,,pragmatism ,by ,d4,l4 ,,murray ,,) ,a ,,preface ,,by ,,dr4 ,f4,c4,s4 ,,s*ill] ,,philosophies ,,anci5t ,,& ,,mod]n ,,pragmatism ,,cont5ts ,,preface ,,by ,,dr4 ,f4,c4,s4 ,,s*ill] ,i4 ,,! ,,g5esis ,,( ,,pragmatism ,,ii4 ,,! ,,new ,,psy*ology ,,iii4 ,,w ,,9 ,,cognition ,,iv4 ,,! ,,dilemmas ,,( ,,dogmatism ,v4 ,,! ,,problem ,,( ,,tru? ,,& ,,error ,,vi4 ,,! ,,failure ,,( ,,=mal ,,logic ,,vii4 ,,! ,,bankruptcy ,,( ,,intellectualism ,,viii4 ,,?\ght ,,& ,,life ,,bibliography ,,preface ,mr4 ,murray's y\?ful mode/y insi/s t 8 /udy ( ,pragmatism ne$s a sponsor2 ?is is n at all my own op9ion1 b ,i may take ! opportunity ( po9t+ out h[ s+ul>ly qualifi$ he is to give a good acc\nt ( x4 ,9 ! fir/ place he is "y1 & y\? is an almo/ indisp5sable qualification = ! appreciation ( novelty2 = ! m9d works m & m /iffly z x gr[s old]1 & becomes less & less capable ( absorb+ :at is new4 ,h5ce1 if our 'great au?orities' liv$ = ev]1 !y w\ld become complete ,/ruldbrugs4 ,?is is ! ju/ification ( dea? f ! /&po9t ( social progress4 ,& z !re is no subject 9 :i* ,/ruldbrugg]y is m rampant ?an 9 philosophy1 a y\?ful & nimble m9d is "h p>ticul>ly ne$$4 ,x has giv5 ,mr4 ,murray an eye also to ! v>ieties ( ,pragmatism & to _! connections4 ,secondly1 ,mr4 ,murray has 7l myself7 enjoy$ ! advantage ( a sev]ely intellectuali/ic tra9+ 9 ! classical philosophy ( ,ox=d ,univ]sity1 & 9 its premi] college1 ,balliol4 ,! aim ( ?is tra9+ is to in/il into ! be/ m9ds ! c\ntry produces an adamant9e conviction t philosophy has made no progress s9ce ,ari/otle4 ,x co/s ab\t #ej1jjj a ye>1 b on ! :ole x is s+ul>ly successful4 ,its effect ^u capable m9ds possess$ ( common s5se is to produce t contempt = pure intellect :i* di/+ui%es ! ,briti% nation f all o!rs1 & ensures ! practical success ( adm9i/rators select$ by an exam9ation s glori\sly irrelevant to _! future duties t1 s9ce ! lam5table demise ( ! ,*9ese sy/em1 x may boa/ to be ! mo/ antiquat$ 9 ! _w4 ,9 m9ds1 h[ev]1 :i* are m prone to !oriz+1 b at ! same "t cle>-head$1 ?is tra9+ produces a ke5ness ( insight into ! defects ( intellectualism & a p]ception ( ! intellectual necessity ( ,pragmatism :i* c probably be rea*$ 9 no o!r way4 ,mr4 ,murray1 !re=e1 is q "r 9 emphasiz+1 above all1 ! s]vices ( ,pragmatism z a rigor\sly critical !ory ( k1 & 9 refut+ ! amiable delusion ( _m p$ants t ,pragmatism is m]ely an emotional revolt aga9/ ! rigors ( ,logic4 ,x is ess5tially a re=m ( ,logic1 :i* prote/s aga9/ a ,logic t has become s =mal z to ab/ract f mean+ altoge!r4 ,?irdly1 an elem5t>y introduction to ,pragmatism 0 greatly ne$$1 less because ! subject is inh]5tly difficult ?an because x has become s deeply involv$ 9 philosophic controv]sy4 ,intr9sically x %\ld be z easy to make philosophy intelligible z any o!r subject4 ,! exposition ( a tru? is difficult only to ^? :o h n und]/ood x1 or d n desire to reveal x4 ,b ,briti% philosophy _h long become almo/ z op5 z ,g]man to ! 7,g]man7 gibe t 'philosophy is no?+ b ! sy/ematic misuse ( a t]m9ology inv5t$ expressly = ?is purpose1' & ,pragmatism1 too1 c\ld obta9 a he>+ only by %[+ t x c\ld p>ley ) its foes 9 ! te*nical language ( ,kant & ,hegel4 ,h5ce x _h no leisure to compose a fitt+ introduction to itself = /ud5ts ( philosophy4 ,william ,james's ,pragmatism1 great z x is z a "w ( g5ius1 brilliant z x is z a contribution to lit]ature1 0 int5d$ ma9ly = ! man 9 ! /reet4 ,x is s lack+ 9 ! famili> philosophic cat*words t x may be d\bt$ :e!r any pr(essor has q und]/ood x4 ,& moreov]1 x 0 writt5 "s ye>s ago1 & no long] cov]s ! :ole gr\nd4 ,! o!r writ+s ( ! pragmati/s h all be5 too controv]sial & te*nical4 ,! critics ( ,pragmatism h produc$ only c>icatures s gross z to be unrecognizable1 & s obscure z to be un9telligible4 ,mr4 ,murray's little book alone may claim to be 7)9 its limits7 a complete survey ( ! field1 simply word$1 & yet n unm9dful ( due te*nicality4 ,x is also up to date1 ?\gh 9 deal+ ) s progressive a subject x is impossible to say h[ long x is de/9$ to rema9 s4 ,f4,c4,s4 ,,s*ill]4 ,,*apt] ,i ,,! ,,g5esis ,,( ,,pragmatism ,!re is a curi\s impression to-day 9 ! _w ( ?\ght t ,pragmatism is ! mo/ audaci\s ( philosophic novelties1 ! mo/ an>*ical transvaluation ( all respectable traditions4 ,sometimes x is pictur$ z an insurg5ce ( emotion aga9/ logic1 sometimes z an assault ( !ology ^u ! integrity ( ,pure ,reason4 ,"o day x is describ$ z ! reckless !oriz+ ( dilettanti ^: k ( philosophy is too sup]ficial to require refutation1 ! next z a transatlantic importation ( ! debas+ slang ( ! ,wild ,we/4 ,abroad x is frequ5tly d5\nc$ z an outbreak ( ! sordid comm]cialism ( ! ,anglo-,saxon m9d4 ,all ^! ideas are mi/ak54 ,pragmatism is nei!r a revolt aga9/ philosophy nor a revolution 9 philosophy1 except 9 s f> z x is an important evolution ( philosophy4 ,x is a collective "n = ! mo/ mod]n solution ( puzzles :i* h imp$$ philosophical progress f "t immemorial1 & x has aris5 naturally 9 ! c\rse ( philosophical reflection4 ,x answ]s ! big problems :i* are z famili> to ! sci5ti/ & ! !ologian z to ! metaphysician & epi/emologi/1 & :i* are bo? intelligible & int]e/+ to common s5se4 ,! foll[+ que/ions /& out3 7#a7 ,c ! possibility ( k be ma9ta9$ aga9/ ,hume & o!r sceptics8 ,c]ta9ly1 if x c be %[n t ',! ,new ,psy*ology' has antiquat$ ! analysis ( m9d :i* ,hume assum$ & ',briti% ,associationism' respectfully cont9u$ to uphold4 7#b7 ,see+ t incl9ation & volition indisputably play a "p 9 ! acceptance ( all beliefs1 sci5tific & religi\s1 :at is ! logical significance ( ?is fact8 ,?is yields ! problem ',! ,w to ,believe1' & m g5]ally ( '! place ( ,w 9 cognition4' 7#c7 ,is !re no crit]ion by :i* ! div]g5t claims ( rival cre$s & philosophies--to be possess$ ( unconditional tru?--c be sci5tifically te/$8 ,! sceptic's sne]1 t ! %ift+ sy/ems ( philosophy illu/rate only ! *ang+ fa%ions ( a great illusion ab\t man's capacity = tru?1 plunges dogmatism into a ',dilemma1' f :i* x c em]ge only by f9d+ a way ( discrim9at+ a 'tru?' f an 'error1' & s solv+ ! 'problem ( ,tru? & ,error4' ,! weird v]balism ( ! traditional ,logic sugge/s a problem :i* /rikes deep] ev5 ?an ! "q1 ',:at d y mean by tru?8' viz43 ',d y mean any?+8' & s ! 'problem ( ,mean+' is prop\nd$ by ! failure ( ,=mal ,logic4 ,is ,logic n conc]n$ at all ) mean+1 is x only juggl+ ) empty =ms ( words8 ,la/ly1 if f all ?is !re spr+s up a conviction ( ',! ,bankruptcy ( ,intellectualism1' ! "q sugge/s itself :e!r ! relation betwe5 ab/ract ?9k+ & concrete exp]i5ce1 betwe5 ',?\ght' & ',life1' has be5 rightly grasp$4 ,is life wor? liv+ only = ! sake ( philosophic contemplation1 or is ?9k+ only wor? do+ to aid u 9 ! /ruggle = life8 ,are '!ory' & 'practice' two sep>ate k+doms ) rigid fronti]s1 /rictly gu>d$1 or does x appe> t !ories :i* _c be appli$ h1 9 ! end1 nei!r wor?1 nor tru?1 nor ev5 mean+8 ,x is pla9 f ?is catalogue ( inquiries t ,pragmatism makes no abrupt brea* 9 tradition4 ,x is n ! ptroleuse ( philosophy4 ,x does n wipe out ! hi/ory ( speculation 9 ord] to ann\nce a mill5nium ( new ideas2 x claims1 on ! contr>y1 to be ! culm9ation & dnom5t ( t hi/ory4 ,x _c rightly be repres5t$ z try+ ei!r to sell new lamps = old1 or to j]ry-build a new metaphysical sy/em on ! ru9s ( all previ\s a*ievem5ts4 ,its real task is s+ul>ly mode/4 ,x aims m]ely at in/ruct+ sy/em-build]s 9 ! elem5t>y laws :i* condition ! /ability ( su* /ructures & conduce to _! cons]vation4 ,x is !re=e a grave mi/ake to reg>d x z a p>o*ial ecc5tricity1 z a specific ,am]icanism4 ,nor is x ! product ( ! misplac$ +5uity ( individual p>adox-mong]s4 ,x has come into be+ by ! conv]g5ce ( di/9ct l9es ( ?\ght pursu$ 9 diff]5t c\ntries by diff]5t ?9k]s4 #a4 ,"o ( ! mo/ int]e/+ ( ^! has orig9at$ 9 ! sci5tific _w4 ,! imm5se gr[? ( sci5tific k dur+ ! la/ c5tury 0 b\nd to react on human conceptions ( sci5tific proc$ure4 ,! enorm\s numb] ( new facts br\ght to light by manipulat+ hypo!ses c\ld n b modify our view ( sci5tific law4 ,laws no long] seem to sci5ti/s ! immutable f\ndations ( an et]nal ord]1 b are inevitably treat$ z man-made =mulae = gr\p+ & pr$ict+ ! ev5ts :i* v]ify !m4 ,! lab\rs ( physici/s l ,ma*1 ,duhem1 & ,o/wald1 po9t to alt]native =mulations ( new hypo!ses = ! be/ e/abli%$ laws4 ,! physics ( ,newton are no long] f9al1 & ! notion ( 'en]gy' is a dang]\s rival to ! old] conception ( 'matt]4' ,x is1 ( c\rse1 indiff]5t to ! philosoph] :e!r ! new physics are successful 9 sup]s$+ ! old or n4 ,:at x conc]ns him to note is t dogmatic confid5ce 9 ! f9ality ( sci5tific laws has giv5 place to a belief t our laws are only work+ =mulae = sci5tific purposes1 & t no sci5ce c truly boa/ ( hav+ read (f ! m9d ( ! ,deity4 ,z ,sir ,j4,j4 ,?omson neatly puts x1 a sci5tific !ory1 = ! enlight5$ mod]n sci5ti/1 is a 'policy & n a cre$4' ,sci5ce has become cont5t to be only 'a conceptual %or?&1' provid$ t its message be humanly intelligible4 ,x no long] claims tru? because ab/ractly & absolutely x 'corresponds ) ,nature1' b because x yields a conv5i5t means ( ma/]+ ! flux ( ev5ts4 ,ev5 ma!matics1 long ! patt]n ( absolute k1 has n escap$ ! /igma ( relativity4 ',metageometries' h be5 inv5t$ by ,riemann & ,lobats*ewski z rivals to ! assumptions ( ,euclid1 & ! brilliant writ+s ( ,po9c> h expla9$ ! human devices on :i* ma!matical concepts re/4 ,euclidean geometry is r$uc$ to a useful int]pretation ( ! data ( exp]i5ce2 x is n !oretically ! only "o4 ,its sup]ior validity is dep5d5t ^u its use :5 appli$ to ! physical _w4 ,ev5 ma!matics1 !re=e1 l5d !mselves to ! philosophic inf]5ce drawn by ,h5ri ,b]gson & o!rs1 t all conceptual sy/ems ( ! human m9d h a m]ely conditional tru?1 dep5d+ on ! circum/ances ( _! application4 #b4 ,ano!r f\nta9-head ( ,pragmatic philosophy has be5 ,d>w9ism4 ,inde$1 ! ,pragmatic is ! only philosophiz+ :i* has completely assimilat$ ,evolution4 ,! insight into ! real fluidity ( natural species ought long ago to h ton$ d[n ! artificial rigidity ( logical classifications4 ,to "k reality man c no long] re/ 9 a 'timeless' contemplation ( a /atic sy/em2 he mu/ exp& 8 ?\ghts s z to cope ) a p]petually *ang+ process4 ,s9ce ! _w *anges1 8 'tru?s' mu/ *ange to fit x4 ,he is fac$ ) ! necessity ( a cont9u\s recon/ruction ( beliefs4 ,?is influ5ce ( ,d>w9 has inspir$ ! logical !ories ( ,pr(essor ,dewey & ! ',*icago ,s*ool' ( ,pragmati/s4 ,?