Pragmatism

William Reaper and Linda Smith in their book, A Brief Guide to Ideas: Turning Points in Religion and Philosophy, deliver what the title of the book promises. The key person that is important for my research is the American Pragmatists William James (1842-1910). James was part of a movement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century known as pragmatism. According to the authors, “The pragmatist criticism of classical philosophy was that it had little or no cash-value.” (320) Besides James, the other key figure of the movement is John Dewey (1859-1952). Both James and Dewey, “shared in a basic mistrust of the sort of intellectualism that is purely theoretical. Hence the term ‘pragmatism’, which derives from the Greek word for ‘action’, ‘deeds’, ‘business’.” (320-321)

 

A closer look at James philosophy reveals that he “was convince that experience rather than theory is the key to our understanding of the world and reality.” (322) According to the authors, James believed that a person’s viewpoint is of utter importance in philosophy. The authors explain, “We think only in order to solve our own problems, so that our theories are actually instruments employed to solve problems in our experience. Therefore theories should be assessed on their ability to succeed in dealing with particular problems. If the function of a theory is to deal with an experience, the pragmatists’ test of a theory is that it is true if it works. If we apply this to classical philosophy, the only way of assessing the so-called absolute truths of Plato or Descartes is by judging them in relation to their effect on the concrete aspects of life, our experience. If they have no effect then they are meaningless.” (322)

Unless a theory has a concrete positive effect on a persons life it is deemed meaningless. Thus all theories are evaluated based on their practicality to help the modern person deal with the challenges that life poses.

 

Pragmatism is also connected with moral relativism. According to the authors, “For a pragmatist, truth is not a fixed idea which we are all trying to find, but truth is something that happens to an idea. Truth develops and grows in time. So for instance, you might have a view that life exists on other planets. The idea is neither true nor false. However, when finally a space expedition discovers that life exists on Mars then the theory will become true. Some ideas yield to development. They are true in that they work, and false in that they do not work. Ideas may work for a while and are true while they work. When an idea ceases to be satisfactory, it is no longer true. James based his illustrations of truth on examples of various scientific theories that have now been discarded and replaced with better truths. Truth is that which enables us to deal successfully with the life-problems that we encounter.” (323) James model is an evolutionary one, since our environment continues to change; truth continues to change as well. Since everything is in flux, including truth, truth is therefore relative.

 

Today there is a continuous discussion between reason and experience. The authors write, “The traditionalists argue that reason is the only source of all knowledge, while the empiricists and pragmatists argue that useful knowledge comes from sense experience. In their view, reason only gives definition and expresses what is known already, whereas empirical knowledge shows things that are new and useful.” (323-324) There are some implications of this type of view on how one understands moral behavior. According to the authors, “If morality is not based on objective reason, then it has to be based on subjective or personal judgments.” (324) This type of perspective has been termed subjectivism or emotivism. In this perspective, “Your perception is as good as mine, and moral integrity is about being true to one’s own feelings.” (324)

 

Willima James applied the pragmatism and relativism to religion. The authors note, “if truth is relative, then when this is applied to religion it means that a religion is not to be valued for its own sake but for its psychological and moral effect.” (324) Whatever has a positive effect for a person or group of people is viewed as meaningful and true. According to the authors, “James defended the idea that people are not at root concerned with an exact definition of the nature of God or about proofs of his existence; they believe in God because they need God.” (324)

 

By now we can see a lot of problems with James’ pragmatism and relativism. Jesus has revealed to us who God is, how he feels about us and what he desires for us. God is not who we make him to be or how we wish for him to be. God’s being is one way and not the other. From a traditional and orthodox Christian view this form of pragmatism potentially distorts who God is. We see this pragmatism reflected in popular religion where people build their own “patchwork-God.” Thus, this pragmatism that is described in this brief overview is alive and well and might be the majority religious outlook (or approach) to religion today.

 

Another problem is that only the practical is valued. Success becomes the only measure of truth. The biblical call to discipleship does not always look successful from a human perspective. Being self-giving instead of self-serving does not always lead to worldly success – but it often is the path of obedience and faithfulness to the life that God has called us.