Course Pragmatism

7/28/2019 Course Pragmatism

1/4

PHILOSOPHY OF AMERICAN PRAGMATISM COURSE

GABRIEL GHERASIM Benedek Szidonia

Observations:

- Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of practice to theory- Practice is observed, then theory is extracted from practice and reapplied to practice- Circular method- Instrumentalism, radical empiricism, verificationism, conceptual relativity, fallibilism- Revised pragmatism was used to criticize logical positivism- Neopragmatism- Neo-classical pragmatism- Pragma: deed, act, to pass over, to achieve, to practice- The Metaphysical Club, began in America- Unique American philosophy- Inquiry depends on doubt


2/4



COURSE I 26th

February

General characteristics of classical American philosophy

What are those conceptual trends and ideatic interests of American philosophers?

When speaking about classical American philosophy, we have in mind the American philosophical

tradition at the end of the 18th

century and the first half of the 19th

century. The pragmatic movement in

philosophy properly started in 1877 with a text written by Charles Peirce entitled How to make our ideas

clear?.

Characteristics of classical American philosophy before the birth of pragmatism:

1. The damnation of Renee Descartes (Renatus Carthesius in Latin, died in 164) the Americanphilosophy started by denouncing his philosophy. He was considered the first modern philosopher. Al

the basic premises of Cartesian philosophy were rejected. The first thesis of his rejected was the thesis of

the separation between faculties of knowledge. According to Descartes, for instance the activity of our

sensibility (a faculty of knowledge) is completely separate/distinct form the activity of reason or of our

intellect. In modern philosophy there are 3 main faculties of knowledge; sensibility, imagination and

intellect/reason, through which we can know something. Sensibility works through our senses, the

imagination works through representations and reason works through concepts/ideas/thoughts. This

distinction between faculties was rejected. American philosophers considered that we can have no

genuine knowledge according to this division. In other words, we can have no genuine knowledge about

an object by separating our sensibility towards it from the intellect. There are no distinctions between

these. Another thesis rejected was his distinction between body and mind. American philosophers

considered that the body and the mind are organically connected and cannot be separated. Descartes saidthat experiencing a physical contact is a part of how our body works and has nothing to do with our

mind. (pain for example) Our mind simply operates on our sensation. Descartes didnt genuinely think

body was separated from the mind. To have the consciousness of humans allows experiencing the pain

and understanding it in the same time with our brains. Americans thought that experiencing the pain and

understanding it is one and the same act which happen simultaneously. They considered that this

separation is artificial, with no validity in practice, only theoretical.

2. The naturalization of the spirit: in classical tradition, the glorious There are two main worldswhat Plato called the sensiblr eotld, the world of teresttal action, the world. American philosophers

discarded these distinctions. Metaphysics separation between the spiritual worlds and the world ofexperience stood at the basis of metaphysics. Americans rejected all this tradition in metaphysics/ the

metaphysical tradition. They considered it to be highly speculative, fiction. American philosophers

considered that for a better understanding of what is spiritual, it is necessary to naturalize values and

ideas to put them to work. What is spiritual should be manifested in nature, manifesting experience

These ideas have no value when approached abstractly theoretically. Their essential meaning is

exactly their role in experience. There is no form without contentso they rejected the existence of the

spiritual world SEPARATELY from the natural world.


3/4



3. The mentalization of nature: European philosophy (Hegel, Plato, Aristotle, Plotin, Augustine, StThomas, Descartes, Kant) considered that nature is of a minor value for the mind. Nature is nothing else

than the domain of our experiences. In other words, it has a poor rational significance (or spiritual

significance). That is what for instance the transcendentalists contested (R.W. Emerson). Emerson

considered that nature is essentially spiritual. Its role for our life is not minor as European philosophersconsidered, but our experiences are the very condition for a better understanding of ourselves. This was

commonly the opinion of classical American philosophers. Nature has a spiritual value and is not simply

the domain of our experience. This means the mentalization of nature considering nature from a

spiritual standpoint.

