Pragmatism

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » Pragmatism

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Mon 17 Mar, 2008 05:35 pm
I copied this from the MSN Encarta Website on Metaphysics

Quote:

Notable among these later metaphysical theories are radical empiricism, or pragmatism, a native American form of metaphysics expounded by Charles Sanders Peirce, developed by William James, and adapted as instrumentalism by John Dewey


Is it true that Pragmatism can be classified as radical empricism?
 
Pythagorean
 
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2008 12:06 pm
@de Silentio,
Hi, de Silentio. Smile

That's an excellent question. I do know that there is a book written by William James that is actually entitled "Essays in Radical Empiricism".

I guess they call Pragmatism 'Radical Empiricism' because of the movement of their focus (the "Pragmatists") away from the basic structure of the older empricism (which we can trace from Bacon through Locke to Kant) and their subsequent absolutization of empirical reality.

In 20th Century American Pragmatism as I understand it, there does not exist a 'thing-in-itself', but rather things exist for themselves as kinds of absolutes without conjecture as to any ultimate nature. It is this absolutizing of empirical things in James and the subjective psychological encounter with empirical reality which seperates it from the older philosophical exploration of empirical reality. In the older theory the thing-in-itself is hypothesized (by Kant) and knowledge of god is deduced (by Locke) through intuition. Such first order metaphysical speculation as is found in the older empiricist theory is therefore rejected in 20th Century Pragmatism. Pure theory is rejected for pure practise and Pragmatism is generally understood to be allied with the sciences (as opposed to Phenomenology, for example, which often shows itself hostile to modern science).

Smile

--Pyth
 
Jazzman phil
 
Reply Sat 5 Jul, 2008 04:18 am
@Pythagorean,
Sorry for the late answer Wink

I don't think that classification is right. A radical empiricism would be a fundamentalistic one. But pragmatists like Pierce stood for a consens theory: in their opinion knowlege doesn't have a foundation on which it's based on. According to Pierce truth is nothing more than a consens.
 
de Silentio
 
Reply Sun 6 Jul, 2008 06:57 pm
@Jazzman phil,
Jazzman wrote:
Sorry for the late answer Wink
in their opinion knowlege doesn't have a foundation on which it's based on.


Welcome to the thread, Jazzman.

According to the Pragmatist (or maybe just James?), isn't the foundation of truth (valid knowledge) practicality relative to the terms being used in the judgement?
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Tue 16 Feb, 2010 02:32 am
@de Silentio,
This is a good thread. Let's fire it back up. Pragmatism is slick. It's simultaneously a retreat and a bayonet charge.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Tue 16 Feb, 2010 04:02 pm
@Reconstructo,
I'm bumping this. I think pragmatism can add much to some of our current live theads.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 20 Feb, 2010 02:28 pm
@de Silentio,
Dissolving yesterday's dichotomies in a holistic acid.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » Pragmatism
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 04/20/2024 at 01:00:21