Pragmatic is a philosophical approach that prioritizes practical solutions and action over abstract theorizing. This perspective is especially useful in fields like engineering or medicine, where results are more important than ideas and theories. It also encourages open-mindedness and flexibility in beliefs and ideas, and allows individuals to consider new ways of approaching problems and seeing their world.
In pragmatism, reality is defined by the experiences that each individual has. Knowledge and truth are subjective and ever-changing, and only those concepts that can be verified through practical experiments are considered true. This is a major change from the traditional concept of truth as a stable absolute, and it allows for the possibility that different people may perceive the same events differently.
This is a philosophy that has shaped many modern-day political theories, including liberatory movements such as feminism, ecology, and Native American philosophy (Zalta, 2001). It has been instrumental in fostering modern science, which has replaced the idea of objective truth with the concept of’verifiability’ (Kuhn, 1962).
As with any philosophy, there are pros and cons to pragmatics. Some people argue that a pragmatic view of the world can lead to a lack of foundational principles or a coherent philosophical framework, and that it is therefore unsuitable for constructing moral or ethical arguments. Other critics point out that the emphasis on practical outcomes can lead to an ad hoc, fragmented approach to problem-solving and an inability to establish long-term goals.
Those who embrace a pragmatic approach to the world often find it easier to interact with others. They are more likely to take a flexible attitude toward social norms, and they can be more tolerant of other people’s views. They tend to value a clear understanding of what is being said rather than an ideologically driven definition of meaning, and they can be effective communicators.
Pragmatism can also be a challenge in interpersonal relationships, where it is easy to misunderstand one another’s motives. For example, someone who is pragmatic may not understand why another person seems unwilling to complete a task that has been assigned. This can create tension between two people who otherwise have a good working relationship.
The study of pragmatics is also integral to computational linguistics, where it helps computers better interpret human language and information. For instance, Victoria Fromkin’s Computational Pragmatics is concerned with how humans communicate their intentions to a computer system by using context to resolve ambiguity. The system then uses that contextual information to more closely mimic a user’s natural language and information processing abilities. This allows it to understand and respond to a greater variety of real-world situations.