\ght 9 _! writ+s is ess5tially ! in/rum5t ( ?is readju/m5t4 ,its function is to effect ! necess>y *anges 9 beliefs z economically & usefully z possible4 ,x is an evolv+ process :i* keeps pace ) ! evolution ( reality & ! *ang+ situations ( mortal life4 #c4 ,x is n1 h[ev]1 entirely ! reaction ( sci5ce ^u philosophy :i* has giv5 bir? to ,pragmatism4 ,philosophy itself has be5 r5t by int]nal convulsions4 ,^! h be5 emphasiz$ 9 ! "w ( ,dr4 ,f4,c4,s4 ,s*ill]1 :o has %[n t already 9 ! days ( ,plato ! di/9ction betwe5 'tru?' & 'error' 0 baffl+ philosophy1 t ,plato's ,!aetetus has fail$ to e/abli% x1 & t ! fam\s dictum ( ,protagoras1 ',man is ! measure ( all ?+s1' di/9ctly =e%ad[s ! ',pragmatic1' or1 z he calls x1 ! ',humani/1' solution ( ! difficulty4 ,else:]e ,dr4 ,s*ill] has comm5t$ on ! controv]sies rais$ by ,hume's criticism ( dogmatism4 ,he has %[n t ,kant fail$ to answ] ,hume because he accept$ ,hume's psy*ology1 & t no a priori philosoph]s h s9ce be5 able to devise any consi/5t & t5able doctr9e4 ,! ideali/ic !ories ( ! ',absolute' reveal _! futility by _! want ( application to ! g5u9e problems ( life1 & by ! !oretic agno/icism f :i* !y _c escape4 ,h5ce ! ne$ = a new ,!ory ( ,k & a ?or\gh re=m ( ,logic4 #d4 ,at ?is po9t he jo9s =ces ) ,mr4 ,alfr$ ,sidgwick1 :o has long be5 urg+ a radical criticism ( ! proc$ures ( ,=mal ,logic1 & %[n ! gulf betwe5 !m & ! processes ( concrete ?\ght4 ,sidgwick has demon/rat$ t ! belief 9 =mal tru? r5d]s ,logic m]ely v]bal1 & t ! actual mean+ ( ass]tions completely escapes x4 #e4 ,! mo/ s5sational approa* to ,pragmatism1 h[ev]1 is t f ! side ( religion4 ,! ,pragmatic me?od ( decid+ religi\s problems1 :i* ass]ts ! legitimacy ( a ',fai?' t prec$es k1 has always be51 m or less consci\sly1 practis$ by ! religi\s4 ,x is brilliantly advocat$ 9 ! ,?\ghts ( ,pascal1 & cle>ly & =cibly def5d$ 9 t mo/ rem>kable essay 9 unpr(essional philosophy1 ,c>d9al ,newman's ,gramm> ( ,ass5t4 ,?is l9e ( reason+1 h[ev]1 is mo/ famili>ly associat$ ) ! "n ( ,william ,james2 he fir/ illu/rat$ ! ,pragmatic ,me?od by a fam\s pap] 7= a !ological audi5ce7 on ,! ,w to ,believe1 & f\nd$ ! psy*ological /udy ( religi\s exp]i5ce 9 8 ,gif=d ,lectures on ,! ,v>ieties ( ,religi\s ,exp]i5ce4 #f4 ,?is br+s u to ! la/1 & hi/orically ! mo/ f]tile1 ( ! s\rces ( ,pragmatism1 ,psy*ology4 ,! publication 9 #ahij ( ,james's great ,pr9ciples ( ,psy*ology op5$ a new era 9 ! hi/ory ( t sci5ce4 ,m ?an t1 x 0 de/9$ 9 ! long run to "w a trans=mation 9 philosophy z a :ole1 by introduc+ into x ^? biological & volunt>i/ic pr9ciples to :i* he aft]w>ds appli$ ! g5]ic "n ( ,pragmatism1 or philosophy ( action4 ,we mu/ pass1 !n1 to consid] ! ,new ,psy*ology ( ,william ,james4 ,,*apt] ,,ii ,,! ,,new ,,psy*ology ,until ! ye> #ahij1 :5 ,james's ,pr9ciples 7 publi%$1 ! psy*ology ( ,hume reign$ absolutely 9 philosophy4,a ,all empirici/s accept$ x en?usia/ically1 z ! sum ( philosophic wisdom2 all apriori/s submitt$ to x1 ev5 9 supplem5t+ & modify+ x by 'transc5d5tal' & metaphysical additions2 9 ei!r case x rema9$ unconte/$ z psy*ology1 &1 by prop\nd+ an utt]ly errone\s analysis ( ! m9d & its exp]i5ce1 entangl$ philosophy 9 inextricable difficulties4 ,hume _h1 z philosoph]s commonly d1 set out f ! practically suffici5t analysis ( exp]i5ce :i* all f9d ready-made 9 language4 ,he accept$1 !re=e1 f common s5se ! belief t physical reality is compos$ ( a multitude ( sep>ate exi/5ces t act on "o ano!r1 & tri$ to conceive m5tal life /rictly on ! same analogy4 ,8 !ory ( exp]i5ce1 !re=e1 closely p>allels ! atomi/ic !ory ( matt]4 ,j z ! physici/ expla9s bodies z collections ( discrete p>ticles1 s ,hume r$uc$ all ! cont5ts ( ! m9d to a numb] ( elem5t>y s5sations4 ,:e!r ! m9d 0 reflect+ on its own int]nal ideas1 or :e!r x 0 und]go+ impressions :i* x suppos$ to come f an ext]nal s\rce1 all t 0 really happ5+ 0 a succession ( deta*$ s5sations4 ,x seem$ to ,hume indisputable t e di/9ct p]ception 7or 'impression'7 0 a di/9ct exi/5ce1 & t all 'ideas' 7 equally di/9ct1 ?\gh fa9t]1 copies ( impressions4 ,beyond impressions & ideas x 0 unnecess>y to look4 ,?us to look at a *essbo>d 0 to h a numb] ( s5sations ( black & :ite arrang$ 9 a c]ta9 ord]1 to li/5 to a piece ( music 0 to exp]i5ce a succession ( l\d & s(t auditory s5sations1 to h&le a /one 0 to receive a gr\p ( s5sations ( t\*4 ,to suppose t any?+ beyond ^! s5sory units 0 ev] really exp]i5c$ 0 futile fiction4 ,exp]i5ce 0 a mosaic1 ( :i* ! /ones 7 ! deta*$ s5sations1 & _! wa%$-out copies1 ! ideas4 ,if ?is analysis ( ! m9d 7 correct--& its correctness 0 n disput$ = m ?an a hundr$ ye>s1 = 7 n ! s5sations admitt$ to be ! ultimate analysis ( all t 0 p]ceiv$8--! common-s5se belief t k reveal$ a _w outside ! ?9k] 01 ( c\rse1 errone\s4 ,= common s5se c\ld h>dly treat '?+s' z m]ely 's5sations' artificially gr\p$ toge!r 9 space1 ea* '?+' be+ a complex ( a numb] ( s5sations hav+ relation to simil> complexes4 ,x held r t ! successive appe>ances ( ?+s 7 relat$ 9 "t1 9 su* a way t !y c\ld be suppos$ to reveal a s+le object able to endure 9 spite ( surface *anges1 & to manife/ ! id5tity ( its s5sory 'qualities4' ,simil>ly1 ! succession ( ideas )9 ! m9d 0 = x support$ by ! inw>d unity ( ! s\l )9 :i* !y arose4 ,moreov]1 ,hume's analysis made havoc ( all idea1 ( 'causation4' ,if e s5sation 0 a sep>ate be+1 h[ 0 x to be connect$ ) any o!r 9 any regul> or necess>y connection8 ,two ev5ts relat$ z 'cause' & 'effect' mu/ be a my?4 ,^! subv]sive consequ5ces ( 8 !ory ,hume did n conceal1 ?\gh he did n pu% 8 m5tal 'atomism' to its logical extreme4 ,:5 he def9$ mat]ial objects z 'col\r$ po9ts dispos$ 9 a c]ta9 ord]1' he 0 9 fact admitt+ space z a relat+ factor2 :5 he spoke ( ! succession ( impressions & ideas 9 exp]i5ce1 he 0 tacitly assum+ t :at 0 appreh5d$ 0 n a b>e succession ( s5sations1 b also ! fact t !y 7 succe$+ "o ano!r1 & s all[+ a s5se ( temporal relation4 ,b fur!r ?an ?is he refus$ to g4 ,! idea ( a cont9u\s self 0 fanta/ic4 ,!re 0 no?+ b5ea? ! ideas to connect !m4 ,! notion ( causal connection 0 equally *im]ical4 ,ea* s5sation 0 di/9ct & exi/$ 9 its own "r4 ,x c\ld !re=e occur alone4 ,!re 0 no?+ to l9k toge!r ! di/9ct impressions4 ,h5ce necess>y connection 9 ev5ts c\ld n be m ?an a fiction ( ! m9d bas$ on expectation ( cu/om>y sequ5ces2 h[ ! m9d he _h describ$ z non-exi/5t c\ld =m an expectation or obs]ve a sequ5ce 0 calmly left a my/]y4 ,hume1 !n1 seem$ to leave to 8 successors 9 philosophy a task ( syn!sis4 ,he _h tumbl$ ! s\l (f h] high wat*-t[]1 b h[ to comb9e h] %att]$ fragm5ts aga9 into a work+ unity he decl9$ to say4 ,he saw ! sceptical implications ( 8 analysis1 b pr(ess$ himself unable to sugge/ a rem$y4 ,he _h1 h[ev]1 made ! emb>rassm5ts ( ! !ory ( k suffici5tly cle> = ,kant1 8 mo/ important successor1 to hit ^u ! mo/ obvi\s palliative1 & 9 ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason ,kant set himself to pat* up ,hume's analysis4 ,exp]i5ce z x came ?r\gh ! *annels ( s5se1 he admitt$ ,hume _h analys$ correctly2 x 0 'a manifold1' a :irl ( sep>ate s5sations4 ,b ^! p] se c\ld n yield k4 ,!y mu/ be made to coh]e1 & ! way to d ?is he _h f\nd4 ,! m9d on to :i* !y fell 0 equipp$ ) a complicat$ app>atus ( faculties :i* c\ld organize ! *aotic manifold ( s5se & turn x into ! connect$ _w :i* common s5se & sci5ce recognize4 ,fir/ x views ! data ( s5se 9 ! light ( its own 'pure intuitions1' &1 lo6 !y are se5 to be 9 ,space & ,"t2 !n x solidifies !m ) its own 'categories1' :i* turn !m into 'sub/ances' & 'causes' & end[ !m ) all ! attributes requir$ to su/a9 t /atus2 f9ally x ref]s !m all to a ,transc5d5tal ,ego1 :i* is n1 inde$1 a s\l1 b suffici5tly l "o to provide some?+ t c admire ! creative syn!sis ( 'm9d z su*4' ,_h ,hume liv$ to read ,kant's ,critique1 he w\ld probably h je]$ at ! va9 complications ( ,kant's transc5d5tal ma*9]y1 & made x cle> t betwe5 ! prim>y manifold ( s5sation & ! fir/ con/ructions ( ! intellect !re /ill yawns a gulf :i* ,kant's lab\r$ explanations n[h]e bridge4 ,:y does ! *aotic 'matt]' ( s5sations submit itself s tamely to ! =m+ ( ! m9d8 ,h[ c ! a priori necessities ( ?\ght1 :i* are ! 'presuppositions' ( ! complexities ,kant lov$1 op]ate ^u s ali5 a /uff z ! s5sations are assum$ to be8 ,&1 aft] all1 0 n ,kant a bit premature 9 proclaim+ ! f9ality ( 8 analysis & ( 8 refutation ( empiricism = all "t8 ,! se>*+ "q1 ,:y %\ld ! future resemble ! pa/8 _h receiv$ no answ]1 & s might n ! m9d itself1 ) all its categories1 be susceptible to *ange8 ,0 x c]ta9 t ! miracle :]eby ! data pres5t$ to our faculties con=m$ to !m w\ld be a /&+ "o8 ,_h n ,kant himself z good z admitt$ t our faculties might di/ort reality in/ead ( mak+ x intelligible8 ,! tru? is t at ?is po9t ,kant is op5 to a *>ge aga9/ :i* ! assumptions he %>$ ) ,hume admit ( no def5ce4 ,hume _h be5 ! fir/ to discov] t we are 9 ! habit ( try+ to rationalize our s5se-data by putt+ ideal con/ructions ^u !m1 ?\gh he _h ab/a9$ f sanctify+ ! practice by a hide\s j>gon ( te*nical t]m9ology4 ,b ?is way ( ek+ out ! facts only seem$ to him to falsify !m4 ,tru? 9 8 view 0 to be rea*$ by accept+ ) docility ! s5sations giv5 f )\t4 ,to set to "w to 'imag9e' connections betwe5 !m1 & to claim = !m a high] tru?1 _h seem$ to him an outrage4 ,:at "r1 !n1 _h ,kant to legitimate ! m9d's impud5ce 9 tamp]+ ) s5sations8 ,0 n e a priori =m an 'imag9ation1' & a va9 "o at t8 ,to ^! objections ! ,kantian s*ool h nev] f\nd an answ]4 ,!y h simply repeat$ ,kant's phrases ab\t ! necess>y 'presuppositions' :i* 7 to be add$ to ,hume's data4 ,! ,engli% psy*ologi/s 7! ,mills1 ,ba91 etc47 exhibit$ a simil> fidelity4 ,!y nev] accept$ ! a priori1 b reli$ on '! association ( ideas' to build up a m9d out ( isolat$ s5sations4 ,b 0 ?is exp$i5t really ?9kable8 ,= if all 's5sations' or qualities are sep>ate entities1 h[ c ! addition ( m 'di/9ct exi/5ces' ( ! same sort really b9d !m toge!r8 ,if 9 '! cat is ^u ! wall1' '^u' is a di/9ct entity :i* has to relate 'cat' & 'wall1' :at is to connect 'cat' ) '^u' & '^u' ) 'wall'8 ,! atomiz+ me?od c>ri$ to its logical extreme dem&s t n only 's5sations' b also '?\ghts' %\ld be ess5tially disconnect$1 & !n1 ( c\rse1 no ?9k+ c coh]e4 ,psy*ology1 !n1 _h work$ itself to a breakd[n by accept+ ! 's5sationali/ic' analysis (f]$ by ,hume1 & dragg$ philosophy ) x4 ,yet ! escape 0 z easy z ! egg ( ,columbus to ! insight ( g5ius4 ,william ,james _h m]ely to inv]t ! problem4 ,in/ead ( assum+ ) ,hume t because "s exp]i5ces seem$ to atte/ ! pres5ce ( di/9ct objects1 all connections 7 illusory & all exp]i5ce mu/ ultimately consi/ ( psy*ical atoms1 ,james _h m]ely to ma9ta9 t ?is sep>ation 0 second>y & artificial1 & t exp]i5ce 0 initially a cont9uum4 ,once ?is is po9t$ out1 ! fact is obvi\s4 ,! /ream ( exp]i5ce no d\bt conta9s :at x is aft]w>ds possible to s+le out z 's5sations1' b x pres5ts !m also z connect$ by 'relations4' ,moreov]1 ! 