Pragmatic is the most commonly used word to describe something that focuses on the practical and useful, rather than its theoretical foundations. It can also be applied to people who are more concerned with the outcome of their actions than their reasoning or justification.
The idealism of the Enlightenment is contrasted by pragmatism, which emphasizes how individuals interpret and apply knowledge in their daily lives. It’s the basis for linguistics and communication studies, and is known as pragmatics. It’s what allows us to understand that the daughter of a friend who says, “Eating cookies makes you fat,” is not actually calling her fat. This is because semantics, or the literal meaning of a statement, is often different from its pragmatic interpretation.
One of the key ideas of pragmatism is that there are no universally agreed-upon truths; instead, what is true depends on how the individual interprets and uses a particular piece of information. It’s the underlying principle of linguistics and communication studies, and is what allows you to understand that when someone asks how you are doing, they are not really seeking a detailed account of your well-being; rather, they are using this question as a way to establish rapport with you.
This is why the study of linguistics and communication studies, or pragmatics, is so important: it helps you to recognize and appreciate how context and circumstance affects what we say and how we say it. It’s the underlying principle of all meaningful interaction and communication, both in everyday life and in academic settings.
While the pragmatist tradition of philosophy has waned in recent times, its epistemological roots remain powerfully relevant and useful. As Rorty suggests, it’s a philosophical perspective that supports the priority of democracy over philosophy (Rorty, 1993b).
Pragmatism can be particularly helpful in navigating qualitative applied research on organizational processes within respondent organizations such as NGOs. By integrating pragmatism into the research process, it can help researchers to surface themes and issues that are often hidden in formal documentation or rhetoric (Onwuegbuzie and Leech, 2005).
Another methodological benefit of pragmatic inquiry is that it allows for a more holistic understanding of the organizational processes being studied. This is possible because pragmatism embraces the idea that action, even when carefully planned, may have variable spatial and temporal qualities.
Lastly, pragmatism also advocates for the use of flexible and responsive research methods that can adapt to changing conditions during an investigation. This is especially important in the context of NGOs where action, whether or not planned, can have varying spatial and temporal qualities. This flexibility is essential to enabling researchers to develop a mediated understanding of organizational processes.