What do you think?
Rate this book
Essays in Pragmatism
The Hafner Library of Classics is a refreshing approach to the study of major Western philosophers. Introductory essays by noted scholars enliven each volume with insights into the human side of the great thinkers, & provide authoritative discussions of the historical background, evolution & importance of their ideas. Highly recommended as classroom texts.
The seven papers brought together in this volume provide an introduction to the philosophy of Wm James. The 1st & 6th deal with questions of method, asks what philosophy is & how it should go about its job. The remaining five deal with free will, morals, science & religion, his own views in religion & the nature of truth. It would be difficult to suggest more persistent problems in philosophy. These papers introduce a reader to James. They do more than that. Few authors are better able to communicate the spirit of humane philosophizing. These papers therefore provide a valuable introduction to American philosophy & to philosophy itself. To the extent that there is a perennial philosophy, concerning itself with humans as rational animals, James, like Plato, provides a genial & colorful introduction to many of its problems & arguments. These papers were written between 1879 & 1907. Darwinism was 20 years in the air when James wrote The Sentiment of Rationality, & WWI was just seven years around the corner when Pragmatism was published. These papers express the interests of an alert & sensitive mind during one of the most critical quarter centuries in modern history. Darwin & Spencer, Newman & Huxley, Arnold & Pater, Tolstoy & Dostoyevsky, Ibsen & Zola, Marx & Nietzsche formed the climate of opinion within which James' ideas took shape. They were the elder statesmen. James' 1879 paper has the character of a manifesto addressed by a younger man to the world of their making. During the quarter century which followed new intellectual leaders arrived, James himself among them. They included Bergson & Poincarg, Butler & Shaw, Bradley & Royce, Wells & Chesterton, Santayana & Croce, Dewey & Schiller, Belloc & Babbitt, Kipling & Anatole France. These were his contemporaries. Hi 1907 volume, Pragmatism, has the character of a testament addressed to them by way of challenge or confirmation.
The seven papers brought together in this volume provide an introduction to the philosophy of Wm James. The 1st & 6th deal with questions of method, asks what philosophy is & how it should go about its job. The remaining five deal with free will, morals, science & religion, his own views in religion & the nature of truth. It would be difficult to suggest more persistent problems in philosophy. These papers introduce a reader to James. They do more than that. Few authors are better able to communicate the spirit of humane philosophizing. These papers therefore provide a valuable introduction to American philosophy & to philosophy itself. To the extent that there is a perennial philosophy, concerning itself with humans as rational animals, James, like Plato, provides a genial & colorful introduction to many of its problems & arguments. These papers were written between 1879 & 1907. Darwinism was 20 years in the air when James wrote The Sentiment of Rationality, & WWI was just seven years around the corner when Pragmatism was published. These papers express the interests of an alert & sensitive mind during one of the most critical quarter centuries in modern history. Darwin & Spencer, Newman & Huxley, Arnold & Pater, Tolstoy & Dostoyevsky, Ibsen & Zola, Marx & Nietzsche formed the climate of opinion within which James' ideas took shape. They were the elder statesmen. James' 1879 paper has the character of a manifesto addressed by a younger man to the world of their making. During the quarter century which followed new intellectual leaders arrived, James himself among them. They included Bergson & Poincarg, Butler & Shaw, Bradley & Royce, Wells & Chesterton, Santayana & Croce, Dewey & Schiller, Belloc & Babbitt, Kipling & Anatole France. These were his contemporaries. Hi 1907 volume, Pragmatism, has the character of a testament addressed to them by way of challenge or confirmation.
193 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1948
10 people are currently reading
138 people want to read
About the author
William James
347 books1,368 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
William James (January 11, 1842 – August 26, 1910) was an American philosopher and psychologist who was also trained as a physician. The first educator to offer a psychology course in the United States, James was one of the leading thinkers of the late nineteenth century and is believed by many to be one of the most influential philosophers the United States has ever produced, while others have labelled him the "Father of American psychology". Along with Charles Sanders Peirce and John Dewey, he is considered to be one of the greatest figures associated with the philosophical school known as pragmatism, and is also cited as one of the founders of the functional psychology. He also developed the philosophical perspective known as radical empiricism. James' work has influenced intellectuals such as Émile Durkheim, W. E. B. Du Bois, Edmund Husserl, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Hilary Putnam, and Richard Rorty.