's5sations' or 'qualities' & _! 'relations' exhibit ! imm$iate indisc]ptible unity ( a fluid r ?an a succession ( fla%es4 ,temporal & spatial relations ) all ! connections !y su/a9 are p]ceiv$ j z directly z :at we come to di/+ui% z ! '?+s' 9 !m4 ',consci\sness1' ,james insi/s1 'does n appe> to itself *opp$ up 9 bits1' & 'we ought to say a feel+ ( &1 a feel+ ( if1 a feel+ ( b1 & a feel+ ( by1 q z readily z we say a feel+ ( blue or a feel+ ( cold4 ,all ?+s 9 exp]i5ce naturally 'comp5etrate1' to use a phrase ( ,b]gson's2 !y are di/9ct & !y are unit$ at ! same "t4 ,! great crux 9 ,hume is ?us se5 to be illusory4 ,imm$iate exp]i5ce does n require 'syn!sis'3 x calls = 'analysis4' ,x is n a jigsaw puzzle1 to be piec$ toge!r )\t glue3 x is a confus$ :ole :i* has to be divid$ & set 9 ord] = cle> ?9k+4 ,hume's mi/ake 0 to h />t$ f exp]i5ce z p>tly analys$ by common s5se1 & n f ! flux z giv54 ,8 's5sations' 7 ! qualities already analys$ out ( ! flux2 he took ^! selections = ! :ole & neglect$ ! o!r less obvi\s features 9 x--viz41 ! relations :i* float$ !m4 ,?us ! puzzle ',h[ d relations relate8' receiv$ its solution 9 ?is new acc\nt ( exp]i5ce4 ,philosoph]s are puzzl$ by ?is "q because !y confuse p]cepts ) concepts4 ,p]cepts are giv5 9 relation2 b concepts1 be+ ideal dissections ( ! p]ceptual flux1 are discont9u\s t]ms :i* h to be relat$ by an act ( ?\ght1 because !y 7 made = ?is v purpose ( di/9ction4 ,?us ! eye sees cats sitt+ ^u walls1 z p>ts ( a rural l&scape1 & )\t ! %>p di/9ctions :i* exi/ betwe5 ! concepts 'cat1' '^u1' 'wall4' ,^! ideas 7 meant to disconnect '! cat' 9 ?\ght f ! site x sat ^u4 ,?\ght1 !n1 has made ! 'atomism' x pr(ess$ to f9d4 ,x has only to unmake x1 & to all[ ! di/9ctions x held ap>t to m]ge aga9 into ! /ream ( *ange4 ,all ,hume's problems1 !re=e1 are unreal1 & ^? ( 8 apriori/ critics are d\bly remov$ f reality4 ,! :ole conception ( philosophy z aim+ at unit+ disjo9t$ data 9 a high] syn!sis runs c\nt] to ! real movem5t1 :i* aims at ! analysis ( a giv5 :ole4 ,! real "q ab\t causation is n h[ ev5ts c be connect$ causally1 b :y are c]ta9 antec$5ts pref]r$ & dissect$ out & entitl$ 'causes4' ,s ! 'self' is n "o 7undiscov]able7 item imag9$ to keep 9 ord] a ho/ ( o!r su* items4 ,any giv5 mom5t ( a consci\sness is j ! mass ( its 's5sations1' b ^! are consci\sly ! heirs ( its hi/ory & connect$ ) a pa/ :i* is rememb]$4 ,no ,transc5d5tal ,ego c\ld d m to support ! process ( exp]i5ce ?an is a*iev$ by 'a /ream ( consci\sness :i* c>ries its own pa/ along4' ,"h1 !n1 is ! /raight way ,james desid]at$1 a critical philosophy :i* goes1 n '?r\gh' ! complexities ( ,kantism1 b leaves !m on "o side z sup]flu\s 'curios4' ,b !re rema9s an ev5 m important d$uction f ! new psy*ology4 ,hume _h be5 convict$ ( error 9 select+ ^? elem5ts ( ! flux :i* s]v$ 8 purpose & neglect+ ! re/4 ,b ?is mi/ake might reveal ! important fact t all analysis 0 a *oice1 & inspir$ by volitions4 ,a m9d t analyses _c b be active 9 h&l+ its exp]i5ce4 ,x manipulates x to s]ve its ends4 ,x emphasizes only ^? portions ( ! flux :i* seem to x important4 ,9 a bett] & fair] analysis ?an ,hume's ^! features w p]si/4 ,x1 too1 w\ld be a product ( selection1 ( a selection dep5d+ on its mak]'s pref]5ces4 ,z ,james %[$1 ! di/9ction betwe5 'dreams' & 'realities1' betwe5 '?+s' & 'illusions1' results only f ! diff]5tial values we atta* to ! p>ts ( ! flux accord+ z !y seem important or int]e/+ to u or n4 ,! volitional contribution is all-p]vasive 9 our ?9k+4 ,& once ?is volitional int]f]5ce ) 'pure p]ception' is %[n to be indisp5sable1 x mu/ be all[$ to be legitimate4 ,nor c ?is approval ( our int]f]5ce be re/rict$ to selections4 ,x mu/ be ext5d$ to additions4 ,j z we c select factors f '! giv5' to con/ruct 'reality1' we c add hypo!ses to x to make x 'intelligible4' ,we c claim ! "r ( causal analysis1 & assume t our dissections h laid b>e ! inn] spr+s ( ! connection ( ev5ts4 ,moreov]1 to ! 'real _w :i* our *oice has built out ( ! *aos ( 'appe>ances' we may hypo!tically add 'inf]nal' & 'heav5ly' regions4,b ,bo? are trans=mations ( '! giv5' by ! w1 b1 l ! po/ulate ( causal s]ies1 exp]i5ce may confirm !m4 ,kant's a priori activity ( ! m9d may ?us 9 a s5se supply an answ] to ,hume--b only 9 a volunt>i/ic philosophy :i* w\ld probably h seem$ too bold bo? to him & to ,hume4 ,!re c be no d\bt t we d n approa* ! data ( p]ception 9 an attitude ( quiesc5t resignation4 ,our desires & ne$s equip u ) assumptions & 'fir/ pr9ciples1' :i* orig9ate f )91 n f )\t4 ,b h[ precisely %\ld ?is m5tal contribution to k be conceiv$8 ,9 ! la/ *apt] ( 8 ,psy*ology ,james sugge/$ t ! m9d's organization is ess5tially biological4 ,x has evolv$ accord+ to s\nd ,d>w9ian pr9ciples1 & 9 s do+ ! fitte/ ( its 'v>iations' h surviv$4 ,b 7 ^! v>iations q =tuit\s8 ,may !y n h be5 purposive responses to ! /imulation ( environm5t8 ,c logic h be5 inv5t$ l saws & %ips = purposes ( human s]vice8 ,^! are "s ( ! /imulat+ que/ions :i* ,james's "w 9 ,psy*ology has sugge/$4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote ,a3 ,n 9 ,bradley's ,logic4 ,footnote ,b3 ,?is is ! sub/ance ( ! doctr9e ( ',! ,w to ,believe4' ,,*apt] ,,iii ,,w ,,9 ,,cognition ,! new psy*ology ( ,james 0 b\nd to produce a new !ory ( k1 & ?\gh x did n actually explore ?is problem1 x conta9$ sev]al valuable sugge/ions ^u ! subject4 ,= in/ance1 9 a brief passage discuss+ ',! ,relations ( ,belief & ,w1' ,james po9t$ out t belief is ess5tially an attitude ( ! w t[>ds an idea1 add+ t 9 ord] to acquire a belief 'we ne$ only 9 cold blood act z if ! ?+ 9 "q 7 real1 & keep act+ z if x 7 real1 & x w infallibly end by gr[+ into su* a connection ) our life t x w become real' 7ii41 p4 #cba74 ,?is passage is an outl9e ( ! doctr9e ( ',! ,w to ,believe1' :i* he 0 aft]w>ds to develop s =cibly4 ,aga91 9 8 la/ *apt]1 ,james criticiz$ ! doctr9e ( ,sp5c] t all ! pr9ciples ( ?\ght1 all its g5]al tru?s & axioms1 7 d]iv$ f impressions ( ! ext]nal _w4 ,he argu$1 on ! o!r h&1 t su* ways ( look+ at ph5om5a mu/ orig9ate 9 ! m9d1 & be prior to ! exp]i5ce :i* confirms !m4 ,)\t digg+ fur!r into ! "* ( ?is m5tal contribution to k1 ,james cont5t$ himself ) ! sugge/ion t ! use ( ^! axiomatic pr9ciples might be con/ru$ 9 ,d>w9ian /yle z a 'v>iation' surviv+ by its fitness1 ?us introduc+ into 8 acc\nt ( m5tal process ! important idea t ?9k+ might be te/$ by its vital value4 ,:at if k be nei!r a dull submission to dictation f )\t nor an unexpla9$ necessity ( ?\ght8 ,:at if x be a bold adv5ture1 an exp]im5tal sally ( a ,w to live1 to "k & to control reality8 ,:at if its pr9ciples 7 frankly risky1 & _! tru? _h to be desir$ be=e x 0 te/$ & assur$8 ,9 a ^w1 :at if fir/ pr9ciples 7 to beg9 ) po/ulates8 ,?us ! way is pav$ f ! new psy*ology to a new !ory ( k4 ,a ?ird alt]native to ! banal dilemma ( 'empiricism' or 'apriorism' sugge/s itself4 ,! old empirici/ view1 z typifi$ by ,mill1 0 t ! m9d _h be5 impress$ ) all its pr9ciples1 su* z ! tru?s ( ari?metic1 ! axioms ( geometry1 & ! law ( causation1 by an uncontradict$ c\rse ( exp]i5ce1 until x g5]aliz$ facts into 'laws1' & 0 enabl$ to pr$ict a simil> future ) c]ta9ty4 ,b ?is !ory _h really be5 explod$ 9 advance by ,hume4 ,facts d n appe> z causally connect$1 nor1 if !y did1 w\ld ?is gu>antee t !y w cont9ue to d s 9 ! future4 ,! cont9uum ( exp]i5ce1 we may add1 is n giv5 z a s]ies ( ari?metical units or geometrical equalities1 unless we delib]ately measure x out 9 accordance ) ma!matical pr9ciples4 ,empiricism ?us gives no real acc\nt ( ! sci5tific rational ord] ( ! _w4 ,b does x foll[ f ! failure ( empiricism t apriorism is true8 ,?is has always be5 assum$1 & held to disp5se rationali/ philosoph]s f giv+ any direct & positive pro( t ^! pr9ciples are a priori tru?s4 ,b manife/ly _! proc$ure is logically f> f cog5t4 ,if a ?ird explanation c be ?\ght (1 x w n foll[ t apriorism is true4 ,all t foll[s is t some?+ has to be assum$ be=e exp]i5ce proves x4 ,:at t some?+ is1 & :5ce x comes1 rema9s an op5 "q4 ,moreov]1 apriorism has n escap$ f ! empirical d\bt ab\t ! future4 ,ev5 grant$ t facts n[ con=m to ! necessities ( our ?\ghts1 :y %\ld !y s comport !mselves = ev]8 ,let u1 !re=e1 try a compromise1 :i* ignores nei!r t :i* we br+ to exp]i5ce 7l empiricism71 nor t :i* we ga9 f exp]i5ce 7l apriorism74 ,?is compromise is effect$ by ! doctr9e ( po/ulation4 ,= ?\gh a po/ulate proce$s f u1 & is meant to guide ?\ght 9 anticipat+ facts1 x yet all[s ! facts to te/ & m\ld x2 s t its work+ modifies1 exp&s1 or re/ricts its dem&s1 & fits x to meet ! exig5cies ( exp]i5ce1 & p]mits1 also1 a c]ta9 re9t]pretation ( ! previ\s 'facts' 9 ord] to con=m !m to ! po/ulate4 ,a po/ulate ?us fully meets ! dem&s ( apriorism4 ,x is 'univ]sal' 9 claim1 because x is conv5i5t & economical to make a rule c>ry z f> z x w g2 & x is 'necess>y1' because all fre% facts are on pr9ciple subject$ to x1 9 ! hope t !y w support & illu/rate x4 ,yet a po/ulate c nev] be accus$ ( be+ a m]e sophi/ication1 or a b> to ! progress ( k1 because x is always will+ to submit to v]ification 9 ! c\rse ( fre% exp]i5ce1 & c always be recon/ruct$ or ab&on$1 %\ld x cease to edify4 ,a long & successful c\rse ( s]vice raises a po/ulate to ! dignity ( an 'axiom'--i4e41 a pr9ciple :i* x is incr$ible anyone %\ld ?9k wor? disput+--:]eas repeat$ failure 9 application degrades x to ! position ( a prejudice--i4e41 an a priori op9ion :i* is always beli$ by its consequ5ces4 ,a 'po/ulate' ?us diff]s ess5tially f ! 'a priori tru?' by its dep5d5ce ^u ! w1 by its be+ ! product ( a free *oice4 ,we h always to select ! assumptions ^u :i* we mean to act 9 our comm]ce ) reality4 ,we select ! rules ^u :i* we g1 & we select ! 'facts' by :i* we claim to support our rules1 /ripp+ !m ( all ! 'irrelevant' details involv$ by _! position 9 ! flux ( happ5+s4 ,?us we emphasize t side ( ?+s :i* fits 9 ) our expectations1 until ! facts are 'fak$' suffici5tly to figure z 'cases' ( our 'law4' ,po/ulation & ! v]ify+ ( po/ulates is ?us a process ( reciprocal discrim9ation & selection4 ,! po/ulate once =mulat$1 we seek 9 ! flux = confirmations ( x1 & ?us con/ruct a sy/em ( 'facts' :i* are relative to x2 t is h[ ! po/ulate reacts ^u exp]i5ce4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 ?is process ( selection is unfruitful1 & ! confirmations ( our rule turn out inf9itesimal1 we alt] ! rule2 & ?us ! 'facts' 9 ! case reject ! po/ulate4 ,?is cont9u\s process ( selection & rejection ( 'pr9ciples' & 'facts' has1 z we h said1 a ?or\ghly biological t+e4 ,! fitness ( a po/ulate to survive is be+ cont9ually te/$4 ,x spr+s 9 ! fir/ place f a human hope t ev5ts may be sy/ematiz$ 9 a c]ta9 way1 & x endures s long z x enables m5 to deal ) !m 9 t way4 ,if x fails1 ! =mation ( fre% ideals & fre% hypo!ses is dem&$2 b t :i* causes "o po/ulate to prevail ov] ano!r is always ! satisfaction :i*1 if successful1 x promises to "s ne$ or desire4 ,?us '?\ght' is ev]y:]e inspir$ by 'w4' ,x is an in/rum5t1 ! mo/ pot5t man has f\nd1 :]eby he br+s ab\t a h>mony ) 8 environm5t4 ,?is h>mony is always some?+ ( a compromise4 ,we po/ulate con=mity betwe5 ,nature & "o ( our ideals4 ,we usually desire m ?an we c get1 b insi/ on all t ,nature c conc$e4 ,causation s]ves z a good example4 ,exp]i5ce z x fir/ comes to u is a m]e flood ( happ5+s1 ) no di/9ction betwe5 causal & casual sequ5ces4 ,cle>ly our :ole ability to control our life1 or ev5 to cont9ue x1 dem&s t we %\ld pr$ict :at happ5s1 & guide our actions accord+ly4 ,we !re=e po/ulate a "r to dissect ! flux1 to fit toge!r select$ s]ies )\t ref]5ce to ! re/4 ,?us1 a sy/ematic network ( natural 'laws' is sl[ly knit toge!r1 & *aos visibly trans=ms itself into sci5tific ord]4 ,! po/ulation ( 'causes' is v]ifi$ by its success4 ,moreov]1 x is to be not$ t to ?is po/ulate !re is no alt]native4 ,a belief t all ev5ts are casual w\ld be sci5tifically wor?less4 ,s is a doctr9e 7/ill popul> among philosoph]s7 t ! only true 'cause' is ! total univ]se at "o mom5t1 ! only true 'effect1' ! :ole ( reality at ! next4 ,= t is m]ely to re9/ate ! giv5 *aos sci5ce tri$ to analyse1 & to =bid u to make selections f x4 ,x w\ld make pr$iction :olly va91 & entangle tru? 9 a totality ( ?+s :i* is unique at e in/ant1 & nev] c recur4 ,! pr9ciples ( ma!matics are z cle>ly po/ulates4 ,9 ,euclidean geometry we assume def9itions ( 'po9ts1' 'l9es1' 'surfaces1' etc41 :i* are nev] f\nd 9 nature1 b =m ! mo/ conv5i5t ab/ractions = measur+ ?+s4 ,bo? 'space' & '"t1' z def9$ = ma!matical purposes1 are ideal con/ructions drawn f empirical 'space' 7ext5sion7 & '"t' 7succession7 feel+s1 & purg$ ( ! subjective v>iations ( ^! exp]i5ces4 ,nev]!less1 geometry =ms ! h&ie/ sy/em = apply+ to exp]i5ce & calculat+ %apes & motions4 ,b1 ideally1 o!r sy/ems might be us$4 ,! 'metageometries' h con/ruct$ o!r ideal 'spaces' out ( po/ulates diff]+ f ,euclid's1 ?\gh :5 appli$ to real space _! great] complexity de/roys _! value4 ,! po/ulatory "* ( ! ari?metical unit is q z cle>2 =1 9 application1 we always h to agree z to :at is to c\nt z '"o'2 if we agree to c\nt apples1 & c\nt ! two halves ( an apple z ea* equall+ "o1 we are said to be 'wrong1' ?\gh1 if we 7 divid+ ! apple among two applicants1 x w\ld be q "r to treat ea* half z '"o' %>e4 ,aga91 ?\gh "o p5ny add$ to ano!r makes two1 "o drop ( wat] add$ to ano!r makes "o1 or a doz51 accord+ z x is dropp$4 ,common s5se1 !re=e1 admits t we may reckon v>i\sly1 & t ari?metic does n apply to all ?+s4 ,aga91 x is impossible to conc$e any mean+ ev5 to ! c5tral 'law ( ?\ght' itself--! ,law ( ,id5tity 7',a is ,a'7--except z a po/ulate4 ,outside ( ,=mal ,logic & lunatic asylums no "o wi%es to ass]t t ',a is ,a4' ,all significant ass]tion takes ! =m ',a is ,b4' ,b ,a & ,b are diff]5t1 &1 inde$1 no two ',a's' are ev] q ! same4 ,h5ce1 :5 we ass]t ei!r ! 'id5tity' ( ',a' 9 two contexts1 or t ( ',a' & ',b1' 9 ',a is ,b1' we are cle>ly ignor+ diff]5ces :i* really exi/--i4e41 we po/ulate t 9 spite ( ^! diff]5ces ,a & ,b w = our purposes behave z if !y 7 "o 7'id5tical'74 ,& we %\ld realize t ?is po/ulate is ( our mak+1 & involves a risk4 ,x may be t exp]i5ce refuses to confirm x1 & convicts u in/ead ( a 'mi/ak5 id5tity4' ,9 %ort1 e id5tity we reason f is made by our po/ulat+ an irrelevance ( diff]5ces4 ,!re is ?us1 p]haps1 no fundam5tal proc$ure ( ?\ght 9 :i* we _c trace "s delib]ately adopt$ attitude4 ,we di/+ui% betwe5 'ourselves' & ! 'ext]nal' _w1 p]haps because we h m control ov] our ?\ghts & limbs1 & less1 or none1 ov] /icks & /ones & m\nta9s2 fundam5tal z x is1 x is a di/9ction )9 exp]i5ce1 & is n giv5 ready-made1 b elaborat$ 9 ! c\rse ( our deal+s ) x4 ,simil>ly1 9 accordance ) its v>y+ degrees ( vividness1 cont9uity1 & value1 exp]i5ce itself gets sort$ into 'realities1' 'dreams1' & 'halluc9ations4' ,9 %ort1 :5 ! processes ( discrim9at+ betwe5 'dreams' & 'reality' are consid]$1 all ^! di/9ctions w ultimately be f\nd to be judgm5ts ( value4 ,nor is x only 9 ! realm ( sci5tific kn[+ t po/ulation reveals itself z a practicable & successful me?od ( anticipat+ exp]i5ce & consolidat+ fact4 ,! same me?od has always be5 employ$ by man 9 rea*+ out t[>ds ! f9al syn!ses :i* 79 imag9ation7 complete 8 vision ( reality4 ,! 'tru?s' ( all religions orig9ate 9 po/ulates4 ',gods' & 'devils1' 'heav5s' & 'hells1' are ess5tially dem&s = a moral ord] 9 exp]i5ce :i* transc5d ! giv54 ,! value ( ! actual _w is supplem5t$ & enhanc$ by be+ conceiv$ z project$ & cont9u$ into a great]1 & our po/ulates are v]ifi$ by ! salut>y influ5ce !y ex]cise on our e>?ly life4 ,bo? po/ulation & v]ification1 !n1 are applicable to ! problems ( religion z ( sci5ce4 ,?is is ! mean+ ( ! ,w to ,believe4 ,:5 ,james fir/ def9$ & def5d$ x1 x provok$ abundant prote/1 on ! gr\nd t x all[$ ev]yone to believe :atev] he pleas$ & to call x 'true4' ,! critics _h simply fail$ to see t v]ification by exp]i5ce is j z integral a "p ( volunt>i/ic proc$ure z exp]im5tal po/ulation1 & t ,james himself _h f ! fir/ ass]t$ ?is4 ,inde$1 t he _h fir/ giv5 a !ological illu/ration ( ! function ( volition 9 kn[+ 0 m]ely an accid5t4 ,b t ! w to believe 0 capable ( be+ g5]aliz$ into a volunt>i/ !ory ( all k 0 soon %[n 9 ,dr4 ,s*ill]'s ,axioms z ,po/ulates4 ,,*apt] ,,iv ,,! ,,dilemmas ,,( ,,dogmatism ,e man1 probably1 is by in/9ct a dogmati/4 ,he feels p]fectly sure t he kn[s "s ?+s1 & is "r ab\t !m aga9/ ! _w4 ,:atev] he believes 9 he does n d\bt1 b holds to be self-evid5tly or indisputably true4 ,8 naive dogmatism1 moreov]1 spontane\sly assumes t 8 tru? is univ]sal & %>$ by all o!rs4 ,if n[ he c\ld live l a fakir1 :olly wrapp$ 9 a cl\d ( 8 own imag9+s1 & no?+ ev] happ5$ to disappo9t 8 expectations1 to j> ^u 8 prejudices1 & to convict him ( error2 if he nev] held conv]se ) anyone :o took a diff]5t view & controv]t$ him1 8 dogmatism w\ld be lifelong & incurable4 ,b z he lives socially1 he has 9 practice to outgr[ x1 & ?is l&s him 9 a s]i\s !oretical dilemma4 ,he has to le>n to live ) o!rs :o diff] f him 9 _! dogmatiz+4 ,social life pla9ly w\ld become impossible if all rigidly insi/$ on ! absolute rightness ( _! own beliefs & ! absolute wrongness ( all o!rs4 ,s compromises h to be made to get at a common 'tru?4' ,x mu/ be recogniz$ t n ev]y?+ :i* is believ$ to be 'k' is k4 ,9 fact1 x is saf] to assume t none h k1 ?\gh all ?9k !y h2 to say fact1 m5 only h 'op9ions1' :i* may be ne>] to or f>!r f '! tru?1' b are n ( necessity z unque/ionable z !y seem to be4 ,out ( ?is concession to ! social life arise ?ree problems4 ,h[ are 'op9ions' to be comp>$ ) ea* o!r1 & h[ is ! ext5t ( _! 'tru?' or 'error' to be det]m9$8 ,h[ is ! belief 9 absolute tru? to be int]pret$ & disc\nt$8 ,h[ is ! p5it5t dogmati/1 once he has all[$ d\bt to corrupt 8 self-confid5ce1 to be /opp$ f d\bt+ all ?+s & turn+ sceptic8 ,z reg>ds ! fir/ problem1 ! fir/ "q is :e!r we %all try to te/ op9ions & to arrive at a /&>d ( value by :i* to measure !m by comp>+ ! op9ions !mselves ) "o ano!r1 or %all presume t !re mu/ be "s absolute /&>d :i* alone is truly true1 :e!r we are aw>e ( x or n4 ,! =m] view is relativism1 ! latt] is absolutism1 9 ! matt] ( tru?4 ,n[1 !re c be no d\bt t absolutism is m cong5ial to our natural prejudices4 ,accord+ly x is ! me?od tri$ fir/2 b x soon conducts dogmatism to an awkw>d s]ies ( dilemmas4 #a4 ,if !re is absolute tru?1 :o has x8 & :o c use ! absolute crit]ion ( op9ions x is suppos$ to =m8 ,n1 surely1 ev]yone :o ?9ks he has4 ,x w nev] d to let e dogmati/ vote = himself & condemn all o!rs4 ,t way w> & madness lie4 ,until !re is absolute agreem5t1 !re _c be absolute tru?4 #b4 ,b absolute tru? may /ill be rev]5c$ z an ideal1 to save u f ! scepticism to :i* a complete relativity ( tru? w\ld lead4 ,b w\ld x save u8 ,if x is admitt$ t no "o c arrogate to himself its possession1 :at use is x to believe t x is an ideal8 ,= if no "o c assume t he has x1 all human tru? is1 9 fact1 su* z ! relativi/ ass]t$1 & scepticism is j z inevitable z be=e4 ,x makes no diff]5ce to ! sceptical inf]5ce :e!r !re is no absolute tru?1 or :e!r x is unatta9$ by man1 & human unatta9able4 #c4 ,x 0 a mi/ake1 !re=e1 to admit t op9ions _c be comp>$ toge!r4 ,"s are mu* m c]ta9 ?an o!rs1 &1 inde$1 'self-evid5t' & 'intuitive4' ,let u !re=e take ^! to be 'tru]4' ,if s1 ! ?9k] :o feels mo/ c]ta9 he is "r is mo/ likely to be "r4 #d4 ,?is sugge/ion w be welcom$ by all dogmati/s--until !y discov] t x does n help !m to agree toge!r1 because !y are all z c]ta9 z c be4 ,b a critically-m9d$ man w urge aga9/ x t 'c]ta9ty' is a subjective & psy*ological crit]ion1 & t no "o has be5 able to devise a me?od = di/+ui%+ ! alleg$ logical f ! und5iable psy*ological c]ta9ty4 ,he w hesitate to say1 !re=e1 t because a belief seems c]ta9 x is true1 & to tru/ ! =mal claim to infallibility :i* is made 9 e judgm5t4 ,& :5 'intuitions' are appeal$ to1 he w ask h[ 'true' intuitions are to be discrim9at$ f 'false1' s\nd f insane1 & inquire to :at he is committ+ himself 9 admitt+ ! tru? ( intuitions4 ,he w dem&1 !re=e1 ! publication ( a li/ ( ! intuitions :i* are absolutely true4 ,b he w n get x1 & if he did1 x may be pr$ict$ t he w\ld n f9d a s+le "o :i* has n be5 disput$ by "s em95t philosoph]4 #e4 ,intuitions1 !re=e1 are an emb>rassm5t1 r ?an a help to ,intellectualism4 ,x has to ma9ta9 bo? t intuitions are ! f\ndations ( all tru? & c]titude1 & also t n all are true4 ,b our natural curiosity z to h[ ^! sorts are to be kn[n ap>t is left unsatisfi$4 ,we mu/ n ask :i* are true1 & :i* n4 ,no "o c say 9 advance ab\t :at matt]s intuitive c]ta9ty is possible2 :at is1 or is n1 an intuition is reveal$ only to reflection aft] ! ev5t4 ,only if an intuition has play$ u false1 we may be sure x 0 n infallible2 x mu/ ei!r h be5 "o ( ! fallible sort1 or else no intuition at all4 #f4 ,at ?is po9t univ]sal scepticism beg9s to raise its hydra head1 & to gr9 at ! dogmati/'s discomfiture4 ,= 9 po9t ( fact ! hi/ory ( ?\ght reveals1 n a /eady accumulation ( indubitable tru?1 b a cont9u\s /rife ( op9ions1 9 :i* ! mo/ widely accept$ beliefs daily succumb to fre% criticism & fall into disrepute z ! 'errors ( ! pa/4' ,no?+1 x seems1 c gu>antee a 'tru?1' h[ev] firmly x may be believ$ = a "t1 f ! corrosive =ce ( new speculation & *ang$ op9ion2 to survey ! field ( philosophic dispute1 /rewn ) ! rema9s ( 'infallible' sy/ems & 'absolute' c]ta9ties1 is to be l$ irresi/ibly to a sceptical d\bt z to ! compet5ce ( human ?\ght4 ,if 'absolute tru?' is our ideal & acqua9tance ) 'absolute reality' our aim1 !n1 9 view ( ! p]si/5t illusions on bo? ^! po9ts to :i* ! human m9d is liable1 x seems necess>y to recognize ! hopelessness ( our se>*4 ,?us ! la/ dilemma ( dogmatism is rea*$4 ,9 view ( ! div]sity ( human beliefs & ! discr$it :i* has hi/orically fall5 on ! mo/ axiomatic articles ( fai?1 we mu/ ei!r admit scepticism to be ! issue ( ! debate1 or else1 condemn+ our absolute view ( tru?1 f9d "s means ( utiliz+ ! relative tru?s :i* are all t humanity seems able to grasp4 ,b to come to t]ms ) relativism is to r5\nce ! dogmatic attitude entirely1 & to approa* ! problems ( philosophy 9 a totally diff]5t _s4 ,,*apt] ,v ,,! ,,problem ,,( ,,tru? ,,& ,,error ,x has be5 %[n 9 ! la/ *apt] h[ urg5t has become ! problem ( discrim9at+ betwe5 ! true & false among relative 'tru?s4' ,= absolute tru? has become a *im]a1 self-evid5ce an illusion1 & intuition untru/wor?y4 ,all ?ree are psy*ologically v real to ^? :o believe 9 !m1 b logically !y succumb to ! assaults ( a scepticism :i* inf]s f ! fact t no 'tru?s' are absolute t all may reasonably be ov]?r[n4 ,! only ob/acle to its triumph lies 9 ! exi/5ce ( 'relative' tru?s :i* are n absolute1 & d n claim to be1 & 9 ! unexam9$ possibility t 9 a relativi/ int]pretation ( all tru? a mean+ may be f\nd = ! di/9ction betwe5 'true' & 'false4' ,n[1 n ev5 a sceptic c\ld d5y t ! size ( an object is bett] measur$ by a y>d-measure ?an by ! eye1 ev5 ?\gh x may be mean+less to ask :at its size may be absolutely2 or t x is probable t bread w be f\nd m n\ri%+ ?an /one1 ev5 ?\gh x may n be a p]fect elixir ( life4 ,ev5 if he d5i$ ?is1 ! sceptic's acts w\ld convict 8 words ( ins9c]ity1 & practically1 at any rate1 no "o has be5 or c be a sceptic1 :atev] ! ext5t ( 8 !oretic d\bts4 ,?is fact is con/ru$ by ! pragmati/ z a significant indication ( ! way out ( ! epi/emological impasse4 ,! 'relative' tru?s1 :i* ,intellectualism pass$ by ) contempt1 may diff] 9 practical value & lead to ! conceptions ( practical tru? & c]ta9ty :i* may be bett] adapt$ to ! requirem5ts ( human life ?an ! elusive & discr$it$ ideals ( absolute tru? & c]ta9ty1 & may enable u to ju/ify ! di/9ctions we make betwe5 ! 'true' & ! 'false4 ,at any rate1 ?is sugge/ion seems wor? foll[+ up4 ,to beg9 )1 we mu/ radically disabuse our m9ds ( ! idea t ?9k+ />ts f c]ta9ty4 ,ev5 ! self-evid5t & self-confid5t 'intuitions' t impress ! uncritical s mu* ) _! claim to infallibility are really ! results ( antec$5t d\bts & pond]+s1 & w\ld nev] be enunciat$ unless !re 7 ?\ght to be a dispute ab\t !m4 ,9 real life ?\ght />ts f p]plexities1 f situations 9 :i*1 z ,pr(essor ,dewey says1 beliefs h to be 'recon/ruct$1' & x aims at sett+ d\bts at re/4 ,x is psy*ologically impossible = a rational m9d to ass]t :at x kn[s to be true1 & supposes ev]yone else to admit ! tru? (4 ,?is is :y ev5 a philosoph]'s conv]sation does n consi/ ( a rehe>sal ( all ! un*all5g$ truisms t he c rememb]4 ,be+ ?us condition$ by a d\bt1 e judgm5t is a *all5ge4 ,x claims tru?1 & backs its claims by ! au?ority ( its mak]2 b x w\ld be folly to imag9e t x !reby becomes ipso facto true1 or is meant to be univ]sally accept$ )\t te/+4 ,its mak] mu/ "k ?is z well z anyone1 unless 8 dogmatism has q blott$ out 8 common s5se4 ,inde$1 he may himself h giv5 pref]5ce to ! judgm5t he made ov] ! alt]natives t occurr$ to him only aft] mu* debate & hesitation1 & may prop\nd x only z a basis = fur!r discussion & te/+4 ,initially1 !n1 e judgm5t is a tru?-claim1 & ?is claim is m]ely =mal4 ,x does n mean t ! claim is absolutely true1 & t x is impi\s to "q x4 ,on ! contr>y1 x has /ill to be validat$ by o!rs1 & may "w 9 su* a way t its own mak] )draws x1 & corrects x by a bett]4 ,! intellectuali/ acc\nts ( tru? h all fail$ to make ?is vital di/9ction betwe5 'tru?-claim' & validat$ tru?4 ,!y re/ on a confusion ( =mal ) absolute tru?1 & x is on ?is acc\nt t !y _c di/+ui% betwe5 'tru?' & error4 ,= false judgm5ts also =mally claim 'tru?1' ,no judgm5t alleges t x is false4,c ,on ! o!r h&1 if ! di/9ction betwe5 tru?-claims & validat$ tru?s is made1 !re ceases to be any !oretic difficulty ab\t ! conception & correction ( errors1 h[ev] difficult x may be to detect !m 9 practice4 ',tru?s' w be 'claims' :i* h work$ well & ma9ta9$ !mselves2 'errors1' su* z h be5 sup]s$$ by bett] ones4 ,all 'tru?s' mu/ be te/$ by some?+ m objective ?an _! own self-ass]tiv5ess1 & ?is te/+ by _! work+ & ! consequ5ces to :i* !y lead may g on indef9itely4 ,9 o!r words1 h[ev] mu* a 'tru?' has be5 validat$1 x is always possible to te/ x fur!r4 ,i4e41 x is nev] !oretically 'absolute1' h[ev] well x may practically be assur$4 ,= a confirmation ( ?is doctr9e ,pragmatism appeals to ! hi/ory ( sci5tific tru?1 :i* has %[n a cont9u\s correction ( 'tru?s1' :i* 7 re-valu$ z 'errors1' z bett] /atem5ts = !m became available4 ,x may also be confirm$ negatively by ! breakd[n ( ! curr5t def9itions ( tru?1 :i* all seem 9 ! end to mean no?+4 ,! olde/ & commone/ def9ition ( a 'tru?' :i* is giv5 is t x is '! correspond5ce ( a ?\ght to reality4' ,b ,intellectualism nev] p]ceiv$ ! difficulties lurk+ 9 x4 ,at fir/ sight ?is seems a brave attempt to get outside ! circle ( ?\ght 9 ord] to te/ its value & to control its vag>ies4 ,unluckily1 ?is !ory c only ass]t1 & nei!r expla9s nor proves1 ! connection betwe5 ! ?\ght & ! reality x desid]ates4 ,=1 grant+ t x is ! int5t ( e ?\ght to correspond ) reality1 we mu/ yet inquire h[ ! alleg$ correspond5ce is to be made out4 ,made out x mu/ be2 = z ! crit]ion is q =mal & holds ( all ass]tions1 ! claim to 'correspond' may be false4 ,to prove ! correspond5ce1 !n1 ! 'reality' w\ld h someh[ to be kn[n ap>t f ! tru?-claim ( ! ?\ght1 9 ord] t ! two might be comp>$ & f\nd to agree4 ,b if ! reality 7 already kn[n directly1 :at w\ld be ! ne$ ( ass]t+ an idea ( x & claim+ 'tru?' = ?is8 ,h[1 moreov]1 c\ld ! claim be te/$1 if1 z is admitt$1 ! reality is n directly kn[n8 ,to ass]t ! 'correspond5ce' mu/ become a gr\ndless po/ulate ab\t some?+ :i* is def9$ to transc5d all k4 ,! correspond5ce !ory1 !n1 does n te/ ! tru?-claim ( ! ass]tion2 x only gives a fre% def9ition ( x4 ,a 'true' ?\ght1 x says1 is "o :i* claims to correspond ) a 'reality4' ,b s does a false1 & h5ce ! !ory leaves u z we 71 puzzl$ to di/+ui% !m4,d ,yet ! !ory is n :olly wrong4 ,_m ( our ?\ghts d claim to correspond ) reality 9 ways t c be v]ifi$4 ,if ! judgm5t ',!re is a gre5 c>pet 9 my hall' is tak5 to mean ',if ,i ent] my hall1 ,i %all see a gre5 c>pet1' p]ception te/s :e!r ! judgm5t 'corresponds' ) ! reality p]ceiv$1 & s goes to validate or disprove ! claim4 ,b ! limits )9 :i* ?is correspond5ce works are v /rait4 ,x applies only to su* judgm5ts z are anticipations ( p]ception1,e & w te/ a tru?-claim only :]e !re is will+ness to act on x4 ,x implies an exp]im5t1 & is n a :olly intellectual process4 ,! sup]iority ( ! 'correspond5ce' !ory ov] ! belief 9 'intuitions' lies 9 its insi/5ce t ?\ght is n to audit its own acc\nts4 ,its success or failure dep5ds ^u factors ext]nal to x1 :i* e/abli% ! tru? or falsehood ( its claims4 ,no su* gu>antee is (f]$ by ! next !ory1 :i* is kn[n z ! 'consi/5ce' or 'coh]5ce' !ory4 ,9 ord] to avoid ! difficulty :i* wreck$ ! 'correspond5ce' !ory1 t ( mak+ ! tru? ( an ass]tion reside 9 an inexp]i5ceable relation to an unatta9able reality1 ?is view ma9ta9s t an idea is true if x is consi/5t ) ! re/ ( our ?\ghts1 & s c be fitt$ ) !m into a coh]5t sy/em4 ,no d\bt a coh]5ce among our ideas is a conv5i5ce & a "p ( _! 'work+1' b x is h>dly a te/ ( _! objective tru?4 ,= a h>moni\s sy/em ( ?\ghts is conceivable :i* w\ld ei!r n apply to reality at all1 or1 if appli$1 w\ld completely fail4 ,on ?is !ory sy/ematic delusions1 fictions1 & dreams1 might prop]ly lay claim to tru?4 ,true1 !y might n be q consi/5t3 b nei!r are ! sy/ems ( our sci5ces4 ,if1 !n1 ?is absolute coh]5ce be insi/$ on1 ?is te/ condemns our :ole k2 if n1 x rema9s =mal1 & fails to recognize any di/9ctions ( value 9 ! claims :i* c be sy/ematiz$4 ,to avoid ?is r$uctio ad absurdum1 x has be5 sugge/$ t x is n ! coh]5ce ( ! idea 9 human1 f9ite1 m9ds :i* con/itutes 'tru?1' b ! p]fect consi/5cy ( ! exp]i5ce ( an ,absolute ,m9d4 ,! te/1 !n1 ( our limit$ coh]5cy w lie 9 its relation to ?is ,absolute ,sy/em4 ,b "h we h ! correspond5ce doctr9e once aga9 9 a fre% disguise2 our human sy/ems are n[ 'true' if !y correspond ) ! ,absolute's1 ,b z !re is no way = u ( %>+ ! ,absolute ,exp]i5ce1 our te/ is aga9 illusory1 & productive ( a depress+ scepticism2 &1 aga91 we h only ass]t$ t tru? is :at claims to be "p ( ! ,absolute ,sy/em4 ,a ^w may be devot$ to ! simple refusal ( intuitioni/s to give an acc\nt ( ,tru? on ! gr\nd t x is 'indef9able4' ,tru? is tak5 to be an ultimate unanalyzable quality ( c]ta9 propositions1 intuitively felt1 & incapable ( description4 ,error1 by ! same tok51 %\ld be equally indef9able & z imm$iately appreh5d$4 ,h[1 !n1 c !re be diff]5ces ( op9ion1 & mi/akes z to :at is true & :at false8 ,h[ is x t a proposition :i* is felt to be 'true' s (t5 turns out to be errone\s8 ,if all errors are felt to be true by ^? !y deceive1 is x n cle> t imm$iate feel+ is n a good en\gh te/ ( a validat$ tru?8 ,?us1 once aga91 we f9d t an acc\nt ( tru?-claim is be+ foi/$ on u 9 place ( a description ( tru?-te/+4 ,! intellectuali/1 !n1 be+ 9 e case unable to ju/ify ! vital di/9ction commonly made betwe5 ! true & ! false1 we return to ! pragmati/4 ,he />ts ) no preconceptions z to :at tru? mu/ mean1 :e!r x exi/s or n2 he is cont5t to wat* h[ de facto claims to tru? get !mselves validat$ 9 exp]i5ce4 ,he obs]ves t e "q is intimately relat$ to "s s*eme ( human purposes4 ,= x has to be put1 9 ord] to come into be+4 ,h5ce e inquiry arises1 & e "q is ask$1 because ( ob/acles & problems :i* arise 9 ! c>ry+ out ( human purposes4 ,s soon z unc]ta9ty arises 9 ! c\rse ( fulfill+ a purpose1 an idea or belief is =mulat$ & act$ on1 to fill ! gap :]e imm$iate c]titude has brok5 d[n4 ,?is eng5d]s ! tru?-claim1 :i* is necess>ily a 'good' 9 its mak]'s eyes1 because x has be5 select$ by him & judg$ pref]able to any alt]native t occurr$ to him4 ,h[1 !n1 is x te/$8 ,simply by ! consequ5ces :i* foll[ f adopt+ x & us+ x z an assumption ^u :i* to "w4 ,if ^! consequ5ces are satisfactory1 if !y promote ! purpose 9 h&1 in/ead ( ?w>t+ x1 & ?us h a valuable effect ^u life1 !n ! tru?-claim ma9ta9s its 'tru?1' & is s f> validat$4 ,?is is ! univ]sal me?od ( te/+ ass]tions alike 9 ! =mation ( ma!matical laws1 physical hypo!ses1 religi\s beliefs1 & e?ical po/ulates4 ,h5ce su* pragmatic aphorisms z 'tru? is useful' or 'tru? is a matt] ( practical consequ5ces' mean ess5tially t all ass]tions mu/ be te/$ by be+ appli$ to a real problem ( kn[+4 ,:at is signifi$ by su* /atem5ts is t no 'tru?' mu/ be accept$ m]ely on acc\nt ( ! insi/5ce ( its claim1 b t e idea mu/ be te/$ by ! consequ5ces ( its work+4 ,its tru? w !n dep5d ^u ^? consequ5ces be+ fruitful = life 9 g5]al1 & 9 p>ticul> = ! purpose beh9d ! p>ticul> inquiry 9 :i* x arose4 ,tru? is a value & a satisfaction2 b 'intellectual satisfaction' is n a morbid delight 9 dialectical & v]bal juggl+3 x is ! satisfaction :i* rew>ds ! h>d lab\r ( rationaliz+ exp]i5ce & r5d]+ x m con=mable ) human desires4 ,x %\ld be cle>1 ?\gh x is (t5 misund]/ood1 t !re is no?+ arbitr>y or 'subjective' 9 ?is me?od ( te/+ beliefs4 ,x does n mean t we are free to ass]t ! tru? ( e idea :i* seems to u pretty or pleasant4 ,! v t]m 'useful' 0 *os5 by pragmati/s z a prote/ aga9/ ! common philosophic lic5ce ( alleg+ 'tru?s' :i* c\ld nev] be appli$ or te/$1 & 7 suppos$ to be none ! worse = be+ 'useless4' ,x is cle> bo? t su* 'tru?s' mu/ be a monopoly ( ,intellectualism1 & also t !y d all[ e man to believe :atev] he wi%es1 provid$ only t he boldly claims 'self-evid5ce' = 8 idiosyncrasy4 ,9 ?is purely subjective s5se1 into :i* ,intellectualism is driv51 x is1 h[ev]1 cle> t !re c be no useless ideas4 ,= any idea anyone decid$ to adopt1 because x pleas$ or amus$ him1 w\ld be ipso facto true4 ,pragmatism1 !re=e1 by refut+ 'useless' k1 %[s t x does n admit su* m]ely subjective 'uses4' ,x insi/s t ideas mu/ be m objectively useful--viz41 by %[+ ability to cope ) ! situation !y 7 devis$ to meet4 ,if !y fail to h>monize ) ! situation !y are untrue1 h[ev] attractive !y may be4 ,= ideas d n function 9 a void2 !y h to "w 9 a _w ( fact1 & to adapt !mselves to all facts1 ?\gh !y may succe$ 9 trans=m+ !m 9 ! end4 ,nor has an idea to reckon only ) facts3 x has also to coh]e ) o!r ideas4 ,x mu/ be congru\s ) ! mass ( o!r beliefs held = good reasons by ! ?9k] :o accepts x4 ,= no "o c af=d to h a /ock ( beliefs :i* conflict too viol5tly ) ^? ( 8 fell[s4 ,if 8 'intuitions' contra/ too s]i\sly ) ^? ( o!rs1 & he acts on !m1 he w be %ut up z a lunatic4 ,if1 !n1 ! 'useful' idea has to approve itself bo? to its mak] & 8 fell[s )\t develop+ limitations 9 its use1 x is cle> t a pragmatic tru? is really f> less arbitr>y & subjective ?an ! 'tru?s' accept$ z absolute1 on ! b>e gr\nd t !y seem 'self-evid5t' to a few intellectuali/s4 ,if1 h[ev]1 x be urg$ t pragmatic tru?s nev] gr[ absolutely true at all1 & t ! mo/ prolong$ pragmatic te/s d n exclude ! possibility ( an ultimate error 9 ! idea1 !re is no difficulty ab\t admitt+ ?is4 ,! pragmatic te/ yields practical1 & n 'absolute1' c]ta9ty4 ,! exi/5ce ( absolute c]ta9ty is d5i$1 & ! dem& = x1 9 a _w :i* conta9s only ! practical sort1 m]ely plays into ! h&s ( scepticism4 ,! unc]ta9ty ( all our v]ificatory processes1 h[ev]1 is n ! creation ( ! pragmati/1 nor is he a god to aboli% x4 ,ab/ractly1 !re is always a d\bt ab\t :at transc5ds our imm$iate exp]i5ce1 & ?is is :y x is s heal?y to h to repudiate s _m !oretic d\bts 9 e act we d4 ,= beliefs h to be act$ on1 & ! results ( ! action rightly react on ! beliefs4 ,! pragmatic te/ is practically adequate1 & is ! only "o available4 ,t x br+s out ! risk ( action only br+s out its sup]iority to a !ory :i* _c get />t$ at all until x is suppli$ ) absolute c]ta9ty1 & meantime c only idly rail at all exi/+ human tru?s4 ,we h 9 all ?is consi/5tly ref]r$ ! tru? ( ideas to individual exp]i5ces = v]ification4 ,?is evid5tly makes all tru?s 9 "s s5se dep5d5t ^u ! p]sonality ( ^? :o ass]t & accept !m4 ,intellectuali/ logic1 on ! o!r h&1 has always proclaim$ t m5tal processes1 if true1 are 'indep5d5t' ( ! idiosyncrasies ( p>ticul> m9ds4 ,ideas h a fix$ mean+1 & coh]e 9 bodies ( 'univ]sal' tru?1 q irrespective ( :e!r any p>ticul> m9d h>b\rs !m or n4 ,?is is n only a cont5tion fatal to ! pragmatic claims1 b also b\nd up ) o!r assumptions ( ,=mal ,logic4 ,s x becomes necess>y to inquire :e!r ?is ,logic is a success1 & s c coh]5tly ab/ract f ! p]sonality ( ! kn[] & ! p>ticul> situations t incite him to "k4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote ,c3 ,n ev5 ',i lie1' :i* is mean+less z x /&s1 ,cf4 ,dr4 ,s*ill]'s ,=mal ,logic1 p4 #cgc4 ,footnote ,d3 ,?is same difficulty reappe>s 9 v>i\s =ms1 z e4g41 9 a rec5t !ory :i* makes ! tru? ( a judgm5t lie 9 its ass]t+ a relation betwe5 diff]5t objects1 & n 9 ! exi/5ce ( ^? objects !mselves4 ,?is =mula also applies z evid5tly to false judgm5ts z to true4 ,x1 too1 br+s no indep5d5t evid5ce ( ! exi/5ce ( ! objects ref]r$ to1 & might fall into error ?r\gh ass]t+ a relation betwe5 objects :i* did n exi/4 ,x is1 moreov]1 incapable ( %[+ t a relation correspond+ to ! idea we h ( x really exi/s :5 we judge t x does4 ,footnote ,e3 ,ea* p]ception1 h[ev]1 conta9s mu* t is suppli$ by ! m9d1 n 'giv5' to x4 ,,*apt] ,,vi ,,! ,,failure ,,( ,,=mal ,,logic ,9 ord] to escape ! necessity ( conc]n+ itself ) p]sonality & p>ticul> circum/ances 9 que/ions ( tru? & error1 ,intellectualism appeals to ,logic1 :i* x conceives z a purely =mal sci5ce & its impregnable citadel4 ,?is appeal1 h[ev]1 re/s on a numb] ( que/ionable assumptions1 & mo/ ( ^! are n av[$4 #a4 ,x assumes t =ms ( ?\ght c be treat$ 9 ab/raction f _! matt]--9 o!r words1 t ! g5]al types ( ?9k+ are nev] affect$ by ! p>ticul> context 9 :i* !y occur4 ,n[1 ?is means t ! "q ( real tru? mu/ n be rais$2 =1 z we h se5 7,*apt] ,v471 real tru? is always an affair ( p>ticul> consequ5ces4 ,! result is1 t z tru?-claims are no long] te/$1 !y all pass z true = ,logic1 & are ev5 rais$ to ! rank ( 'absolute tru?s1' or are mi/ak5 = !m4 ,= ! notion ( a really 7'mat]ially'7 true judgm5t :i* someone has *os51 made1 & te/$1 !re is sub/itut$ t ( a =mally valid proposition1 & 9 ! end ,logic gets s involv$ 9 ! /udy ( 'validity' t x puts aside altoge!r all real te/s ( tru?1 & becomes a game ) v]bal symbols :i* is entirely irrelevant to sci5tific ?9k+4 #b4 ,=mal ,logic assumes ! "r ( ab/ract+ f ! :ole process ( mak+ an ass]tion4 ,x presumes t ! ass]tion has already be5 made someh[4 ,h[1 x does n inquire4 ,yet x is cle> t 9 ea* case !re 7 concrete reasons :y j t ass]tion 0 pref]r$ to any o!r4 ,^! concrete reasons x makes bold to dismiss z 'psy*ological1' & betwe5 'logic' & 'psy*ology',f x decrees an absolute divorce4 ,:]e1 :51 :y1 by & to :om1 an ass]tion 0 made1 is tak5 to be irrelevant1 & put aside z 'extralogical4' #c4 ,?is conv5i5t assumption1 h[ev]1 ultimately necessitates an ab/raction f mean+1 ?\gh ,=mal ,logic does n av[ ?is op5ly4 ,e ass]tion is meant to convey a c]ta9 mean+ 9 a c]ta9 context1 & !re=e its v]bal '=m' has to take on its own individual nuance ( mean+4 ,:at any p>ticul> =m ( words does 9 fact mean on any p>ticul> occasion always dep5ds ^u ! use ( ! words 9 a p>ticul> context4 ,mean+1 !re=e1 _c be dep]sonaliz$2 if mean+s are dep]sonaliz$1 !y cease to be real1 & become v]bal4 ,=mal ,logic has1 9 fact1 mi/ak5 words1 :i* are 7)9 ! same language7 id5tical on all occasions1 = ! ?\ghts !y are int5d$ to express1 :i* are v>i$ to suit ea* occasion4 ,words alone are tol]ant ( ! ab/ract treatm5t ,=mal ,logic dem&s4 ,?is 'sci5ce1' !re=e1 f9ally r$uces to m]e v]balism1 di/ract$ by inconsi/5t relapses into 'psy*ology4' ,b w ?is conception ( ,logic ei!r "w out consi/5tly 9 itself or lead to a t5able !ory ( sci5tific ?9k+8 ,emphatically n4 ,:at is ! use ( a logic :i* 7#a7 _c effect ! capital di/9ction ( all ?\ght1 t betwe5 ! true & ! false8 7#b7 is deb>r$ by its own pr9ciples f consid]+ ! mean+ ( any real ass]tion8 & 7#c7 is ?us toss$ helplessly f horn to horn ( ! dilemma 'ei!r v]balism or psy*ology'8 ,we may select a few examples ( ?is fatal dilemma4 #a4 ,9 deal+ ) :at x calls '! mean+' ( t]ms1 propositions1 etc41 ,=mal ,logic has always to *oose betwe5 ! mean+ ( ! words & ! mean+ ( ! man4 ,= x is cle> t words :i* may be us$ ambigu\sly may on occasion leave no d\bt z to _! mean+1 :ile conv]sely all may become 'ambigu\s' 9 a context4 ,if1 !re=e1 ! occasion is ab/ract$ f1 all =ms mu/ be treat$ v]bally z ambigu\s =mulae1 :i* may be us$ 9 diff]5t s5ses4 ,if x is1 nev]!less1 attempt$ to deal ) _! actual mean+ on any giv5 occasion1 :at its mak] meant ! words to convey mu/ be discov]$1 & ! inquiry at once becomes 'psy*ological'--t is to say1 'extralogical4' #b4 ,if judgm5ts are n to be v]bal 7'propositions'71 b real ass]tions :i* are actually meant1 !y mu/ proce$ f p]sonal selections1 & mu/ h be5 *os5 f among alt]native =mulations because ( _! sup]ior value = _! mak]'s purpose4 ,b all ?is is pla9ly an affair ( psy*ology4 ,s inevitable is ?is t a truly =mal ,ideal ( ',logic' w\ld exclude all judgm5t :atev] f ! complete sy/em ( 'et]nal' ,tru?4 ,= f su* a sy/em no "p c\ld be rightly extract$ to /& alone4 ,su* a selection c\ld be effect$ & ju/ifi$ only by ! exig5cies ( a human ?9k]4 ,! impot5t v]balism ( ! =mal treatm5t ( judgm5t appe>s 9 ano!r way :5 ! "q is rais$ h[ a 'true' judgm5t is to be di/+ui%$ f a 'false4' ,= ! logician1 if 8 public w n accept ei!r ! relegation ( ?is di/9ction to 'psy*ology' or ! prop] =mal answ] t all judgm5ts are 7=mally7 'true' & ev5 'infallible1' c ?9k ( no?+ bett] to say ?an t if ! 'judgm5t' is n true x 0 n a 'true judgm5t1' b a false 'op9ion' :i* may be ab&on$ to 'psy*ology4',g ,app>5tly he is n conc]n$ to help m5 to discrim9ate betwe5 'judgm5ts' & 'op9ions1' or ev5 to %[ t true 'judgm5ts' d 9 fact occur4 #c4 ,inf]5ce involves ,=mal ,logic 9 a ho/ ( difficulties4 7a7 ,if x is n to be a v]bal manipulation ( phrases ^: com+ toge!r is n inquir$ into1 x mu/ be a connect$ tra9 ( ?