4. The focus on processes instead of substances: in European tradition our existence, God, truth, thegood, beautyall of these are substances (something existing in and by itself). For instance (in Plato) a

beautiful woman is the instantiation in reality of the abstract substance of beauty which lives

independently in our soul thus our souls have the capacity of recognizing something beautiful when

seeing it, because beauty is implanted in our soul. Our soul is co-generated with the forms of truth,beauty or good. Thats why substances exist by themselves. American philosophers considered that

operating or using substances is irrelevant/of no use for our experience. They questioned the meaning of

the Platonic idea that forms are imprinted in our souls. Instead of using substances, whats relevant is to

see how for instance the idea of truth works in experiencehow is it possible for something to become

true. They contested the idea that there are essential and eternal truths. Instead they considered that what

is true is a processit BECOMES true. They insisted on the process of something becoming true.

5. The substitution of yesterday with tomorrow: in European tradition what was meaningful was relatedto accomplishments of the past. European philosophers considered that to know something is equivalent

with knowing the past of that something. American philosophers didnt deny the role of the past, butthey put an accent on the role of the future. Namely, something is meaningful only if it is relevant for

future experiences.

6. Thought is not a substance, but something revealing a certain goal/something oriented towardsresults: in European tradition, thought was important because it was the only way of understanding what

happened through concepts/ideas. Americans rejected the idea that theories and concepts alone are

sufficient for explaining the true meaning of our experience. They considered that the most important

role of our thought is that of changing the world not that of understanding itof transforming reality.

7. The importance of language: in European tradition, the meaning of our statements was established interms of a correspondence between our ideas and facts, so that language was of a minor importancei

didnt really matter how you said it or what language you say it in. whats important is the accuracy of

our ideas in confrontation with facts. American philosophers considered that language is central in

experience, because they considered ideas to be abstract, they thought that there was no way of verifying

the presupposed correspondence between ideas and facts so that language became contextual/essentia

in the way in which understand and communicate experiences or facts.

8. Science is no more a singular and contemplative accomplishment but a cooperative one: sciencewas no longer conceived as a purely singular activity but a cooperative one. Example: Newton


4/4



constructed his world according to his own rationality, following certain laws and axioms. His

mechanics was a result of his solitary thinking upon what are the laws governing nature and our

experience. According to Americans, the progress of science and technology in late modernity makes it

impossible for a solitary mind to conceive and to explain the entire experience. Thats why science is or

should be conceived as a cooperative investigation - a collaboration of scholars, researchers. Thesimplistic mechanicism of the world according to Newton was no longer sufficient to explain the

realities of our contemporary world. Thus science is not the product of a single mind nor the prerogative

it cannot explain the mysteries of the world.

9. The primacy of method: our knowledge was founded, according to the European tradition, uponspeculative theories/sets of concepts constructed by the mind. According to Americans, in the absence of

a specified methodology of research there is no possibility of achieving theoretical results. So method is

not only desirable, but also necessary. Their question was: how do you achieve your results? Thats why

they insisted on the role of experiments, testing our theoretical assumptions according to a transparent

methodology.

10.Science can no longer be separated from society: science is not abstract, no longer independent of theworld. The meanings of our scientific results should be tested in order to get to their validation. Science

is no longer speculative, but applicative. Thats why probably the most developed sciences and most

popular ones are applied sciences. Namely, sciences that prove their results in experience.

11.The substitution of the individual with the community: in the European tradition the center of ouruniverse was the individual. Men and women were conceived generically under the label; they didnt

speak about distinct human habitudes, they spoke instead of how generically the human mind works.

Americans, starting in the 2nd

half of the 19th

century, started to abandon the idea of the central

importance of the individual and to stress upon the importance of communities of individuals. Because

they didnt think that the human potentialities are the same. They are different from a culture to another

from a period of time to another, etc. It is better to think about individuals as parts of communities. The

concept of the individual by itself cannot tell something relevant about the world we live in. so

individuals should not be conceived isolated but living in communities. This assumption had a decisive

role in the development of philosophy, behavioral sciences, etc.

Documents

Course Pragmatism