Born into a wealthy family, James was the son of the Swedenborgian theologian Henry James Sr and the brother of both the prominent novelist Henry James, and the diarist Alice James. James wrote widely on many topics, including epistemology, education, metaphysics, psychology, religion, and mysticism. Among his most influential books are Principles of Psychology, which was a groundbreaking text in the field of psychology, Essays in Radical Empiricism, an important text in philosophy, and The Varieties of Religious Experience, which investigated different forms of religious experience.
William James was born at the Astor House in New York City. He was the son of Henry James Sr., a noted and independently wealthy Swedenborgian theologian well acquainted with the literary and intellectual elites of his day. The intellectual brilliance of the James family milieu and the remarkable epistolary talents of several of its members have made them a subject of continuing interest to historians, biographers, and critics.
James interacted with a wide array of writers and scholars throughout his life, including his godfather Ralph Waldo Emerson, his godson William James Sidis, as well as Charles Sanders Peirce, Bertrand Russell, Josiah Royce, Ernst Mach, John Dewey, Macedonio Fernández, Walter Lippmann, Mark Twain, Horatio Alger, Jr., Henri Bergson and Sigmund Freud.
William James received an eclectic trans-Atlantic education, developing fluency in both German and French. Education in the James household encouraged cosmopolitanism. The family made two trips to Europe while William James was still a child, setting a pattern that resulted in thirteen more European journeys during his life. His early artistic bent led to an apprenticeship in the studio of William Morris Hunt in Newport, Rhode Island, but he switched in 1861 to scientific studies at the Lawrence Scientific School of Harvard University.
In his early adulthood, James suffered from a variety of physical ailments, including those of the eyes, back, stomach, and skin. He was also tone deaf. He was subject to a variety of psychological symptoms which were diagnosed at the time as neurasthenia, and which included periods of depression during which he contemplated suicide for months on end. Two younger brothers, Garth Wilkinson (Wilky) and Robertson (Bob), fought in the Civil War. The other three siblings (William, Henry, and Alice James) all suffered from periods of invalidism.
He took up medical studies at Harvard Medical School in 1864. He took a break in the spring of 1865 to join naturalist Louis Agassiz on a scientific expedition up the Amazon River, but aborted his trip after eight months, as he suffered bouts of severe seasickness and mild smallpox. His studies were interrupted once again due to illness in April 1867. He traveled to Germany in search of a cure and remained there until November 1868; at that time he was 26 years old. During this period, he
William James (January 11, 1842 – August 26, 1910) was an American philosopher and psychologist who was also trained as a physician. The first educator to offer a psychology course in the United States, James was one of the leading thinkers of the late nineteenth century and is believed by many to be one of the most influential philosophers the United States has ever produced, while others have labelled him the "Father of American psychology". Along with Charles Sanders Peirce and John Dewey, he is considered to be one of the greatest figures associated with the philosophical school known as pragmatism, and is also cited as one of the founders of the functional psychology. He also developed the philosophical perspective known as radical empiricism. James' work has influenced intellectuals such as Émile Durkheim, W. E. B. Du Bois, Edmund Husserl, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Hilary Putnam, and Richard Rorty.
Born into a wealthy family, James was the son of the Swedenborgian theologian Henry James Sr and the brother of both the prominent novelist Henry James, and the diarist Alice James. James wrote widely on many topics, including epistemology, education, metaphysics, psychology, religion, and mysticism. Among his most influential books are Principles of Psychology, which was a groundbreaking text in the field of psychology, Essays in Radical Empiricism, an important text in philosophy, and The Varieties of Religious Experience, which investigated different forms of religious experience.
William James was born at the Astor House in New York City. He was the son of Henry James Sr., a noted and independently wealthy Swedenborgian theologian well acquainted with the literary and intellectual elites of his day. The intellectual brilliance of the James family milieu and the remarkable epistolary talents of several of its members have made them a subject of continuing interest to historians, biographers, and critics.
James interacted with a wide array of writers and scholars throughout his life, including his godfather Ralph Waldo Emerson, his godson William James Sidis, as well as Charles Sanders Peirce, Bertrand Russell, Josiah Royce, Ernst Mach, John Dewey, Macedonio Fernández, Walter Lippmann, Mark Twain, Horatio Alger, Jr., Henri Bergson and Sigmund Freud.
