What do you think?
Rate this book
Pragmatism by Bacon, Michael (2012) Paperback
An Introduction provides an account of the arguments of the central figures of the most important philosophical tradition in the American history of ideas, pragmatism. This wide-ranging and accessible study explores the work of the classical pragmatists Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and John Dewey, as well as more recent philosophers including Richard Rorty, Richard J. Bernstein, Cheryl Misak, and Robert B. Brandom. Michael Bacon examines how pragmatists argue for the importance of connecting philosophy to practice. In so doing, they set themselves in opposition to many of the presumptions that have dominated philosophy since Descartes. The book demonstrates how pragmatists reject the Cartesian spectator theory of knowledge, in which the mind is viewed as seeking accurately to represent items in the world, and replace it with an understanding of truth and knowledge in terms of the roles they play within our social practices. The book explores the diverse range of positions that have engendered marked and sometimes acrimonious disputes amongst pragmatists. Bacon identifies the themes underlying these differences, revealing a greater commonality than many commentators have recognized. The result is an illuminating narrative of a rich philosophical movement that will be of interest to students in philosophy, political theory, and the history of ideas.
- GenresPhilosophyNonfiction
Paperback
First published May 22, 2012
22 people are currently reading
119 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
June 6, 2023
A Century Of Pragmatism
Michael Bacon's book, "Pragmatism: an Introduction" (2012) offers a detailed and learned overview of the philosophical movement of pragmatism which Bacon describes as "North America's most significant contribution to Western philosophy". Although primarily associated with North America, pragmatism has an international scope. At least two major figures Bacon discusses, Jurgen Habermas and Huw Price, are not Americans; and Bacon himself is Senior Lecturer in Political Theory, Department of Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway, University of London.
Bacon has written a brief but dense book, as he covers in 200 pages pragmatic thinkers beginning with Charles Peirce and William James at the close of the 19th Century and concludes with the Australian philosopher, Huw Price and his book written in 2011, "Naturalism without Mirrors" which is new to me. With its largely chronological discussion of philosophers, the book shows well the development and interrelationship of pragmatic themes over the 20th Century and beyond. As the discussion progresses and issues are refined, the book becomes progressively more difficult and more technical.
Bacon's Preface and Introduction to the book offer a lucid overview of pragmatism and its themes. He begins with Charles Peirce's initial formulation of the pragmatic maxim in which he proposed that philosophers examine thought and ideas in terms of the difference they make to human behavior. Peirce wrote: "we come down to what is tangible and practical as the root of every real distinction of thought, no matter how subtle it may be; and there is no distinction of meaning so fine as to consist in anything but a possible difference of practice." Bacon shows that pragmatism constituted a pervasive critique of the Cartesianism which set the themes for modern philosophy. Cartesianism resulted in the sharp vacillations between dogmatism and skepticism that characterize much philosophy. Pragmatist thinkers rejected many of the components of Cartesianism, including its quest for certainty, its foundationalism, its representationalism (holding that there was a dualism between thought and matter and that thought somehow had to mirror reality), its correspondence theory of truth, and more. In its place, pragmatism substituted a human perspectivism, a recognition of the fallible character of human thought, an instrumentalism and a sense of human activity and agency as critical to philosophical understanding. The critique and the pragmatic reorientation of philosophical questions had to be expanded and fleshed out in different ways by different pragmatists, as pragmatism itself straddled uneasily the line between objectivity and relativism.
Bacon tries to show the continuity between the classical American pragmatists, Peirce, James, and Dewey, and the analytic tradition of philosophy which, according to some writers, displaced pragmatism around mid-20th Century. Thus, Bacon follows the first two chapters of his book, which deal with the three classic pragmatists, with a chapter showing the close connection between pragmatism and analysis in three key figures, W.V.O. Quine, Wilfrid Sellars, and Donald Davidson.
Subsequent chapters of the book present philosophers in pairs, with Bacon comparing and contrasting their views. He considers the two leading pragmatic philosophers at the turn of the century, Richard Rorty and Hilary Putnam and their contrasting views about objectivity and relativism. The following chapter examines the German philosopher Habermas and his heavily Kantian approach to pragmatism, comparing it with Richard Bernstein, who takes an approach that draws from many philosophical traditions. A chapter on Susan Haack and Cheryl Misak shows the continued interest in Peirce's pragmatism. The final difficult chapter on rationalism and naturalistic influences on pragmatism contrasts two contemporary thinkers, Robert Brandom and Huw Price.
