Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking

“The pragmatic method is primarily a method of settling metaphysical disputes that otherwise might be interminable.”

James uses an anecdote about a squirrel to illustrate the principle that two seemingly contradictory sides can often coexist. Just as James mediated in the squirrel dispute to show that there was no fundamental disagreement between the two sides, so the pragmatic method advances philosophy by showing where misunderstandings might lie and thus bringing opposing sides together.

“There can be no difference anywhere that doesn’t make a difference elsewhere.”

Part of the job of pragmatism is to ask what difference a particular philosophical theory would make in real life. If there is no difference in the consequences of two particular theories, then pragmatism concludes that there is no real difference between them. If, on the other hand, there is a real difference or consequence, then pragmatism can appraise the value of the theories.

“Pragmatism unstiffens all our theories, limbers them up and sets each one at work.”

James emphasizes that pragmatism functions as a mediator between various philosophies, finding common ground between them and pointing out where the practical differences between them lie. By emphasizing philosophy’s practicality, pragmatism makes philosophy useful for life.

“The attitude of looking away from first things, principles, ‘categories,’ supposed necessities; and of looking towards last things, fruits, consequences, facts.”

This definition of the pragmatic attitude deemphasizes abstract theory—especially theories about the origins of things—and emphasizes its results or consequences. In this way, pragmatism is oriented toward action, possibility, and the future. It does not so much seek to explain how things came to be as to direct the future course of human action and events.

“The true is the name of whatever proves itself to be good in the way of belief, and good, too, for definite, assignable reasons.”

James states his conviction that truth is equivalent to good; it is in fact a human good, just like health or wealth. This is a departure from traditional theories that see truth in more transcendent and abstract terms. James’s theory relates to his pragmatic emphasis on truth as a useful process or tool for human perceptions of the world.

“This need of an eternal moral order is one of the deepest needs of our breast.”

By “moral order” James means the sense that there is ultimate meaning to the universe and to life. Humans need be reassured that their lives are not in vain, that tragedy and death are not the final word, and that their ideals will come to fruition in some way. They furthermore need a philosophy that provides such hope. James argues that theism fulfills this need and materialism does not.

“The earth of things, long thrown into shadow by the glories of the upper ether, must resume its rights.”

James is underscoring that pragmatism emphasizes practical, real-life results (“the earth of things”) rather than abstract metaphysical principles (“the upper ether”). He believes that previous philosophy has dwelt too much on abstraction and that pragmatism will bring about a revolution toward the opposite direction, thus altering philosophy’s “centre of gravity.”

“But spiritualistic faith in all its forms deals with a world of promise, while materialism’s sun sets in a sea of disappointment.”

Related to Quote 7, James argues that belief in God, the afterlife, and a spiritual world gives human beings hope in the future, whereas materialism postulates that everything will end in death and decay. Pragmatically speaking, theism is the preferable philosophy because it postulates better consequences, and this also argues for its greater truth or validity. 

“[…] our knowledge grows in spots.”

James means that knowledge, both for an individual and in civilization as a whole, grows slowly and gradually, sometimes by fits and starts, rather than consistently. We learn things in a haphazard way, as we encounter reality and reflect upon it. A key pragmatic idea, this is developed by James into the doctrine that the universe, rather than being a finished product, is constantly improving while developing toward a goal.

“New truths thus are the resultants of new experiences and of old truths combined and mutually modifying one another.”

Here James describes his epistemology, or theory of knowledge: We progressively build our knowledge through observation and reflection, accommodating new discoveries to our previously held beliefs. In this way we are able to adapt ourselves to new realities without too much disturbance to our way of thinking and way of life.

“Science and critical philosophy thus burst the bounds of common sense.”

James argues that science and critical philosophy leave the commonsense level of thought behind by postulating the existence of things like atoms and magnetic fields. Science and philosophy challenge us to envision things and concepts that lie beyond what we immediately see, feel, and perceive.

“Profusion, not economy, may after all be reality’s keynote.”

James argues in favor of pluralism, or the metaphysical theory that reality, or the universe, is predominantly composed of multiple or plural interacting parts instead of being a great unified system. This ties in closely with James’s pragmatic concept that because truth is fluid and complex, we cannot restrict it to doctrinal formulas: Because reality is not monolithic, we must recognize multiple points of view.