William James received an eclectic trans-Atlantic education, developing fluency in both German and French. Education in the James household encouraged cosmopolitanism. The family made two trips to Europe while William James was still a child, setting a pattern that resulted in thirteen more European journeys during his life. His early artistic bent led to an apprenticeship in the studio of William Morris Hunt in Newport, Rhode Island, but he switched in 1861 to scientific studies at the Lawrence Scientific School of Harvard University.
In his early adulthood, James suffered from a variety of physical ailments, including those of the eyes, back, stomach, and skin. He was also tone deaf. He was subject to a variety of psychological symptoms which were diagnosed at the time as neurasthenia, and which included periods of depression during which he contemplated suicide for months on end. Two younger brothers, Garth Wilkinson (Wilky) and Robertson (Bob), fought in the Civil War. The other three siblings (William, Henry, and Alice James) all suffered from periods of invalidism.
He took up medical studies at Harvard Medical School in 1864. He took a break in the spring of 1865 to join naturalist Louis Agassiz on a scientific expedition up the Amazon River, but aborted his trip after eight months, as he suffered bouts of severe seasickness and mild smallpox. His studies were interrupted once again due to illness in April 1867. He traveled to Germany in search of a cure and remained there until November 1868; at that time he was 26 years old. During this period, he
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
September 6, 2018
In his opening essay, James lays out his view that we are problem solvers. A problem motivates action; action resolves problems; problems are solved when it feels good. (1) This combination of rationality (end-means coordination) and sentiment (good/bad appraisal), provides the foundation for his pragmatism, at least in these essays (Hafner Publishing Co., NY, 1951).
Being a problem solver means that humans have free will. His argument is as follows: James gives facts to the world of nature, but then removes that world from his ethical theory. Facts, are neutral. They are or are not, but they cannot tell us what to do. James acknowledges “simple bodily pleasures and relief from pain,” but he goes on to say that “it is surely impossible to explain all of our sentiments and preferences in this simple way. The more minutely psychology studies human nature, the more clearly it finds there traces of secondary affections.” He then adds that “a vast number of our moral perceptions are also certainly of this secondary and brain-born kind.” “Brain-born” is the key here. Though we are animalistic in the pain-pleasure way, human nature is not animal at all. It is distinctively human. Human nature is the capacity to make choices, to do what we ought to do (solve problems). This is James’ theory of regret and obligation. To do something that we regret means that we had the choice to do the correct thing as verified by a feeling of it being good (it meets human need). He refers to his approach as “soft determinism,” or “deterministic optimism,” thereby combining the determinism of nature with the indeterminism of human freedom, which is “the existence of possibilities…as things that may, but need not, be.”
With some straightening out, James’ philosophical approach can be helpful. We are problem solvers just as he said, and we can choose how we solve them (his free will argument). But what are these problems? They are the needs we share with the rest of life – for nurture, for protection, for reproduction, and the freedom to satisfy those needs and to defend them against threats or harm. As Schopenhauer (who James dislikes) observed, pain is need; the satisfaction of need is pleasure. (2) Pain motivates. Pain explains the reasons for our actions and reactions. Pain and pleasure are states and have their origin in the disequilibrium-equilibrium states common to all life. Needs are fixed by nature, as is the capacity in humans to address these needs by free will (i.e., we are not instinctively determined). But the choices we make, the reasons we choose the way we do, are based on a nature-nurture combination: disposition, experience, habitat and reason (the coordination of end with means).
Having covered naturalism and humanism, James turns to religious philosophy. (3) Being pragmatic problem solvers is a good thing, but human nature craves for belief and a moral creed sanctioned by something transcendent, something that can speak to our “emotional constitution” and can give ethics their energy. “[I]n a merely human world without a God,” he writes, “the appeal to our moral energy falls short of its maximal stimulating power.” (4) “We cannot,” he writes, “live or think at all without some degree of faith.” Here, James comes back, full circle. Our need for religious belief and certitude is a problem but it too can be addressed by his pragmatic approach. Solving this problem cannot come from the natural world that insists on facts. Rather, James uses Pascal’s statement, the heart has reasons of its own, to say that faith transcends the world of facts and nature. In the absence of empirical evidence to the contrary, which is not possible to do on matters of faith, such beliefs may be regarded as true (5) and religious certitude becomes true, by default, despite its “provisional” nature. (6)
This is James’ “Will-to-believe” and it’s a dangerous way of doing philosophy. It discounts or suspends the weight of empirical evidence. It also tends to remove the possibility of a psychological explanation for the need to believe (e.g., fear, hope, tribal identification as extensions of the survival instinct) in favor of something altogether different. Provisional truth becomes absolute truth under another guise. And it’s not just a simple transcendent notion. A full prescriptive suite of actions comes with faith, some or much of which either impose on others or are intolerant of those who see the world otherwise.
