Pragmatism James and Peirce
Uploaded by liebermann on Oct 31, 2011
This essay discusses the philosophical construct known as “pragmatism,” an American school of thought of the 19th Century.
I Introduction
When we use the word “pragmatic” or “pragmatist” today, we generally mean someone who deals in facts, has a realistic grasp of them, and can employ them in rational arguments. By extension, then, “pragmatism” is a realistic way of viewing the world.
However, there is a older definition, one that deals with a far more philosophical construct; “pragmatism” in the 19th Century was a way of thinking that gave meaning to words and ideas so that those debating these subjects had common ground; it was a way to strive to make sure that everyone understood everyone else’s terminology. Furthermore, pragmatism in the philosophical sense is regarded as a uniquely American way of thinking.
This paper examines three essays: “What Pragmatism Means” by William James; and “The Fixation of Belief” and “How to Make Our Ideas Clear” by Charles Sanders Peirce. It attempts to make the central ideas of the essays clear, respond to them, raise any objections to the thinking of these philosophers, and refute those objections.
We’ll start with William James, since a definition of pragmatism is necessary before we can discuss it further.
II James: “What Pragmatism Means”
William James gave a series of lectures in 1904, of which “What Pragmatism Means” is the second. In it, he defines pragmatism, which he describes as a method or process, rather than a result: “The pragmatic method is primarily a method of settling metaphysical disputes that otherwise might be interminable. Is the world one or many? – fated or free? … The pragmatic method in such cases is to try to interpret each notion by tracing its respective practical consequences.” (James, PG). If, he goes on, it would make no practical difference to anyone whether this idea or that idea were true, then the dispute is idle, for the alternatives really do not offer a choice.
He introduces his lecture by giving a trivial example that might help us to understand the method. He relates that he and some friends were on a camping trip in the woods. He had gone for a solitary walk, and upon his return found his friends engaged in a heated debate. Suppose, they were arguing, that there was a squirrel on one side of a tree trunk and a...