“May there not after all be a possible ambiguity in truth?”

Coming at the very end of Lecture 5, this question expresses the pragmatic attitude toward truth. Pragmatism considers truth to be multiple and all theories to be merely convenient and provisional ways to describe what we experience. No one truth is absolute, so we must always be alive to the weaknesses and ambiguity in the language we use to formulate truths.

“Grant an idea or belief to be true […], what concrete difference will its being true make in anyone’s actual life?” 

Occurring in the lecture titled “Pragmatism’s Conception of Truth,” this basic statement highlights the pragmatic emphasis on discovering the practical meaning of philosophical ideas. Pragmatism valorizes practicality, and looks to the real-life consequences of the ideas we adopt on a theoretical level. James contrasts this with the more static and abstract notion of truth as something one can possess.

“The truth of an idea is not a stagnant property in it. Truth happens to an idea. It becomes true, is made true by events.”

A succinct statement of James’s idea of truth as a process rather than a simple correspondence between the knower and the thing known. James states that he has to defend this thesis throughout his lecture on “Pragmatism’s Conception of Truth,” which suggests the novelty of this idea in his contemporaneous philosophical world.

“Experience, as we know, has ways of boiling over, and making us correct our present formulas.”

According to pragmatism, experience is the decisive factor in determining truth. In science, one must constantly revise theories according to new data and experience; James argues that this should hold true in the search for philosophical truths as well.

“Meanwhile, we have to live to-day by what truth we can get to-day, and be ready to-morrow to call it falsehood.”

James believes that in some future state, we may possess perfect, absolute truth that no further experience can alter. In the meantime, however, we must live with a progressive process of acquiring truths, constantly revising our beliefs in light of new experiences and discoveries. James mentions the Ptolemaic theory of the heavens as an example of a doctrine once held as truth but has since been superseded.

“We have heard much of late of the uses of the imagination in science. It is high time to urge the use of a little imagination in philosophy.”

Throughout the book James portrays himself as an independent mind who believes in thinking outside the box. During his era, new discoveries were leading scientists to question commonly held notions of the way the universe was structured. In a similar manner, James believes that philosophers should question the common rationalist assumptions about reality and truth. Coming near the end of Lecture 6, this quote reflects James’s somewhat frustrated tone as he responds to his critics’ misconceptions of pragmatism and its tenets.

“We receive in short the block of marble, but we carve the statue ourselves.”

This metaphor points to the creative power that human beings have to shape their own reality and determine the future. According to James, we bring our own perspective to our conception of reality; he James argues that this in turn causes a distinctive shaping of reality—reality becomes humanized by its contact with us. Further, we add to the stock of reality and fact by our own actions.

“On pragmatic principles we cannot reject any hypothesis if consequences useful to life flow from it.”

James stresses that pragmatism is a broadminded way of thinking because it assimilates as much as it can within a framework of experience-based knowledge. Although loosely allied with empiricism, pragmatism is not stringently tied to it; it can also accept rationalist ideas if they have practical meaning and use.

“[…] the only real reason I can think of why anything should ever come is that someone wishes it to be here.”

This unusual statement is part of James’s conviction about the human ability to contribute to the sum total of reality. James believes that individual persons can affect reality by willing things to happen and then acting on their ideals (though his assertion should not be taken literally, or as replicating the modern pseudoscientific notion of manifestation). Thus, James believes that the universe is ultimately conditioned by free will and not by deterministic laws.

“Is all ‘yes, yes’ in the universe? Doesn’t the fact of ‘no’ stand at the very core of life?”

James expresses doubt about the optimistic view that salvation is inevitable and assured. He believes that life is a dynamic and moralistic struggle that is dangerous and potentially risky, rather than a static expression of eternal principles. In the closing pages of Pragmatism, James puts forth some religious views based on pragmatic principles, which he argues mesh easily.

“[…] I deny the right of any pretended logic to veto my own faith.”

Here James clarifies that religious faith has a definite place in his pragmatic worldview; faith for him has just as much right as “logic.” James implies that reason has limits in its ability to decide such questions as the ultimate destiny of humanity and the universe. Because of this, he posits the need to rely on faith and intuition in some circumstances.