Pragmatism is Quite Practical

Sage Robinson (H02)

William James 1903 "What Pragmatism Means" lecture

For twenty years, this epic and life-changing philosophical method went untouched until the great William James gave it its rightful attention... well at least that is how Mr. James himself would describe it. If you didn’t immediately connect the dots, I am going to be discussing pragmatism. 

The word itself was derived from the Greek word “pragma” which means action and was first introduced into philosophy by Charles Pierce in 1878. Pierce originally defined pragmatism as to determine an object's meaning and clear up perceptions, we must analyze the practical implications. William James touches on how some philosophers have dabbled in the ideas of pragmatism but have all failed to label it and do it justice. A lot of William James’ lecture I read in a very boastful fancy man voice.  

I would like to ask you all to continue to read my post in a fancy pants voice and here is a picture of the man himself to give you some inspiration. 

 

In all seriousness, what does pragmatism really mean? Very early on in our class when reading Little House of Philosophy chapter 29, we immediately associated pragmatism with the squirrel example. I opened my assigned lecture and in scanning through the first paragraph I saw the word “squirrel” and immediately thought to myself “I am so thankful I kind of know what’s going on.” In his 1903 lecture “What Pragmatism Means”, James explains a thought-provoking moment he experienced while camping in the mountains with friends. Picture a tree with a squirrel on it, a man is continuously going round the tree to try to be facing the squirrel, but the squirrel always keeps the tree between it and the man. The question is raised on whether the man is actually “going round” the squirrel. James, so humbly, acknowledges his own intellectual qualifications to settling this dilemma. He says it all depends on the practical meaning of “going round”; if it is defined as the man hitting the positions of north, east, west, and sound then he has done that, but if it is defined as being positioned as some point on all sides of the squirrel then he has not done that. William James points all that out to simply say something along the lines of, well both sides are right, and both sides are wrong depending on the practicality of the matter.  

Here is a squirrel to help you visualize this scenario taking place. 

 

 

To my own disappointment, pragmatism is not just about squirrels. Although if you have name suggestions for the squirrel pictured above, I am open to all ideas. Through James’ lecture, two main components of pragmatism are identified, being method and truth.  

It stood out to me that pragmatism has no set beliefs or stances to abide by, but rather it is to be used as a lens to view all theories through. The majority of philosophers we have looked at seem to be telling you a direct path to live a happy life or how to go about matters to reach some state of potential fulfillment. William J just wants you to trust the process for real. The pragmatic method’s purpose is to settle metaphysical disputes that otherwise could not be concluded. Additionally, if no distinct difference in consequences of one side or the other being true or not can be traced then the alternatives practically mean the same thing. If the outcomes of believing X and Y show no difference, then X and Y are essentially the same. Whether we realize it or not, I believe our brains naturally gauge situations this way on some scale. At least after my time in lecture, I know for sure Professor Oliver does.  

William James emphasized his thoughts on the concept of truth. He claims that we claim ideas as truths if they agree with other aspects of our own experiences. Pragmatic truth does not simply look at reality. It is important to note the pragmatic distinction between truth and fact as well. As just defined, truth is based on its usefulness in the real world and how it results from own experience whereas fact are inarguable physical observations such as “the sky is blue.” A particular quote that stuck out to me is “reasons why we call things true is the reason why they are true.” This quote for some odd reason scratched an itch in my brain. I believe here he is saying we believe wholeheartedly in our own personal truths due to the reasoning for them being true. A very relevant topic in our modern society. Before I start a ramble on that aspect, let me move on to the final heavy hitter I noticed in William James’ lecture. 

Pragmatism is very anti dogmatic as James dismisses the idea of absolute “solving names” such as “God” and “energy”. He viewed words like these as steppingstones to ask more questions and to search down more avenues rather than ending the discussion with them. Which immediately led me to ponder James’ point of view on theology, thankfully he discussed that as well. His overall stance on religion is that if theological ideas prove to do good for real life, then they are true for pragmatism. If religious practice demonstrates positive practical consequences, then it has William James’ stamp of approval... and my stamp of approval as well. 

Okay so now I have discussed much more than just a squirrel and given the title of my assigned lecture I guess I should perhaps give a conclusive statement for the meaning of pragmatism. Pragmatism is a tool to utilize in analyzing all sets of beliefs; it is concerned with the practical implications of a belief in the real world to determine its true value. I found it hard to necessarily disagree with this particular lecture because there are no philosophical principles to form an opinion on. No beliefs or set principles, just a squirrel, a pretty rad method, and a justifiable viewpoint on truth.  

Discussion Questions: 

1. Have you applied the pragmatic method to any aspect of your beliefs? 

2. Are there any truths that you claim because have been pragmatically justified? 

3. What would you name the squirrel I included at the beginning of this post?