The by-product of a mind with an abstract capacity creates a need to comprehend one’s place in the world and the beyond. Otherwise, it’s a formidable sight we face – vulnerability in this life, followed by the dark void that is death. We as animals with minds capable of abstraction, know all of this. We can accept a godless universe or we can create solutions for our existential dilemma. Either approach is ok if it comes with a toleration for other truths but the danger is that we have what Hume called “robust imaginations.” In the name of religious truth, we can and do create a world that imposes on others. This is precisely the problem with James’ religious philosophy. He gives such believers permission to go beyond and into the space of others.
(1) While not clear in these essays, presumably James would argue that a subjective good would have some degree of universal utility for others.
(2) James embeds pain and pleasure in outside objects – but this typical way of seeing the world begs a larger question: Why are they pain and pleasure? To answer this question, one must go inside the organism and the self to see outside objects in terms of their relationship to internal need or threats to need. This is how Schopenhauer reframes pain and pleasure.
(3) In the introduction to these essays, Alburey Castell references James’ humanism as primary, adding that “his supernaturalism is derivative; naturalism he rules out.”
(4) “[E]ven if there were no metaphysical or traditional grounds for believing in a God, men would postulate one simply as a pretext for living hard, and getting out of the game of existence its keenest possibilities of zest….Every sort of energy and endurance, of courage and capacity for landing life’s evils, is set free in those who have religious faith. For this reason, the strenuous type of character will on the battlefield of human history always outwear the easy-going type, and religion will drive irreligion to the wall.”
(5) Tired of those of scientific bent who question faith-based belief, James hopes that those reading “The Will to Believe” essay “will be more open.” “Our passional nature not only lawfully may, but must, decide an option between propositions, whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds.
(6) The practical difficulties of such belief systems are, he states in a loaded footnote that soars to Platonic heights, “(1) to ‘realize the reality’ of one’s higher part; (2) to identify one’s self with it exclusively; and (3) to identify it with all the rest of ideal being.”
Being a problem solver means that humans have free will. His argument is as follows: James gives facts to the world of nature, but then removes that world from his ethical theory. Facts, are neutral. They are or are not, but they cannot tell us what to do. James acknowledges “simple bodily pleasures and relief from pain,” but he goes on to say that “it is surely impossible to explain all of our sentiments and preferences in this simple way. The more minutely psychology studies human nature, the more clearly it finds there traces of secondary affections.” He then adds that “a vast number of our moral perceptions are also certainly of this secondary and brain-born kind.” “Brain-born” is the key here. Though we are animalistic in the pain-pleasure way, human nature is not animal at all. It is distinctively human. Human nature is the capacity to make choices, to do what we ought to do (solve problems). This is James’ theory of regret and obligation. To do something that we regret means that we had the choice to do the correct thing as verified by a feeling of it being good (it meets human need). He refers to his approach as “soft determinism,” or “deterministic optimism,” thereby combining the determinism of nature with the indeterminism of human freedom, which is “the existence of possibilities…as things that may, but need not, be.”
With some straightening out, James’ philosophical approach can be helpful. We are problem solvers just as he said, and we can choose how we solve them (his free will argument). But what are these problems? They are the needs we share with the rest of life – for nurture, for protection, for reproduction, and the freedom to satisfy those needs and to defend them against threats or harm. As Schopenhauer (who James dislikes) observed, pain is need; the satisfaction of need is pleasure. (2) Pain motivates. Pain explains the reasons for our actions and reactions. Pain and pleasure are states and have their origin in the disequilibrium-equilibrium states common to all life. Needs are fixed by nature, as is the capacity in humans to address these needs by free will (i.e., we are not instinctively determined). But the choices we make, the reasons we choose the way we do, are based on a nature-nurture combination: disposition, experience, habitat and reason (the coordination of end with means).