Bacon's approach focuses on different pragmatic understandings of the nature of truth. He also pays a great deal of attention to pragmatism and political philosophy, particularly is it involves the nature of democracy. Bacon recognizes the differences among pragmatists, but his approach tends of minimize the disagreements in favor of emphasizing the common threads of the pragmatic movement. For example, Bacon tries to show how Peirce and James tried to harmonize what many still see as the basic divide in pragmatism on the nature of truth and on determining what counts as the consequence of a belief. Richard Rorty, criticized by many for his alleged relativism is, in Bacon's account, brought close to the views of many of his critics. Of the thinkers Bacon discusses, two have recently written their own broad overviews of pragmatism. Richard Bernstein's "The Pragmatic Turn" explores themes as well as individual philosophers and emphasizes pragmatism's roots in Kant and Hegel. The Pragmatic Turn Cheryl Misak's "The American Pragmatists" The American Pragmatists (Oxford History of Philosophy) examines many of the thinkers that Bacon discusses, but she is more intent on pointing out differences. Misak has learned a great deal from Peirce, and she is critical of the pragmatism of James, Dewey, and Rorty. Each of these three books is worth reading for their expositions of pragmatism.
Bacon's book will interest readers with a strong philosophical interest and basic philosophical background. The discussion becomes increasingly complex, but that is instructive in its own right in considering the development of pragmatism. The book helped me rethink philosophers I have read while introducing me to contemporary writings on pragmatism.
Robin Friedman
Michael Bacon's book, "Pragmatism: an Introduction" (2012) offers a detailed and learned overview of the philosophical movement of pragmatism which Bacon describes as "North America's most significant contribution to Western philosophy". Although primarily associated with North America, pragmatism has an international scope. At least two major figures Bacon discusses, Jurgen Habermas and Huw Price, are not Americans; and Bacon himself is Senior Lecturer in Political Theory, Department of Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway, University of London.
Bacon has written a brief but dense book, as he covers in 200 pages pragmatic thinkers beginning with Charles Peirce and William James at the close of the 19th Century and concludes with the Australian philosopher, Huw Price and his book written in 2011, "Naturalism without Mirrors" which is new to me. With its largely chronological discussion of philosophers, the book shows well the development and interrelationship of pragmatic themes over the 20th Century and beyond. As the discussion progresses and issues are refined, the book becomes progressively more difficult and more technical.
Bacon's Preface and Introduction to the book offer a lucid overview of pragmatism and its themes. He begins with Charles Peirce's initial formulation of the pragmatic maxim in which he proposed that philosophers examine thought and ideas in terms of the difference they make to human behavior. Peirce wrote: "we come down to what is tangible and practical as the root of every real distinction of thought, no matter how subtle it may be; and there is no distinction of meaning so fine as to consist in anything but a possible difference of practice." Bacon shows that pragmatism constituted a pervasive critique of the Cartesianism which set the themes for modern philosophy. Cartesianism resulted in the sharp vacillations between dogmatism and skepticism that characterize much philosophy. Pragmatist thinkers rejected many of the components of Cartesianism, including its quest for certainty, its foundationalism, its representationalism (holding that there was a dualism between thought and matter and that thought somehow had to mirror reality), its correspondence theory of truth, and more. In its place, pragmatism substituted a human perspectivism, a recognition of the fallible character of human thought, an instrumentalism and a sense of human activity and agency as critical to philosophical understanding. The critique and the pragmatic reorientation of philosophical questions had to be expanded and fleshed out in different ways by different pragmatists, as pragmatism itself straddled uneasily the line between objectivity and relativism.
Bacon tries to show the continuity between the classical American pragmatists, Peirce, James, and Dewey, and the analytic tradition of philosophy which, according to some writers, displaced pragmatism around mid-20th Century. Thus, Bacon follows the first two chapters of his book, which deal with the three classic pragmatists, with a chapter showing the close connection between pragmatism and analysis in three key figures, W.V.O. Quine, Wilfrid Sellars, and Donald Davidson.
