Dewey’s Philosophy of Pragmatism

Dewey’s Philosophy of Pragmatism

Dewey's metaphysical assumptions naturally lead to an embrace of the kind of pragmatism advocated in the 19th century by William James (1842-1910) and Charles Saunders Peirce (1839-1914). James and Peirce believed that theoretical soundness was not a matter of adherence to some kind of transcendent logic, removed from everyday experience. "Truth" for pragmatists is not determined in reference to absolute metaphysical principles, but rather in reference to what "works," and what coheres with the genuine experience of living subjects. This explains why, concerning the philosophy of religion, William James was more concerned about people's personal religious experiences than with the various logical "proofs" for God's existence, or appeals to the truth of scripture.

Similarly, Dewey sees humans as part of nature, and sees nature as constantly changing. "A thing is its history" for Dewey, and that history is lived experience (Gordon L. Ziniewicz, www.fred.net/tzaka/deweynew.html). Humans, as part of nature, also have a history of change, both as a race and as individuals. Like existentialists, Dewey believes that what constitutes "human nature" is a history of experience. But unlike existentialists, Dewey believes that history and experience are collective as well as individual. This will become important later, when we see how strongly Dewey believes in cooperation instead of competition.

Pragmatism holds that there is no such thing as "absolute certainty," in theory or practice. Humans may, through experience and reflection (in fact, Dewey sees mental reflection as part of the sum of human experience), reach near-certainty about theories or ideas. This near-certainty results not from an abstract examination of a theory or idea, but through a contemplation of the consequences of behaving as if the theory or idea were true.

For example, I may have the idea that procrastination is an undesirable character trait, that I should adhere to my schedule and not put things off until the last minute. I may have this idea because my parents kept pounding it into my head, because my teachers warn me about it, and so on. But unless the "procrastination is bad" idea is validated by my lived experience, I could never consider it "true." In fact, my experience may contradict the advice of my parents and teachers. I may work well under the pressure of the last minute. I may be talented enough to pull off last-minute miracles. My lived experience tells me that it is okay to procrastinate.

At least, until the inevitable time that my last-minute miracle doesn't happen. My assignment is poorly written; my teacher tells me it's obvious I wrote it the night before. I fail. At that point, I reconsider the original idea, and begin to think that procrastination might be bad after all.

This example illustrates two important aspects of Dewey's pragmatism. First, as already stated, my lived experience is more important than logic or metaphysics in determining the truth or falsity of a claim. Second, however, the example shows that theories and ideas change. I hold something true as long as my experience verifies it. When my experience no longer verifies it, I no longer have sound reason to hold it true.

For Dewey, experience can be active or passive, and includes reflection as well as interaction. Thus, experience is not (as it was for the empiricists), the simple reception and contemplation of external data. It includes long-term, rigorous meditation on ideas and things. It may even include mystical, emotional, or religious experience. As long as those things add to my understanding of the way the world works (and remember, I am part of the world), then they are valuable parts of the way I know things. (Ziniewicz, IBID)

In summary, Dewey's philosophy is an affirmation of humans as part of an ever-changing natural world. Abstract principles are only valuable insofar as they cohere to our experiences of and in this ever-changing natural world. Part of this experience is our membership in a community, where we learn from and with other people. The best political world is one that maximizes the strength of communities, to the maximum benefit of all participants.