\ght4 ,b su* a connection ( ?\ghts _c be conceiv$ or und]/ood )\t ref]5ce to ! purpose ( a reason]1 :o selects :at he requires f ! totality ( 'tru?s4' ,if1 !n1 ',logic' has m]ely to contemplate ?is et]nal & immutable sy/em ( tru? 9 its integrity1 & =bids all selection f x = a m]ely human purpose1 h[ c x ei!r ju/ify1 or ev5 und]/&1 ! draw+ ( any inf]5ce :atev]8 7b7 ,=mal ,logic cle>ly w n quail be=e ! *>ge ( uselessness4 ,b on its own pr9ciples x ought to be consi/5t4 ,b by ?is te/ also1 :5 x is rigor\sly judg$ by x1 x fails completely4 ,its inconsi/5cies are _m & incurable4 ,x _c ev5 be consi/5t 9 its !ory ( ! simple/ fundam5tals4 ,x is f\nd ^u "s occasions to def9e judgm5t z t :i* may be ei!r true or false2 & ^u o!rs z t :i* is 'true' 7=mally7--i4e41 x _c decide :e!r or n to ignore ! exi/5ce ( error4 7c7 ,! ,=mal view ( inf]5ce reg>ds x z a 'p>adox4' ,an inf]5ce is requir$ on ! "o h& to supply fre% in=mation1 & on ! o!r to foll[ rigor\sly f its premisses2 x mu/1 9 a ^w1 exhibit bo? novelty & necessity4 ,x w\ld seem1 h[ev]1 t if our inf]5ce g5u9ely _h imp>t$ new k1 ! ev5t mu/ be m]ely psy*ological2 = h[ c any process or ev5t p]turb1 or add to1 ! complet$ totality ( tru? 9 itself8 ,on ! o!r h&1 if ! 'necessity' ( ! op]ation be tak5 s]i\sly1 ! 'inf]5ce' becomes illusory2 = if ! conclusion inf]r$ is already conta9$ 9 ! premisses1 :at s5se is !re 9 ! purely v]bal process ( draw+ x out8 7d7 ,mo/ gl>+ly inadequate ( all1 h[ev]1 is ! ,=mal doctr9e ( ',pro(' conta9$ 9 its !ory ( ! ,syllogism4 ,a ,=mal or v]bal syllogism dep5ds ess5tially on ! ability ( its ,middle ,t]m to connect ! t]ms 9 its conclusion4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ! ,middle ,t]m has n ! same mean+ 9 ! two premisses1 ! syllogism breaks 9 two1 & no 'valid' conclusion c be rea*$4 ,n[1 :e!r 9 fact any p>ticul> ,middle ,t]m be>s ! same mean+ 9 any actual reason+ ,=mal ,logic has deb>r$ itself f inquir+1 by decid+ t actual mean+ 0 'psy*ological4' ,x has to be cont5t1 !re=e1 ) an id5tity 9 ! ^w employ$ = its ,middle1 ,b ?is evid5ce may always fail2 = :5 two premisses :i* are 79 g5]al7 'true' are br\ght toge!r = ! purpose ( draw+ a p>ticul> conclusion1 a gl>+ falsehood may result4 ,e4g41 x w\ld 9 g5]al be grant$ t 'iron s9ks 9 wat]1' yet x does n foll[ t because '?is %ip is iron' x w 's9k 9 wat]1' ,h5ce syllogi/ic 'pro(' seems q devoid ( ! 'cog5cy' x claim$4 ,aft] a conclusion has be5 'demon/rat$' x has /ill to come true 9 fact4 ,?is flaw 9 ! ,syllogism 0 fir/ po9t$ out by ,mr4 ,alfr$ ,sidgwick4 7e7 ,! =mal ,syllogism1 moreov]1 conceals ano!r =mal flaw4 ,an inf9ite regress lurks 9 its bosom4 ,= if its premisses are disput$1 !y mu/ 9 turn be 'prov$4' ,f\r fre% premisses are ne$$1 & if ^! aga9 are *all5g$1 ! numb] ( true premisses ne$$ to prove ! fir/ conclusion goes on d\bl+ at e /ep ad inf9itum4 ,! only way to /op ! process t occurr$ to logicians 0 an appeal to ! 'self-evid5t' tru? ( 'intuitions'2 b ?is has be5 %[n to be argum5tatively wor?less4 ,f ?is difficulty ! pragmati/ alone escapes1 by assum+ 8 premisses provisionally & argu+ =w>ds1 9 ord] to te/ !m by _! consequ5ces4 ,if ! d$uc$ conclusion c be v]ifi$ 9 fact1 ! premisses gr[ m assur$4 ,?us e real inf]5ce is an exp]im5t1 & 'pro(' is an affair ( cont9u\s trial & v]ification--n an inf9ite fall+ back ^u an elusive 'c]ta9ty1' b an inf9ite rea*+ =w>ds t[>ds a full] consummation4 7f7 ,s long z ! logician reg>ds 8 premisses n z hypo!ses to be te/$1 b z e/abli%$ tru?s1 he mu/ condemn ! ,syllogism z a =mal fallacy4 ,x is inevitably a petitio pr9cipii4 ,if ! argum5t ',all m5 are mortal2 ,smi? is a man1 !re=e ,smi? is mortal1' means t we "k1 be=e draw+ our inf]5ce1 t lit]ally all m5 are mortal1 we mu/ already h discov]$ t ,smi? is mortal2 if we did n "k be=eh& t ,smi? is mortal1 we 7 n ju/ifi$ 9 /at+ t all m5 are mortal4 ,nor is x an escape to int]pret ',all m5 are mortal' to mean t immortals are exclud$ f 'man' by def9ition4 ,= !n ! "q is m]ely begg$ 9 ! m9or premiss4 ,t ',smi? is a man' _c be ass]t$ )\t assum+ t he is mortal4 ,if1 la/ly1 ',all m5 are mortal' be tak5 to /ate a law ( nature conjo9+ insep>ably mortality & humanity1 ! logician ei!r already kn[s t ,smi? is rightly class$ "u ! species 'man1' & s subject to its mortality1 or else he assumes ?is4 ,b h[ does he "k ,smi? is n l ,elijah or ,ti?onus1 a peculi> case1 to :i* = "s reason ! law does n apply8 ,w he decl>e x to be 'intuitively c]ta9' t :atev] is call$1 or looks l1 a case ( a 'law' ipso facto becomes "o8 ,! logician's analysis ( reason+1 !n1 breaks d[n4 ,9 :i*ev] way he int]prets ! ,syllogism x is reveal$ z ei!r a sup]fluity or a fallacy3 x is nev] a '=mally valid inf]5ce' t c compel ass5t4 ,b common s5se is undismay$ by ! pragmati/'s discov]y t if ! ,syllogism is to h any s5se its premisses mu/ be tak5 z disputable2 =1 unlike ,=mal ,logic1 x has p]ceiv$ t m5 d n reason ab\t :at !y ?9k !y "k = c]ta91 b ab\t matt]s 9 dispute4 #d4 ,x is n necess>y to dwell at l5g? on ! futility ( ! =mal notion ( ,induction4 ,=mal ,induction presupposes t en\gh p>ticul> in/ances h be5 collect$ to e/abli% a g5]al rule2 b 9 actual practice inductions always repose1 n on indiscrim9ate obs]vation1 b on a selection ( relevant in/ances1 & nev] claim to be bas$ ^u an exhau/ive k ( p>ticul>s4 ,h5ce 9 =m ! mo/ satisfactory induction is always incomplete1 & diff]s 9 no wise f a bad "o4 ',all bodies fall to ! gr\nd' is an induction :i* has work$4 ',all swans are :ite' broke d[n :5 black swans 7 discov]$ 9 ,au/ralia4 ,! validity ( an induction1 !n1 is n a "q ( =m4 ,! necessity = su* selection no intellectuali/ !ory ( ,induction has und]/ood4 ,all h aim$ at exhau/iv5ess1 & imag9$ t if x c\ld be atta9$1 inductive reason+ w\ld be r5d]$ s\nd1 & n impossible4 ,_! ideal 'cause' 0 ! totality ( reality1 id5tifi$ ) its 'effect1' 9 a mean+less tautology4 ,no?+ b volunt>ism c enable logicians to see t our actual proc$ure 9 kn[+ is ! rev]se ( ?is1 t causal explanation is ! analysis ( a cont9uum1 & t 'ph5om5a1' 'ev5ts1' 'effects1' & 'causes' are all creations ( our selective att5tion2 t 9 select+ !m we run a risk ( analyz+ falsely1 & t if we d1 our 'inductions' w be wor?less4 ,b :e!r !y are "r or wrong1 valuable or n1 real reason+ f 'facts' c nev] be a '=mally valid' process4 ,we are ?us br\ght to see ! holl[ness ( ! cont5tion t ',pure ,reason' c ignore its psy*ological context & dehumanize itself4 ,a ?\ght1 to be ?\ght at all1 mu/ seem wor? ?9k+ to someone1 x mu/ convey ! mean+ he int5ds1 x mu/ be true 9 8 eyes & relevant to 8 purposes 9 ! situation 9 :i* x arises--i4e41 x mu/ h a motive1 a value1 a mean+1 a purpose1 a context1 & be select$ f a great] :ole = its relevance to ^!4 ,none ( ^! features does intellectuali/ logic deign to recognize4 ,= if tru? is absolute & n relative1 x is all or no?+4 ,yet no actual ?9k+ has su* transc5d5t aims4 ,x is cont5t ) selections relative to a concrete situation4 ,if x 7 p]missible to div]sify a debate--e4g41 ab\t ! au?or%ip ( ! ,odyssey--by an irruption ( undisput$ tru?s--e4g41 a recitation ( ! multiplication table--h[ w\ld x be possible to di/+ui% a philosoph] f a lunatic8 ,=mal ,logic is ei!r a p]5nial s\rce ( errors ab\t real ?9k+1 or at be/ an aimless dissection ( a caput mortuum--i4e41 ( ! v]bal husks ( dead ?\ghts1 ^: value ,=mal ,logic c\ld nei!r e/abli% nor appreh5d1 ,a real ,logic1 !re=e1 w\ld mo/ anxi\sly avoid all ! initial ab/ractions :i* h r$uc$ ,=mal ,logic to su* impot5ce1 & w\ld ab&on ! insane attempt to elim9ate ! ?9k] f ! !ory ( ?\ght4 ,,footnotes3 ,footnote ,f3 ,! descriptive sci5ce ( ?\ght1 9 its concrete actuality 9 diff]5t m9ds4 ,footnote ,g3 ,! mo/ popul> contribution :i* ,ox=d makes j n[ to ! !ory ( ,error is1 ',a judgm5t :i* is errone\s is n really a judgm5t4' ,s :5 a pr(essor 'judges' he is infallible--by def9ition6 ,,*apt] ,,vii ,,! ,,bankruptcy ,,( ,,intellectualism ,we h n[ /ruggl$ ?r\gh ! quagmires ( intellectuali/ philosophy1 & f\nd t nei!r 9 its ,psy*ology1 :i* divid$ ! m9d's integrity into a heap ( faculties1 & comm9ut$ x into a du/-cl\d ( s5sations2 nor 9 its ,epi/emology1 :i* ignor$ ! w to "k & ! value ( kn[+2 nor 9 its ,logic1 :i* ab/ract$ ?\ght :olly f ! ?9k+ & ! ?9k]1 & s f9ally f1 all mean+1 c\ld man f9d a practicable r\te ( philosophic progress4 ,b our /ruggles w n h be5 9 va9 if !y h left u ) a will+ness to try ! pragmati/ alt]native1 & conv9c$ u t x is n a wanton innovation1 b ! only pa? ( salvation = ! sci5tific _s4 ,b be=e we v5ture on x1 x w be well to re/ore confid5ce 9 ! solv5cy ( human ?\ght by analys+ ! causes ( ! bankruptcy ( ,intellectualism & expos+ ! extravagance ( ! assumptions :i* conduct$ to x4 ,0 x n1 aft] all1 an unw>rant$ assumption t sev]$ ! intellect f its natural connection ) human activity8 ,no d\bt x seem$ to simplify ! problem to suppose t ! function+ ( ! intellect c\ld be /udi$ z a ?+ ap>t1 & unrelat$ to ! g5]al context ( ! vital functions4 ,aga91 x 0 to simplify to assume t ?\ght c\ld be consid]$ ap>t f ! p]sonality ( ! human ?9k]4 ,b x %\ld n h be5 =gott5 t x is possible to pay too de>ly = simplifications & ab/ractions1 & t !y all involve a risk1 :i* ! ev5t may %[ %\ld nev] h be5 tak54 ,s x is 9 ?is case4 ,its ra% assumptions confront ,intellectualism ) a ho/ ( problems x _c attack4 ,x c d no?+ to assuage ! conflict ( op9ions :i* all claim tru? ) equal confid5ce4 ,x _c und]/& ! correction ( error :i* is cont9ually proce$+4 ,nor c x und]/&1 ei!r ! exi/5ce ( error or ! mean+ ( tru?1 or ! means ( di/+ui%+ betwe5 !m4 ,x has no means ( te/+ & confut+ ev5 ! wilde/ & madde/ ass]tions4 ,x _c discrim9ate betwe5 ! intuitions ( ! sage & ( ! lunatic4 ,x is =c$ to view en]gy ( w 9 kn[+ z a s\rce m]ely ( corruption1 & :5 x f9ds t z a psy*ic fact will+ is in]adicable1 x mu/ conclude t we are con/itutionally incapable ( t passive reflection ( reality :i* x reg>ds z ! s9e qua non ( tru?4 ,h5ce1 if dis9t]e/$ness is ! condition ( kn[+1 k is impossible4 ,& x is s entangl$ 9 its un9telligible !ory ( tru? z a copy+ ( reality t1 r ?an r5\nce x1 :5 x f9ds t human kn[+ is n copy+1 x pref]s a surr5d] to ,scepticism4 ,yet is n its :ole proc$ure a signal example ( human arbitr>9ess & p]v]sity8 ,we pr(ess$ to be impell$ by logical necessity at e /ep1 b 7 free to escape f all our p]plexities by adopt+ ! pragmatic inf]5ces f !m4 ,! ,pragmatic ,me?od ( obs]v+ ! consequ5ces readily sugge/s ! means ( discrim9at+ betwe5 tru? & error1 ( sift+ values & ( te/+ claims4 ,&1 ?