Subsequent chapters of the book present philosophers in pairs, with Bacon comparing and contrasting their views. He considers the two leading pragmatic philosophers at the turn of the century, Richard Rorty and Hilary Putnam and their contrasting views about objectivity and relativism. The following chapter examines the German philosopher Habermas and his heavily Kantian approach to pragmatism, comparing it with Richard Bernstein, who takes an approach that draws from many philosophical traditions. A chapter on Susan Haack and Cheryl Misak shows the continued interest in Peirce's pragmatism. The final difficult chapter on rationalism and naturalistic influences on pragmatism contrasts two contemporary thinkers, Robert Brandom and Huw Price.
Bacon's approach focuses on different pragmatic understandings of the nature of truth. He also pays a great deal of attention to pragmatism and political philosophy, particularly is it involves the nature of democracy. Bacon recognizes the differences among pragmatists, but his approach tends of minimize the disagreements in favor of emphasizing the common threads of the pragmatic movement. For example, Bacon tries to show how Peirce and James tried to harmonize what many still see as the basic divide in pragmatism on the nature of truth and on determining what counts as the consequence of a belief. Richard Rorty, criticized by many for his alleged relativism is, in Bacon's account, brought close to the views of many of his critics. Of the thinkers Bacon discusses, two have recently written their own broad overviews of pragmatism. Richard Bernstein's "The Pragmatic Turn" explores themes as well as individual philosophers and emphasizes pragmatism's roots in Kant and Hegel. The Pragmatic Turn Cheryl Misak's "The American Pragmatists" The American Pragmatists (Oxford History of Philosophy) examines many of the thinkers that Bacon discusses, but she is more intent on pointing out differences. Misak has learned a great deal from Peirce, and she is critical of the pragmatism of James, Dewey, and Rorty. Each of these three books is worth reading for their expositions of pragmatism.
Bacon's book will interest readers with a strong philosophical interest and basic philosophical background. The discussion becomes increasingly complex, but that is instructive in its own right in considering the development of pragmatism. The book helped me rethink philosophers I have read while introducing me to contemporary writings on pragmatism.
Robin Friedman
August 3, 2014
This book should be titled Pragmatism: Some Introductions.
Reading it, I became aware that the genre of Pragmatism surveys is different from other kinds of surveys. First, these books (which it seems every Pragmatist eventually writes) are not summaries of other Pragmatists' positions, but original philosophical works -- attempts to connect agreements and disagreements within a community of respected fellow-thinkers. But second, Pragmatism surveys are distinctly personal. The philosophies are not detached truths, but are understood to proceed from people, each with a personal way of perceiving, conceiving and navigating problems, and these differences help the community resolve, engage and discover productive questions.
So, this introduction is really less like an introduction in the sense of being introduced to a field and more like being introduced to people. And the satisfaction of reading the book is less that of having figured things out and much more the sense of joining a community -- one that extends beyond Pragmatism proper out into analytic philosophy (which I'd always dismissed as a pack of aspy positivists). So now, as a consequence of these introductions, multiple worlds of fresh relevance and potential have opened up in unexpected places.
The only downside of this book is it can be very expensive. I was compelled to buy books by every author covered.
Reading it, I became aware that the genre of Pragmatism surveys is different from other kinds of surveys. First, these books (which it seems every Pragmatist eventually writes) are not summaries of other Pragmatists' positions, but original philosophical works -- attempts to connect agreements and disagreements within a community of respected fellow-thinkers. But second, Pragmatism surveys are distinctly personal. The philosophies are not detached truths, but are understood to proceed from people, each with a personal way of perceiving, conceiving and navigating problems, and these differences help the community resolve, engage and discover productive questions.
So, this introduction is really less like an introduction in the sense of being introduced to a field and more like being introduced to people. And the satisfaction of reading the book is less that of having figured things out and much more the sense of joining a community -- one that extends beyond Pragmatism proper out into analytic philosophy (which I'd always dismissed as a pack of aspy positivists). So now, as a consequence of these introductions, multiple worlds of fresh relevance and potential have opened up in unexpected places.
