Definition of American Pragmatism - Report Example

AMERICAN PRAGMATISM A. Origins Pragmatism has been described as a philosophical school which traces its origin to the late 19th century. The first person who is created with having initiated the concept of pragmatism was Charles Peirce who is considered to be the fist pragmatic maxim. The concept was later developed in the 20th century by philosopher who considered the practical aspect of consequences or the real effects of things both the most vital components of the meaning and truth. But they held the postulation from ideologist that knowledge and action should be taken as two separate things. They also held that there existence tracedental truth above any inquiry that is used by organisms in coping with their life. Therefore it can be held an ecological account of knowledge in which there is a constructed inquiry constructed by organism in order to have a grip of the environment that they are living int. (Quine, 1991) B. Pragmatists 1. Classical Pragmatists [To include James and Peirce] Classical pragmatists were the founders of the concept of pragmatism. They provided the initial thinking that led to the development of the concept. They include the following Charles Sanders Peirce who lived from 1839 to 1914 founded the American Pragmatism. In his inquiry about he concept, Peirce wrote a number of topic including the mathematical logical and semantics which had the concept of psychology in them. Another classical pragmatist was William James who lived between 1842 and 1910. James was a religious theorist and a psychologist and also a philosopher. He was the first philosopher to be identified with the term pragmatism when compared to Perce who was not that much famous. John Dewey who liver between 1859 and 1952 was one of the most prominent philosopher of equation. He as known for his work on instrumentalism which was one brand that constructed pragmatism. Shiller, F.C who lived between 1846 and 1937 did a lot of work on pragmatism. However he has been forgotten now. 2. Neoclassical Pragmatists Neo-classical pragmatists were those who lived from 1950. They have been associated with the work of the classical pragmatism as compared to the neo-pragmatists. There were a number of neoclassical pragmatists (Eldrige, 1993) Sidney Hook lived from 1902 to 1989. He is considered to have been a prominent intellectual philosopher how was based in New York. He was once a student of Dewey at Columbia University where he learnt his pragmatist's foundations. Isaan Live was another pragmatist. He is credited with trying to integrate pragmatist thinking in a theoretic perspective in order to make a decision. Susan Haack who was born in 1945 is a teacher at the University of Miami. She had done commendable work on foundherentism based on the work that was done by Peirce. She is sometimes referred as the intellectual granddaughter of Pierce. Hickman Larry was a philosopher of technology. He is also a Dewey scholar and heads the Center for Dewey Studies. Hildebrand David is one of the most ardent supporters of Dewey work. He has expressed his dissatisfaction with neo-pragmatism and therefore called for the continuation of the original work that was done by John Dewey. Nicholas Research is also another important neoclassical pragmatism who has done a lot of work on the concept of pragmatism. Others include Gorge Herbert Mead Ralph Emerson Josiah Royce George Santayana Giovanni Papini Giovanni Vailati 3. Analytical pragmatists Most of the analytical pragmatists are also referred to as neo-pragmatist according to their work. The following are analytical pragmatists William Van Ormane Quine lived between 1908 and 2000 was more concerned with language, logic, and the concept of mathematical philosophy Lewis Irving live from 1883 to 1964 and also didn't a lot of work of pragmatism. Richard Rorty who lived from 1931 to 2007 did a lot of work of the philosopher and the mirror of nature Hilary Putan expressed that classical pragmatism was permissive a theory. Hew is taken to have been opposite to the work of Rorty in many ways Richar Shterman who as a student in Wittngstein is know for his work of the uses of the argument in his pragmatism work Hawthorne John was a defendant of the contextualism which is a form of pragmatism that deals with lottery paradox. His work on knowledge and lotteries has been used to support his arguments. Jason Stanley was also a defender of pragmatism in the form of contextualisms against semantic varies of contexstualims. This was well expressed in his work on knowledge and practical interest. Arthur Fine was one of those who were opposed to natural ontological attitude in scientific realism. Margolis Joseph defended the original pragmatism in his recent work on cultural realism especially the original work that was done by Pierce and Dewey. Robert Pirsig 4. More obscure pragmatists There were other more obscure pragmatists who argued in the area of legal pragmatists and in other extended sense of the pragmatism. They include Oliver Wendell Holme Jnr. Breyer Stephen Richard Posner West Cornell Wilfred Sellars Frank Ramsey Kar-Otto Apel Randolph Bourne 5. Tie it all together onto the fundamentals of American Pragmatism The work of pragmatism is viewed and some oppose to the other. Neo-pragmatism thinkers usually radically oppose to the one another. The differences in their approach usually occur in the philosophical methodology or in the conceptual formation of thoughts. Neoclassical pragmatism has been associated with some thinkers who follow closely classical pragmatisms C. Pragmatic epistemology 1. Truth concept In all their thoughts, pragmatic has expressed how truth is not always ready made but in real sense how it is made from truth. Under the pragmatic epistemology, truth can therefore take in two ways, truth is mutable and that truth is relative to the conceptual scheme. In arguing about the mutability of truth, pragmatism differs on the whether beliefs can actually pass from being true and be untrue and vice versa. For example philosopher James postulated that beliefs are just made true by verification but they are not true. On the other hand Schiller showed the belief can pass in and out of truth depending on the situation One the concept relativity, we can ague following the above review of James and Schiller where you will find that is based on the idea that we usually make things true by the way we verify them. (Adnerson, 2000) D. Central Pragmatic Tenets 1. The Practice of Pragmatiscm Pragmatism usually process from the basic premise that the capability of human to theorize can be taken as integrate to the practice of intelligent. In this case theory and practice cannot be taken as separate thins but rather theory and distinctions are the only tools or the map that can be used to find our way in this world. According to the work of Dewey there cannot be question of theory and practice but rather there is the issue of intelligent practice against the uninformed and stupid practice. (Rorty, 1998) 2. Logic According to Schiller, words had meaning only when they used in their actual account. Schiller therefore didn't support the possibility of existence of formal logic as has been shown by other pragmatism. He expressed lock as one of the logical tools among other tools. This was in the same line with Peirce who had developed a number of methods that were used in doing formal logic. 3. Ethics Pragmatism postulates that there is not big difference between facts and values or between practical and theoretical reasons. Pragmatism sees facts and values as having the cognitive content in knowledge that we have to believe and the values and hypothesizes on what is good in every action. The ethics of pragmatism can be taken to be humanist as it recognizes no test of morality beyond what really matters to human being. 4. Aesthetics In his work, Dewey showed the existence of integrity between art, culture, and our everyday experiences. Therefore according to Dewy art is a part of our life and it is not just a privilege that can be given to a certain group. In this way he showed that an audience should be more than a passive recipient of the art. (Lekkan, 2003) E. Metaphysics and Pragmatiscm James and Dewey was the most empirical thinks who expressed their view in the most straight forward fashion. They showed that experience could be taken as the most ultimate teaching and it is also what should be explained. F. Religion and Worldview Pragmatists like Dewey and James looked close at the role that can be played by religion in the society. According to James, pragmatism is only works on the psychology level but cannot bring about the things that have been prayed for and can be taken as a soothing effect to the person how is praying. Therefore pragmatism cannot be taken to be authentic neither can it be taken as apologetic to faith. G. Criticism against Pragmatiscm 1. Ties to idealism and relativism Pragmatism has been criticized on lack of view of the general life that we live. It has been criticized by Mendan that it seek to avoid the violence which is inherent in abstraction. It was criticized for epistemology relativism and a practice that is more than short sighted practice. It was accused of lack of realism thinking and to be a mere manifestation of idealism. 2. Schopanhauer's world view Pragmatism has been criticized for lack of realism in its approach to issue. It has been accused of creating Schopenhauer world which is not practical or compatible with the kind of life that we are living. H. Conclusion Pragmatisms can be taken as an important school that has helped to explain what happens in the world and its relation with what is happening. However there have been many differences between different thinkers who have contradicted one another on the issue of pragmatism. It remains to be some of the most important concept in the modern intellectual world that can be used to explain different phenomena. References Anderson, E. (2000): Dewey's moral philosophy. Stanford University Eldrige, M. (1993): Transforming experience. Oxford University Lekkan, T. (2004): Making Morality and Pragmatism. New York: Willey Quine, W. (1991): Two Dogman's of empiricism. Philosophical Review Rorty, R. (1998): Rorty Truth and progress. Philosophical Papers, Vol. 3 Read More