Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking
Where to buy Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Ancient Ways of Thinking books online?
Product Description
This ebook is perfect with linked Table of Content building navigation quicker and simpler.
William James wrote voluminously throughout his life. A non-exhaustive bibliography of his writings, compiled by John McDermott, is 47 pages long. (See not more than for a list of his major writings and additional collections)
He gained widespread recognition with his monumental Principles of Psychology (1890), totaling twelve hundred pages in two volumes, which took twelve years to perfect. Psychology: The Briefer Course, was an 1892 abridgement designed as a less rigorous introduction to the meadow. These works criticized both the English associationist school and the Hegelianism of his day as competing dogmatisms of small explanatory value, and sought to re-conceive the human mind as inherently purposive and selective. —from Wikipedia
In PRAGMATISM William James addresses the pragmatist, essentialist and foundationalist philosophers with their abstract and idealistic opinion demonstrating that it is the pragmatist who takes our obligations seriously. The pragmatist is guided by the experience of the senses and the effective body of truth each person carries with them and these are no tiny trifles and is not one who is free to make anything up .
Buy Cheap Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Ancient Ways of Thinking Online
Related posts:
The notion that the truth of an thought is contingent upon it’s “cash value” has been one of the more ridiculous turns in the history of thought (thus, by James’ own criteria, the thought is “fake”). The premise that human experience is all there is can lead to nothing but such an ridiculousness. An Aztec Gods being was “right”, because a belief in such a God kept one from being beheaded. There’s cash value for you. Any intelligent college freshman can see right through James’ loony theory, until the power of the professor makes its impression upon them. The planet is round now and it was round when everyone believed it was flat, the “cash value” of the belief notwithstanding. It should have been titled “The Convenience Theory of Belief”.
Agreed one extra star for at least being well written sophistry.
Reader’s Rating: 2 / 5
A must for the modern philosopher by one of the most influential thinkers of our time.
Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5
William James is undoubtedly a fantastic thinker. And he undoubtedly likes life, and likes mankind. This much is clear in his work – his sense of humor, insight, and approach to his topic are all evidence of this. James, but, cannot rightly be called a philosopher. While his thoughts are insightful, and the plenty of them proves him a fantastic thinker, his method of presentation and discussion falls fleeting of the demanding science of western philosophy. James does not make a foundation of simple thoughts and erect upon them; he simply introduces a broad thought, and then does not even support it, but assumes that it is self evident.
Despite his flaws as a philosopher but, his work is a pleasure to read and, knowing its flaws, one can delight in this book for what it is – a series of thoughts and thoughts that do form a rather elegant approach to life, if not a right philosophy.
Reader’s Rating: 4 / 5
Pragmatism delves into the extremely thought-provoking topic of philosophizing about philosophy itself. This book / address is a must read for all persons interested in thinking for themselves!
Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5
In a certain view the history of western philosophy can be viewed as the search for truth(s) and systems of thought and action derivable from persons truths. This pursuit for “First Principles” has brought us to the trenches of WW1 and the giant socio-economic experiements of Stalinist Russia, Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge’s Cambodia. As Keynes pointed out philsophical writings have more power than we know. The failure to set up these systems led, in the late 19th century, to the emergence of more contingent and nihlistic systems, e.g. Wittgenstein. Or the inter-war French philsophical conclusions that everything is absurd. James would answer well it exists so it can’t be absurd and your failure to deal with that shows a lack of faith and courage. (the book to read is Barzun’s ‘From Dawn to Decadence – not just highly recommended but Six Stars on the failures of Western culture to rise to the challenges of the 20th century).
Now with all that background as setup, and alternative up what some of the additional reviewers have to say, James offers an entirely different approach not based on absolutes but rather on the process of building truth. He’s an brilliant writer though his depth of thought is regularly disguised by the simplicity and ‘downhominess’ of his expression. What he constructs, in language reminiscant of Hemingway or Hogan on Golf, is a systematic view on achieving “Truth” based on what we can know, the relationships built up from earlier conclusions and hard persons. It seems that his late 19th century American slang disguises some of this all too well. If one substitutes implications and consequences for his use of phrases like ‘how does it pay out’ the material moves forwards in time and interpretation.
What James appears to have acheived, to me, is the first serious consideration of a constructed and dynamic philsophical system that evolves based on both external facts and it’s own workings yet also carries the burdens and benefits of insisting on strong rules for construction and truth hard. He applies this system to many of the major and daily conundrums we face in our lives while also tackling many of the major paradoxes, at least implicitly, of modern philosphy.
To close the loop if James devious and nuanced philsophy had been more widely understood we might not have avoided the disasters of various absolutist systems. But we would be in a better position to deal with the post catasrophe consequences and achieve a more balanced, courageous and forwards-looking approach to things. In fact one could argue that what James does is place a systematic approach in place, based on methods and processes, and an admission that this is a pluralistic not monlithic universe where Truth is contingent. If you like he has adapted the scientific method, or engineering analysis, to philosophy and done so in such a way that a lot of groundwork is laid for the rest of us.
Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5