expect from a theory about truth. They generally avoid the deflationist theories of truth that require verification in order to be valid. They advocate for a different method they call "pragmatic explanation". This is about explaining how a concept can be used in practice and identifying the conditions that must be met in order to recognize that concept as truthful.
It is important to remember that this approach may still be viewed as a type of relativism, and indeed is often criticised for it. But it's less extreme than deflationist alternatives, and is thus a useful method of overcoming some of the issues with relativist theories of truth.
As a result of this, a number of liberatory philosophical initiatives, such as those associated to feminism, eco-philosophy, Native American philosophy, and Latin American philosophy, look for guidance from the pragmatist tradition. Quine for instance, is an philosophical analyticist who has embraced the philosophy of pragmatism in a manner that Dewey could not.
It is important to recognize that pragmatism, though rich in history, also has its shortcomings. Particularly, the pragmatism does not provide an objective test of truth and fails when applied to moral issues.
프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 , Wilfrid Solars and other pragmatists have also criticized the philosophy. Nevertheless, it has been reclaimed from the ashes by a broad variety of philosophers, including Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do have a lot in common with the philosophy of pragmatism, and draw upon the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. Their works are worth reading for anyone interested in this philosophical movement.