Pragmatic is a philosophical tradition founded by American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce and his followers. It is an approach to truth that prioritizes useful knowledge over knowledge that is certain. It also holds that beliefs are only considered true if they prove useful in inquiry and action.
The word pragmatic is derived from the Greek word pragmatikos, meaning “practical.” It can be defined as a principle or theory that emphasizes the value of something based on its practicality or how it will be used. Pragmatism has many applications in daily life, including business practices, political decisions, and even parenting. A pragmatic person is one who values common sense and can solve problems in a way that works best for the situation at hand, rather than being tied down to strict principles or ideals.
Applied fields like public administration,[49] political science,[50] leadership studies,[51] international relations,[52] conflict resolution,[53] and research methodology have often included the ideas of pragmatism.[54] The pragmatist view of reality[55] also plays a large role in the way that people perceive their worlds.
A major figure in the classical pragmatist pantheon is John Dewey (1859-1952), who taught at the University of Chicago and was a close associate of James and Peirce. His wide-ranging writings had a great impact on the American intellectual scene for over a half-century.
However, the influence of pragmatism began to decline in the 1940s. The main reason was that Dewey lacked a bona fide successor. He had many students and admirers, but none who stood to him as he stood to James and Peirce.
Another reason for the decline of pragmatism was the rise of a rival school of philosophy in the United States, called positivism.[55] Positivism criticized the foundationalist picture of pragmatism, and it argued that experiences are interpreted by concepts. Since experience is always theory-laden, it cannot serve as a raw source of justification for theories or worldviews.
The pragmatists countered this by arguing that it is only through the struggle of intelligent organisms with their environment that beliefs acquire meaning and that a belief is considered valid. The pragmatists were also critical of the coherence theory of truth, which holds that facts must be coherent as a set. This can cause a lot of confusion, because a fact is still a fact whether it fits with other facts or not. For example, knowing that it rains most of the time would prevent you from developing wild theories that your cat controls the weather. For this reason, the pragmatists rejected the coherence theory of truth and instead favored a view of truth that is not dependent on how things match up. The pragmatists are referred to as neopragmatists by some contemporary analytic philosophers,[96] but they have been criticized as relativistic by other neopragmatists and by many analytic philosophers.