Fantastic Pragmatism

IF 0.6 0 PHILOSOPHY
J. William
{"title":"Fantastic Pragmatism","authors":"J. William","doi":"10.54103/2239-5474/19025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" The everyday sense of pragmatic involves ideas of sensible practice, cautious realism about current situations, flexibility allied to technical knowledge, and the prioritisation of what works, as opposed to unrealistic and damaging ideals. I argue against this technical and sensible flavour of pragmatism, pre-sent in many of its historical and contemporary versions.  Pragmatism can be taken as technically-minded, realistic and practical, thereby avoiding the excesses of abstract ideologies. Instead, I will defend the thesis that pragmatism should be fantastic, in the precise sense of metaphysically inventive. In making this latter argument, my main critical point will be against the metaphysically «quietist» version of pragmatism, in particular as defended by David Macarthur. My claim is counter-intuitive, since it seems to commit pragmatism to the forms of idealism that it has sought to criticise and escape. If metaphysics propose ideal pictures of the world, as opposed to detailed, local and evidence-based descriptions - allied to rigorous experimentation - then the fantasies of metaphysics are exactly what pragmatism should avoid. In response to this critical counter, I will argue that pragmatism should be metaphysically inventive because it cannot avoid being metaphysical. However, I also argue that it should be self-critical in its fantastic creativity. ","PeriodicalId":40388,"journal":{"name":"Noema-Rivista Online di Filosofia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Noema-Rivista Online di Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54103/2239-5474/19025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

 The everyday sense of pragmatic involves ideas of sensible practice, cautious realism about current situations, flexibility allied to technical knowledge, and the prioritisation of what works, as opposed to unrealistic and damaging ideals. I argue against this technical and sensible flavour of pragmatism, pre-sent in many of its historical and contemporary versions.  Pragmatism can be taken as technically-minded, realistic and practical, thereby avoiding the excesses of abstract ideologies. Instead, I will defend the thesis that pragmatism should be fantastic, in the precise sense of metaphysically inventive. In making this latter argument, my main critical point will be against the metaphysically «quietist» version of pragmatism, in particular as defended by David Macarthur. My claim is counter-intuitive, since it seems to commit pragmatism to the forms of idealism that it has sought to criticise and escape. If metaphysics propose ideal pictures of the world, as opposed to detailed, local and evidence-based descriptions - allied to rigorous experimentation - then the fantasies of metaphysics are exactly what pragmatism should avoid. In response to this critical counter, I will argue that pragmatism should be metaphysically inventive because it cannot avoid being metaphysical. However, I also argue that it should be self-critical in its fantastic creativity. 
神奇的实用主义
日常的务实感包括明智的实践理念、对当前情况的谨慎现实主义、与技术知识相结合的灵活性,以及对有效内容的优先考虑,而不是不切实际和破坏性的理想。我反对这种技术性和理性的实用主义,这种实用主义在许多历史和当代版本中都是预先发出的。实用主义可以被视为具有技术头脑、现实主义和实践主义,从而避免了抽象意识形态的过度。相反,我将捍卫实用主义应该是奇妙的,确切地说是形而上学的创造性。在提出后一种论点时,我的主要批评点将是反对实用主义的形而上学“安静主义”版本,特别是大卫·麦克阿瑟所捍卫的实用主义。我的说法与直觉相悖,因为它似乎将实用主义致力于它试图批评和逃避的理想主义形式。如果形而上学提出了理想的世界图景,而不是详细的、局部的和基于证据的描述——与严格的实验相结合——那么形而上学的幻想正是实用主义应该避免的。作为对这种批判性反驳的回应,我认为实用主义应该在形而上学上具有创造性,因为它不可避免地是形而上学的。然而,我也认为,它的奇妙创造力应该是自我批评的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信