\gh n infallible1 x is adequate to all our ne$s4 ,! pragmatic notion t ,tru? is practical closes ! artificial gulf betwe5 ! !oretic & ! practical side ( life1 & assigns to tru? a biological function & vital value4 ,! humani/ cont5tion t ,tru? is human rescues man f ! despond5cy 9 :i* 8 failure to grasp absolute tru? _h left him4 ,! ,protagorean dictum t ,man is ! measure ( all ?+s assures him t 8 k may become adequate to 8 reality1 & t ! value ( tru?s & ! diff]5ces betwe5 tru? & error also are susceptible ( e/imation4 ,true1 ?is policy av]ts ! bankruptcy ( ! intellect by scal+ d[n ! intol]able *>ges on x4 ,true1 practical k is n absolute2 b if x is en\gh to live by1 is x n bett] to live by x ?an to be lur$ on to p]i% 9 ! des]ts ( ,scepticism by ! mirage ( an absolute tru? n humanly atta9able8 ,true1 v]ification is n 'pro(1' b z its conclusions are n incorrigible1 its defects are n fatal1 & its dem&s are n impracticable4 ,true1 no tru? & no reality are :olly 'objective1' 9 ! s5se ( :olly indiff]5t to our action2 b to say t ! human & 'subjective' factor 9 all k mu/ be tak5 into acc\nt does n preclude our appreh5d+ & measur+ an 'objective' _w z real z1 & m kn[able ?an1 any o!r !ory c (f]4 ,?us ! proposals ( ,pragmatism = recon/ruct+ ! bus9ess ( ! intellect1 & rescu+ x f ! bankruptcy ( ,intellectualism1 are n unreasonable4 ,!y op5 out to x a prospect ( recov]+ its cr$it & its usefulness by return+ to ! s]vice ( ,life4 ,,*apt] ,,viii ,,?\ght ,,& ,,life ,! mission ( ,pragmatism is to br+ ,philosophy into relation to real ,life & ,action4 ,s f> f reg>d+ ,?\ght z a self-c5tr$1 self-enclos$ activity1 ,pragmatism insi/s ^u replac+ x 9 its context among ! o!r functions ( life1 & 9 measur+ its value by its effect ^u !m4 ,s f>1 aga91 f reg>d+ ! ab/ract intellect z a va/ ,jugg]naut ma*9e :i* absorbs & cru%es ! individual ?9k]1 x treats him individually z hav+ 8 own con/itution1 raison d'tre1 & intr9sic int]e/1 & cr$its him ) a p[] to make new tru?s & to enri* ! res\rces ( ?\ght4 ,ea* ?9k] has be=e him an individual situation1 a sy/em ( aims & values1 a /ock ( k & ( means f :i* he mu/ select :at is relevant to 8 ends1 & s _c escape 9 any judgm5t f ! responsibilities ( a p]sonal decision4 ,?us1 = ,pragmatism e ?\ght is an act ) a p]son beh9d x1 :o is responsible = laun*+ x into ! _w ( fact4 ,! result ( ?is *ange ( attitude is imm$iate4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 z has be5 %[n 9 ,*apt] ,v41 by br++ ?\ght face to face ) ! :ole exp]i5ce ^u :i* x claims to "w1 we are enabl$ to f9d a tangible rule = evaluat+ its ass]tions & di/+ui%+ tru? f error4 ,&1 secondly1 by recogniz+ t ! m9d is n an app>atus :i* functions 9 a vacuum1 b is a con/itu5t ( an individual organism1 we see t ?9k+ always dep5ds ^u a purpose2 = x is ! purpose ( an inquiry :i* gives reflection its cue1 & det]m9es its scope & 7mo/ ess5tial ( all7 its mean+4 ,we are ?us l$ f ! n>r[] logical "q1 ',:at con/itutes ! tru? ( a /atem5t8' to a wid] outlook1 f :i* we c survey ! place ( kn[+ 9 human life at l>ge4 ,?is may be call$ ! transition f ,pragmatism to ,humanism4 ,?is la/ ^w 0 introduc$ into philosophic t]m9ology by ,dr4 ,s*ill] 9 ord] to describe 8 g5]al philosophical position z di/9ct f ! orig9al "q ( ! !ory ( k1 :i* _h be5 treat$ by ,james "u ! "n ( ,pragmatism4 ,to ! ,humani/ ! be/ def9ition ( life is "o :i* displays x z ?r\gh\t purposive1 z a rational pursuit ( ends4 ,?is raises ! "q ( ! validity ( valuations4 ,valuation is a widespread human practice4 ,9 _! mo/ g5]al aspect we classify all objects z 'good' & 'bad1' accord+ z !y are ends to be pursu$ or avoid$1 or means :i* fur!r or fru/rate ! pursuit ( ends4 ,?is g5]al anti!sis betwe5 ! 'good' & ! 'bad' has num]\s specific =ms1 applicable to diff]5t dep>tm5ts ( human activity4 ,?us1 9 conduct1 actions are judg$ 'good' or 'evil' & '"r' or 'wrong'2 9 ?9k+1 ideas are 'true' or 'false1' & 'relevant' or 'irrelevant'2 = art1 objects are 'beautiful' or 'ugly1' & s =?1 = ! modes ( valuation 9 life are innum]able4 ,any "o ( ^! adjectives ei!r d5otes value or c5sures lack ( wor?1 & ea* gets its mean+ by ref]5ce to ! specific purpose1 moral1 ae/hetic1 or intellectual1 x appeals to4 ,! summum bonum1 or supreme good1 w !n be ! ideal ( ! h>moni\s satisfaction ( all purposes4 ,:at1 !n1 f ! /&po9t ( ,humanism1 is ! function ( 'tru?-values' 9 our life8 ,!y indicate a relation to ! cognitive end4 ,:at is ?is end8 ,surely n self-suffic+8 ,a tru? t is m]ely true 9 itself has no int]e/ = human life1 & no human m9d has an int]e/ 9 discov]+ & affirm+ x4 ,tru?1 !re=e1 _c /& alo( f life4 ,x mu/ someh[ subs]ve our vital purposes4 ,b h[ %all x d ?is8 ,only by becom+ applicable to ! reality we h to live )1 by becom+ useful = ! *anges we desire to effect 9 x4 ,:oev] w n admit ?is1 & r5d]s tru? inapplicable1 does 9 fact r5d] x unmean+4 ,! fact t ?\ght ess5tially ref]s to a 'reality' ext]nal to x 9 no way dim9i%es its purposive "*4 ,:e!r ! m9d is idealiz+ an aspect ( reality 7z 9 ma!matics7 or ab/ract+1 classify+1 & pr$ict+ 7z 9 sci5ce71 x is always ! fact t a p>ticul> k9d ( reality is ne$$ = "s s]i\s or trivial purpose :i* guides ! op]ations ( ! ?9k]4 ,a m9d :i* crav$ to embrace all or 'any' reality ne$ n ?9k2 x w\ld d bett] to float )\t discrim9ation ^u ! flux ( *ange4 ,?is proc$ure w\ld be s absolutely anti!tical to human kn[+ t x seems a wanton p>adox on t acc\nt to treat x z ! f9al goal ( k4 ,actually1 ( c\rse1 ! philosoph]s :o claim to be devot$ to pure !ory foll[ no su* c\rse4 ,!y delib]ately *oose _! ideal ( :at is wor? kn[+--e4g41 ',god1' or '! unity ( all ?+s1' or '! laws ( ! univ]se'--&1 disreg>d+ all o!r exi/5ces1 !y pursue ! k9d ( reality !y desire because ( its religi\s or moral or ae/hetic value4 ,= !re c\ld be no great] mi/ake ?an to suppose t ! common anti!sis betwe5 'reality' & ! 'un-real' usually means ! same ?+ z ! di/9ction betwe5 :at 'exi/s' & :at is absolutely non-exi/5t4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is usually a judgm5t ( value4 ,we may say t ! 'haunt$' h\se is real & ! 'gho/' is n2 b z an halluc9ation ! gho/ is real en\gh4 ,utopia is unreal = ! politician1 b exi/s z an ideal = ! !ori/4 ,! ,platoni/ treats our physical _w ( sight & t\*1 :i* we ?9k ! mo/ real ( all1 z a m]e illusion comp>$ to ! ',ideas' ( 8 metaphysical _w4 ,! ?9k] :o decl>es he wants to "k all ab\t 'reality' does n mean t he wi%es to inve/igate ev]y?+ :i* 9 any s5se exi/s1 b t he wi%es to "k :at he consid]s be/ wor? kn[+--& ?is1 ( c\rse1 implies a p]sonal valuation1 a purg$ & expurgat$ extract1 :i* w n (f5d 8 ta/e4 ,s all philosophies are1 9 fact1 selective4 ,ev5 ! m consci5ti\s rationali/s %[ v little anxiety to include 9 _! intellectual s*eme a k ( _! oppon5ts' op9ions--inde$1 !y seem to ?9k t ! exi/5ce ( su* facts may be made dep5d5t :olly on _! w to recognize !m4 ,an exposition ( ,pragmatism is = !m a 'reality' :i* does n c\nt3 x is n wor? kn[+ ab\t4 ,& ?is is only natural1 aft] all4 ,= 'reality1' ! object ( ! m9d's se>*1 is always a selection1 conceiv$ aft] ! lik5ess ( ! he>t's desire1 ! product ( a human purpose4 ,to recognize ?is is to appreciate ! wisdom ( ,humanism's refusal to treat ! _w1 = good or bad1 z a giv5 & complet$ :ole4 ,= n only is :at we call ! real _w always a selection f a l>g] :ole f :i* we h v5tur$ to exclude great masses ( irrelevance1 b e day br+s fre% exp]i5ce1 & may br+ fre% enlight5m5t4 ,& s9ce man has always an int]e/ 9 improv+ 8 condition1 is x n futile to =bid him to re-make 8 _w z beat he c8 ,:y prematurely claim to h rea*$ f9ality1 :5 unexpect$ novelties may %att] any sy/em be=e x is ev5 complet$8 ,our _w is pla/ic1 x is mo/ 'really' :at we c make ( x1 & ! process ( our mak+ is n end$4 ,:e!r a decree ( ,fate has fix$ any ultimate limits to our ef=ts we h no means ( kn[+1 & no occasion to assume4 ,is n our wise/ c\rse1 !n1 to p]si/ 9 try+8 ,x is bad me?od ev] to despair ( kn[+ :at we ne$4 ,= good or ill1 ! _w ) :i* ! ,humani/ cont5ds is always a _w t reveals itself to him4 ,reality1 z x is assum$1 presum$1 or guess$ to be '9 itself1' ap>t f our exp]i5ce ( x1 is cancell$ f 8 reckon+s4 ,= he _c discov] h[ he 7or anyone7 c get any 'k' or 'intuition' :i* transc5ds all human faculties4 ,! !ories ( metaphysicians on ^! l(ty !mes he reg>ds z p]sonal po/ulates :i*1 9 s f> z !y _c be subject$ to ! pragmatic me?od1 mu/ rema9 op5 que/ions4 ,human exp]i5ce does n w>rant su* gratuit\s dem&s4 ,x confirms nei!r ! rigid sy/em ( un*ang+ fact :i* realism po/ulates 7see+ t ! only facts t sci5ce speaks ( are ev] *ang+ 9 its progress71 nor f9ds its problems1 conflicts1 & errors cr$ible z a reflexion ( any ,univ]sal ,m9d1 unless ,idealism ultimately repudiates ! sanity ( its ,absolute4 ,! sup]iority ( ,humanism1 !n1 lies 9 ?is1 t x does n disc\rage human ent]prise by assum+ t ! real is completely rigid & et]nally a*iev$ )\t reg>d to human ef=t4 ,9 ! drama t unrolls reality1 e man1 x tea*es1 has a duty & a p[] to play 8 humble b ess5tial "p4 ,humanism is nei!r an ,optimism nor a ,pessimism--bo? ( :i* mu/ consi/5tly1 9 _! extreme =m1 d5y t reality c be improv$--b conc$es to man ! "r & duty to improve ! _w4 ,x impresses u ) ! necessity ( act+1 x v9dicates ! proc$ure ( act+ on our hopes1 x %[s u h[ we may correct our errors1 & s gives reasons = our fai? 9 ! possibility ( ,progress4 ,,bibliography ,,william ,,james3 ,! ,pr9ciples ( ,psy*ology1 #ahij4 ,! ,w to ,believe1 & ,o!r ,essays 9 ,popul> ,philosophy1 #ahig4 ,! ,v>ieties ( ,religi\s ,exp]i5ce1 #aijb4 ,pragmatism1 a ,new ,"n = ,"s ,old ,ways ( ,?9k+1 #aijg4 ,a ,plurali/ic ,univ]se1 #aiji4 ,! ,mean+ ( ,tru?1 #aiji4 ,"s ,problems ( ,philosophy1 #aiaa4 ,radical ,empiricism1 #aiab4 ,f4,c4,s4 ,,s*ill]3 ,riddles ( ! ,sph9x1 #ahia 7revis$ edition1 #aiaj74 ,axioms z ,po/ulates 79 ,p]sonal ,idealism1 ed4 ,h5ry ,/urt1 #aijb74 ,humanism3 ,philosophical ,essays1 #aijc4 ,/udies 9 ,humanism1 #aijg4 ,=mal ,logic1 a ,sci5tific & ,social ,problem1 #aiab4 ,,h5ry ,,/urt3 ,idola ,!atri1 a ,criticism ( ,ox=d ,?\ght & ,?9k]s f ! ,/&po9t ( ,p]sonal ,idealism1 #aijf4 ,j4 ,,dewey ,,& ,,o!rs3 ,/udies 9 ,logical ,!ory1 #aijc4 ,j4 ,,dewey3 ,! ,influ5ce ( ,d>w9ism1 & ,o!r ,essays1 #aiaj4 ,h4,v4 ,,knox3 ,! ,evolution ( ,tru?1 ,qu>t]ly ,review1 ,no4 #dai4 ,april1 #aiji4 ,a4,w4 ,,moore3 ,pragmatism & its ,critics1 #aiaa4 ,a4 ,,sidgwick3 ,! ,application ( ,logic1 #aiaj4