The only downside of this book is it can be very expensive. I was compelled to buy books by every author covered.
April 18, 2018
So I have exactly two experiences with pragmatism. Well three, I've read Cornel West, but nothing about his adherence to pragmatism.
I've read Richard Rorty's Achieving Our Country (absolute yuck), and a biography on William James which I never finished because it couldn't hold my attention.
Rorty's book turned out to be a dumpster fire I threw across the room before I finished. Then I found this book in my local library. Overall it's pretty great. It explains the concepts of each thinker clearly, doesn't overly rely on academic jargon and brings it all back home.
I'm very interested to read more about pragmatism now. But unless you have a hobbyist interest in reading about subjects like philosophy, this book probably isn't for you.
I've read Richard Rorty's Achieving Our Country (absolute yuck), and a biography on William James which I never finished because it couldn't hold my attention.
Rorty's book turned out to be a dumpster fire I threw across the room before I finished. Then I found this book in my local library. Overall it's pretty great. It explains the concepts of each thinker clearly, doesn't overly rely on academic jargon and brings it all back home.
I'm very interested to read more about pragmatism now. But unless you have a hobbyist interest in reading about subjects like philosophy, this book probably isn't for you.
January 30, 2015
Last semester I taught William James' Pragmatism in my intro to philosophy class. I also used video clips of Cornel West and Richard Rorty (both pragmatists) discussing truth. Researching for those clips and other materials to use, I realized a need to catch up on more recent work in Pragmatism, as my understanding was still focused mostly on what I had learned of James and Peirce in school (I never cared much for Dewey). I even had a limited understanding of Rorty despite having read his major work (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) and also having been taught by Don Wester who was very into Rorty.
This book is a nice survey of more recent trends in pragmatism while also discussing how figures such as Quine, Sellars, Davidson, and Habermas are pragmatic.
One thing I did notice was that I'm much more of a Jamesian than a pragmatist as this book understands it. And to me process philosophy was always the systematization of Jamesian intuitions (another connection was Charles Hartshorne's role in editing Peirce's collected writings). None of the figures from the process tradition or the American philosophers we had read with Don Wester (like Richard Neville and Frederick Ferre) figured in this book. Nor did West, who has himself written books on pragmatism. So, while the book claims to demonstrating the breadth of the pragmatic tradition, I felt that the aspect of the tradition that I resonate with was not covered.
The best section of the book is its discussion of Rorty. I have decided that I need to read more Rorty, especially his works on contingency and democracy that were published in the late 80's and 90's. I may also look up some of the more recent writers the book discussed, particularly Cheryl Misak, a Pierce scholar.
This book is a nice survey of more recent trends in pragmatism while also discussing how figures such as Quine, Sellars, Davidson, and Habermas are pragmatic.
One thing I did notice was that I'm much more of a Jamesian than a pragmatist as this book understands it. And to me process philosophy was always the systematization of Jamesian intuitions (another connection was Charles Hartshorne's role in editing Peirce's collected writings). None of the figures from the process tradition or the American philosophers we had read with Don Wester (like Richard Neville and Frederick Ferre) figured in this book. Nor did West, who has himself written books on pragmatism. So, while the book claims to demonstrating the breadth of the pragmatic tradition, I felt that the aspect of the tradition that I resonate with was not covered.
The best section of the book is its discussion of Rorty. I have decided that I need to read more Rorty, especially his works on contingency and democracy that were published in the late 80's and 90's. I may also look up some of the more recent writers the book discussed, particularly Cheryl Misak, a Pierce scholar.
June 15, 2020
Very good exposition of pragmatism
Apart from a couple of parts I had no interest in (continental philosophers), it seems to be a very good introduction intro to classic and contemporary pragmatism.
I am afraid that I share criticism of pragmatism with empiricists as Russell et al, and while there are interesting concepts to takeaway from pragmatism it is not enough to label myself as one. I think the amount of pragmatism I share is that of Quine; the rest of pragmatists are somehow afraid of full blown scientism but I believe that we should all embrace it. Science is philosophy enough.
Apart from a couple of parts I had no interest in (continental philosophers), it seems to be a very good introduction intro to classic and contemporary pragmatism.
I am afraid that I share criticism of pragmatism with empiricists as Russell et al, and while there are interesting concepts to takeaway from pragmatism it is not enough to label myself as one. I think the amount of pragmatism I share is that of Quine; the rest of pragmatists are somehow afraid of full blown scientism but I believe that we should all embrace it. Science is philosophy enough.
July 11, 2024
A very good introduction to Pragmatism, although it does assume a basic understanding of some philosophic principles. Would be a really interesting as a college course.
April 8, 2024
The advertised 'introduction' turns out to be a pretty tough read; it starts out all well with plenty of explanatory paragraphs, laying out pragmatism for the lay reader; the mid and end portion of the book form a rather dull enumeration of pragmatist philosophers and their respective takes on the central paradigm. Be sure to check out this alternative: Pragmatism
"Pragmatists address philosophical questions, such as the nature of truth, how knowledge is possible, and the demands of moral and political life. But they do so by arguing that these questions should be addressed by drawing upon the resources offered by our practices, and with reference to the consequences they have for our lives."
"In his review of James’ Pragmatism, Bertrand Russell claims that pragmatism is a philosophy suited for those unable to set their eyes beyond the here and now. ‘Pragmatism’, he writes, ‘appeals to the temper of mind which finds on the surface of this planet the whole of its imaginative material’, something which he thinks inadequate (Russell, 1910: 110)."
"‘Consider what effects, which might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our concept to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object’ (Peirce, 1992: 132). This principle would subsequently become known as the ‘pragmatic maxim’."
"Peirce proceeds by contrasting belief with doubt. He adopts Alexander Bain’s view that a belief is that which one would be prepared to act upon, with doubt defined as the uneasy sense of dissatisfaction caused when acting according to that belief does not result in the anticipated consequences: ‘The feeling of believing is a more or less sure indication of there being established in our nature some habit which will determine our actions. Doubt never has such an effect’ (Peirce, 1992: 114)."
"An abiding criticism of pragmatism, one which emerges repeatedly throughout its history, is that its forthright rejection of the correspondence theory of truth is intellectually irresponsible. Although, as we have seen, Peirce takes it that the purpose of inquiry is to secure fixed beliefs ‘whether the belief be true or false’, he insists that truth does exist. He connects truth and inquiry by proposing that the method of science is the only one that, if rigorously followed, will result in true belief. Peirce describes the truth in this way: ‘The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate, is what we mean by the truth, and the object represented in this opinion is the real’ (Peirce, 1992: 139)."
"Pragmatists address philosophical questions, such as the nature of truth, how knowledge is possible, and the demands of moral and political life. But they do so by arguing that these questions should be addressed by drawing upon the resources offered by our practices, and with reference to the consequences they have for our lives."
"In his review of James’ Pragmatism, Bertrand Russell claims that pragmatism is a philosophy suited for those unable to set their eyes beyond the here and now. ‘Pragmatism’, he writes, ‘appeals to the temper of mind which finds on the surface of this planet the whole of its imaginative material’, something which he thinks inadequate (Russell, 1910: 110)."
"‘Consider what effects, which might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our concept to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object’ (Peirce, 1992: 132). This principle would subsequently become known as the ‘pragmatic maxim’."
"Peirce proceeds by contrasting belief with doubt. He adopts Alexander Bain’s view that a belief is that which one would be prepared to act upon, with doubt defined as the uneasy sense of dissatisfaction caused when acting according to that belief does not result in the anticipated consequences: ‘The feeling of believing is a more or less sure indication of there being established in our nature some habit which will determine our actions. Doubt never has such an effect’ (Peirce, 1992: 114)."
"An abiding criticism of pragmatism, one which emerges repeatedly throughout its history, is that its forthright rejection of the correspondence theory of truth is intellectually irresponsible. Although, as we have seen, Peirce takes it that the purpose of inquiry is to secure fixed beliefs ‘whether the belief be true or false’, he insists that truth does exist. He connects truth and inquiry by proposing that the method of science is the only one that, if rigorously followed, will result in true belief. Peirce describes the truth in this way: ‘The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate, is what we mean by the truth, and the object represented in this opinion is the real’ (Peirce, 1992: 139)."
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews