Pragmatic Genuine Philosophy
Pragmatism is a philosophy that is based on experience and context. It may lack a clear set of foundational principles or a coherent ethical framework. This can lead to an absence of idealistic ambitions and transformative change.
In contrast to deflationary theories pragmatic theories do not reject the idea that statements are connected to actual states of affairs. They only define the role that truth plays in the practical world.
Definition
The word pragmatic is used to describe people or things that are practical, logical and sensible. It is often contrasted with idealistic, which refers to a person or idea that is based on ideals or high principles. A person who is pragmatic considers the real-world conditions and circumstances when making decisions, and is focused on what can realistically be accomplished rather than trying to find the most effective theoretical course of action.
Pragmatism is a new philosophical movement, emphasizes the importance that practical implications determine meaning, truth or value. It is an alternative in contrast to the dominant continental and analytical traditions. It was established by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James with Josiah Royce as its founding fathers, pragmatism evolved into two distinct streams, one tending towards relativism, and the other toward realism.
프라그마틱 슬롯무료 of the major problems in pragmatism is the nature of truth. While a majority of pragmatists agree that truth is an important concept, they disagree about how to define it and how it functions in practice. One approach, influenced by Peirce and James, concentrates on the ways people deal with problems and make assertions and prioritizes the speech-act and justification tasks of language-users when determining whether truth is a fact. Another method, that is influenced by Rorty and his followers, focuses on the relatively mundane functions of truth--how it is used to generalize, commend and avert danger. It is also less concerned with a full-fledged theory of truth.
This neopragmatic approach to the truth has two flaws. It firstly, it flings with relativism. Truth is a concept that has an extensive and long tradition that it's unlikely that its meaning can be reduced to everyday applications as pragmatists do. Second, pragmatism appears to dismiss the existence of truth in its metaphysical form. This is reflected by the fact that pragmatists such as Brandom, who owes much to Peirce and James and are mostly uninformed about metaphysics. Dewey has made only one reference to truth in his numerous writings.
Purpose
Pragmatism seeks to offer an alternative to the continental and analytic tradition of philosophy. Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and their Harvard colleague Josiah Royce (1860-1916) were the first to introduce it's first generation. These classical pragmatists emphasized the importance of inquiry and meaning and the nature of truth. Their influence was felt by a number of influential American thinkers like John Dewey (1859-1952), who applied their theories to education and other aspects of social improvement, as well as Jane Addams (1860-1935) who created social work.
Recently the new generation of philosophers has given pragmatism more space to discuss. Many of these neopragmatists are not classical pragmatists but they are part of the same tradition. Robert Brandom is their main figure. He focuses his work on semantics and the philosophy of language, but draws inspiration from the philosophy of Peirce, James, and others.
One of the main differences between the classic pragmatists and the 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 focus on the idea of 'ideal warranted assertibility' which says that an idea is genuinely true if the claim made about it is justified in a specific manner to a specific group of people.
This view is not without its problems. It is often criticized as being used to support illogical and ridiculous theories. The gremlin hypothesis is a good example of this: It's an idea that is effective in practice but is unsubstantiated and likely nonsense. This is not an insurmountable issue, but it does highlight one of pragmatism's main flaws that it can be used to justify almost anything, and that includes many absurd ideas.
Significance
When making decisions, the term "practical" refers to considering the real world and its conditions. It can also be used to refer to a philosophy that emphasizes the practical implications in determining the meaning, truth or values. William James (1842-1910) first used the term pragmatism to describe this viewpoint in a speech at the University of California, Berkeley. James claimed to have coined the term with his mentor and friend Charles Sanders Peirce, but the pragmatist viewpoint soon gained its own name.
The pragmatists resisted the sharp dichotomies in analytic philosophy like 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.
Classical pragmatists were focused on the theory of inquiry, meaning and the nature of truth, however James put these ideas to work exploring truth in religion. A second generation turned the pragmatist view of education, politics and other aspects of social development under the influence of John Dewey (1859-1952).
In recent years, neopragmatists have attempted to place the concept of pragmatism within a larger Western philosophical framework. They have traced the connections between Peirce's views and the ideas of Kant and other idealists of the 19th century, and the emerging theory of evolution. They have also sought to understand the significance of truth in an original epistemology of a posteriori and to formulate a metaphilosophy that is pragmatic and includes a view of language, meaning and the nature of knowledge.
Despite this the pragmatism that it has developed continues to evolve and the a posteriori model that it came up with is a significant departure from traditional approaches. The defenders of pragmatism have had to grapple with a number of objections that are just as old as the theory itself, but which have received greater exposure in recent times. Some of them include the notion that pragmatism is ineffective when applied to moral questions and that its claim "what works" is nothing more than relativism with an unpolished appearance.
Methods
The epistemological method of Peirce included a practical explanation. Peirce saw it as a means of undermining spurious metaphysical ideas such as the Catholic conception 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 hope for from a theory about truth. As such, they tend to avoid deflationist claims of truth that need to be verified in order to be valid. They advocate a different approach they refer to as "pragmatic explanation". This is about explaining how a concept can be used in practice and identifying the requirements to be met in order to determine whether the concept is authentic.
It is important to remember that this method could be viewed as a type of relativism, and is often criticized for doing so. But it's less extreme than the alternatives to deflationism, and therefore is a good way of getting around some of the issues associated with relativist theories of truth.
프라그마틱 정품확인방법 has led to various philosophical liberation projects such as those associated with eco-feminism, feminism, Native American philosophy and Latin American philosophy - currently look to the pragmatist tradition as guidance. Quine, for example, is an analytic philosopher who has embraced the philosophy of pragmatism in a manner that Dewey could not.
While pragmatism is a rich tradition, it is crucial to recognize that there are also some significant flaws in the philosophy. In particular, the philosophy of pragmatism is not an accurate test of truth and fails when applied to moral questions.
Some of the most prominent pragmaticists, like Quine and Wilfrid Sellars, also criticised the philosophy. However it has been reclaimed from the ashes by a broad range of philosophers, such as Richard Rorty, Cornel West and Robert Brandom. Although these philosophers aren't classical pragmatists but they do owe a great deal to the philosophy of pragmatism, and draw inspiration from the work of Peirce, James and Wittgenstein in their writings. The works of these philosophers are well worth reading by anyone who is interested in this philosophical movement.