Kidnapping an ugly child: is Willliam James a pragmaticist?
Kidnapping an ugly child: is Willliam James a pragmaticist?
Since the term ‘pragmatism’ was first coined, there have been debates about who is or is not a ‘real’ pragmatist, and what that might mean. The division most often drawn in contemporary pragmatist scholarship is between William James and Charles Peirce. Peirce is said to present a version of pragmatism which is scientific, logical and objective about truth, whereas James presents a version which is nominalistic, subjectivistic and leads to relativism. The first person to set out this division was in fact Peirce himself, when he distinguished his own ‘pragmaticism’ from the broad pragmatism of James and others. Peirce sets out six criteria which defines ‘pragmaticism’: the pragmatic maxim; a number of ‘preliminary propositions’; prope-positivism; metaphysical inquiry; critical common-sensism; and scholastic realism. This paper sets out to argue that in fact James meets each of these criteria, and should be seen as a ‘pragmaticist’ by Peirce’s own lights.
© 2019, BSHP. The attached document (embargoed until 04/03/2019) is an author produced version of a paper published in BRITISH JOURNAL FOR THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self- archiving policy. The final published version (version of record) is available online at the link below. Some minor differences between this version and the final published version may remain. We suggest you refer to the final published version should you wish to cite from it.
154 - 175
Williams, Neil W.
401e2487-a30a-4dd4-8955-55cca4c378a7
Williams, Neil W.
401e2487-a30a-4dd4-8955-55cca4c378a7
Williams, Neil W.
(2017)
Kidnapping an ugly child: is Willliam James a pragmaticist?
British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 26 (1), .
(doi:10.1080/09608788.2017.1358140).
Abstract
Since the term ‘pragmatism’ was first coined, there have been debates about who is or is not a ‘real’ pragmatist, and what that might mean. The division most often drawn in contemporary pragmatist scholarship is between William James and Charles Peirce. Peirce is said to present a version of pragmatism which is scientific, logical and objective about truth, whereas James presents a version which is nominalistic, subjectivistic and leads to relativism. The first person to set out this division was in fact Peirce himself, when he distinguished his own ‘pragmaticism’ from the broad pragmatism of James and others. Peirce sets out six criteria which defines ‘pragmaticism’: the pragmatic maxim; a number of ‘preliminary propositions’; prope-positivism; metaphysical inquiry; critical common-sensism; and scholastic realism. This paper sets out to argue that in fact James meets each of these criteria, and should be seen as a ‘pragmaticist’ by Peirce’s own lights.
© 2019, BSHP. The attached document (embargoed until 04/03/2019) is an author produced version of a paper published in BRITISH JOURNAL FOR THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self- archiving policy. The final published version (version of record) is available online at the link below. Some minor differences between this version and the final published version may remain. We suggest you refer to the final published version should you wish to cite from it.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 18 July 2017
e-pub ahead of print date: 4 September 2017
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 495067
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/495067
ISSN: 0960-8788
PURE UUID: e7dc366a-f067-4ec2-bcbb-bdd0ebdc1e9b
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 28 Oct 2024 17:57
Last modified: 29 Oct 2024 03:13
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Neil W. Williams
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics