Philosophical pragmatism is the view that philosophy can be meaningful only in the light of naturalism. Naturalism is a thesis about the world expressed at every level of inquiry. Every view that can be credibly justified in terms of its predictions about the world, is viewed as natural. Therefore, the philosophy of pragmatism is a theory about the nature of reality.
Philosophically speaking, pragmatists embrace a form of methodological realism; they deny the existence of objective metaphysical truth. They also deny the truth of moral realism, essentialism, subjectivity, and Pluralism. These are the theories they subscribe to about the nature of reality.
The philosophy of pragmatism is sometimes described as ‘pragmatism made easy’. It is a philosophy of science, methodology, and rational inquiry. However, it differs from many other philosophies of science in that it denies the priority of knowledge over experience, an approach some philosophers in the philosophy of science label ‘metaphysical reductionism’. It also denies the legitimacy of reason as a source of knowledge and instead holds that experience is sufficient for knowledge. In its metaphysics, all truths are either universal or particular, and are thus neither true nor false.
The central thesis of pragmatism is that all truths are either self-evident or false. Other philosophers who subscribe to the metaphysics of pragmatism are John Locke, Leo Tolstoy, Daniel Defoe, Elbert Hubbard, Hannahans, Stephen Weinberg and John Stuart Mill. Locke, in particular, presents a form of pragmatism similar to utilitarianism. His ideas concerning God and free will are central to his metaphysics of pragmatism. In fact, many of his ideas are directly considered in the later works of his.
Philosophers who subscribe to the metaphysics of pragmatism can be grouped into three groups. Some specialize in naturalism, denying the existence of God. Others focus on practical reasoning, using reason to arrive at truths independent of religion, science, politics and philosophy. The last group includes those philosophers who take a hybrid approach, incorporating aspects of both naturalism and practical reasoning. The three branches are not mutually exclusive, but the different branches inform each other. The naturalist may be expected to advocate pragmatism as an appropriate philosophy of science.
Charles Taylor, though not a pragmatist, was a key figure for the movement. In his famous lectures, “The Anticipation of Language”, he pointed out the ways in which language and its use can give us access to the internal thoughts of our beings. He was a strong opponent of metaphysics of objectivity and denied the viability of any purely intellectual account of the world. Taylor’s ideas were influential among the British metaphysicians who disagreed with his naturalism.
An early twentieth century American pragmatist, Henry Sidley Crane suggested that we could understand the world only through reflection. According to Crane “To know a thing is to know its cause.” Influenced by Taylor’s ideas, the Chicago school of pragmatists hoped to replace the subject of metaphysics with an object of scientific study. Although the Chicago school never developed a definite philosophy of its own, it remained a prominent influence on the later philosophy of science.
Philosophical pragmatism has been an influential part of many different philosophies of science. One of its most important contributions to philosophy has been its suggestion that truth is independent of any ideology or belief system. This is particularly important in the field of science in which ideologies and belief systems play a central role in determining what is known and what is not known. Without ideology, it is impossible to construct a complete definition of reality.
Since metaphysics has been one of the central preoccupations of scientists for hundreds of years, it is not surprising that pragmatists consider it important to attack the concepts of metaphysics directly. However, the methods of this style of attack vary considerably. Some modern philosophers argue that there are no metaphysical concepts because nothing can be measured or assigned a meaning. Others try to reduce all concepts to physical objects. Still others adopt an indirect method of attack, postulating a relationship between concepts and objects of experience without actually asserting that they are related.
There are some aspects of pragmatism that are valuable as guides to scientific thought. Firstly, it is important to remember that there are no strict rules governing the use of logic in philosophy or in scientific investigation. The only rule that pragmatists tend to follow is to use common sense and rely on other people’s observations when formulating an argument. Secondly, it should be noted that metaphysics can only be understood on the assumption that it has been intelligently ordered from a prior set of principles. Therefore, it is not necessary to make any special claims about reality in order to support a given theory.
Like many other philosophers, pragmatism has stressed the importance of practical experience as a means of reaching conclusions about what is true, wrong, and right. However, it differs from other forms of idealism in that it neither reduces knowledge to facts, nor places importance on personal experience as a source of knowledge. Philosophical reductionism is based on the assumption that most scientific truths can be discovered through scientific research. Pragmatists believe that individuals can discover the truth about most metaphysical questions through self-discovery or experience. Other important characteristics of pragmatism include an attitude towards personal independence, a rejection of the principle of impartiality, and an affinity for direct and immediate action.