Having covered naturalism and humanism, James turns to religious philosophy. (3) Being pragmatic problem solvers is a good thing, but human nature craves for belief and a moral creed sanctioned by something transcendent, something that can speak to our “emotional constitution” and can give ethics their energy. “[I]n a merely human world without a God,” he writes, “the appeal to our moral energy falls short of its maximal stimulating power.” (4) “We cannot,” he writes, “live or think at all without some degree of faith.” Here, James comes back, full circle. Our need for religious belief and certitude is a problem but it too can be addressed by his pragmatic approach. Solving this problem cannot come from the natural world that insists on facts. Rather, James uses Pascal’s statement, the heart has reasons of its own, to say that faith transcends the world of facts and nature. In the absence of empirical evidence to the contrary, which is not possible to do on matters of faith, such beliefs may be regarded as true (5) and religious certitude becomes true, by default, despite its “provisional” nature. (6)
This is James’ “Will-to-believe” and it’s a dangerous way of doing philosophy. It discounts or suspends the weight of empirical evidence. It also tends to remove the possibility of a psychological explanation for the need to believe (e.g., fear, hope, tribal identification as extensions of the survival instinct) in favor of something altogether different. Provisional truth becomes absolute truth under another guise. And it’s not just a simple transcendent notion. A full prescriptive suite of actions comes with faith, some or much of which either impose on others or are intolerant of those who see the world otherwise.
The by-product of a mind with an abstract capacity creates a need to comprehend one’s place in the world and the beyond. Otherwise, it’s a formidable sight we face – vulnerability in this life, followed by the dark void that is death. We as animals with minds capable of abstraction, know all of this. We can accept a godless universe or we can create solutions for our existential dilemma. Either approach is ok if it comes with a toleration for other truths but the danger is that we have what Hume called “robust imaginations.” In the name of religious truth, we can and do create a world that imposes on others. This is precisely the problem with James’ religious philosophy. He gives such believers permission to go beyond and into the space of others.
(1) While not clear in these essays, presumably James would argue that a subjective good would have some degree of universal utility for others.
(2) James embeds pain and pleasure in outside objects – but this typical way of seeing the world begs a larger question: Why are they pain and pleasure? To answer this question, one must go inside the organism and the self to see outside objects in terms of their relationship to internal need or threats to need. This is how Schopenhauer reframes pain and pleasure.
(3) In the introduction to these essays, Alburey Castell references James’ humanism as primary, adding that “his supernaturalism is derivative; naturalism he rules out.”
(4) “[E]ven if there were no metaphysical or traditional grounds for believing in a God, men would postulate one simply as a pretext for living hard, and getting out of the game of existence its keenest possibilities of zest….Every sort of energy and endurance, of courage and capacity for landing life’s evils, is set free in those who have religious faith. For this reason, the strenuous type of character will on the battlefield of human history always outwear the easy-going type, and religion will drive irreligion to the wall.”
(5) Tired of those of scientific bent who question faith-based belief, James hopes that those reading “The Will to Believe” essay “will be more open.” “Our passional nature not only lawfully may, but must, decide an option between propositions, whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds.
(6) The practical difficulties of such belief systems are, he states in a loaded footnote that soars to Platonic heights, “(1) to ‘realize the reality’ of one’s higher part; (2) to identify one’s self with it exclusively; and (3) to identify it with all the rest of ideal being.”
July 31, 2024
Great read. It was recommended to me while watching an online Yale class on the civil war taught by professor David Blight.
A little bit hard to read at first especially if you're not well versed in the context of the conversation but I was able to get through it and understand the essence of pragmatism which greater clarity.
A little bit hard to read at first especially if you're not well versed in the context of the conversation but I was able to get through it and understand the essence of pragmatism which greater clarity.
December 7, 2016
I was reminded of these essays by someone on FB (see, it is for more than cat videos and trolling) in light of the election. I enjoyed them thoroughly and found much in them to remember for the present time. I found many quotes helpful: (pragmatism) "has anti-intellectualist tendencies. Against rationalism as a pretension (which he views as a sentiment) and a method pragmatism is fully armed and militant. But, at the outset, at least, it stands for no particular results. It has no dogmas, and no doctrines save its method." The idea that pragmatism is human -centered is a key point; if we examine any outcome based on its impact on human life, we stay within the real world, rather than take the matter into abstract.
This was also instructive: James defines the pragmatist is the mediator between the extremes of tough-minded” and “tender-minded." The process “for pragmatism is in the making,” whereas for “rationalism reality is ready-made and complete from all eternity.”
This also aligns with fav writer Rebecca Solnit's constant exhortations to not engage in "premature defeatism" or "naive cynicism" in political thought or when discussing campaign strategy. In fact, one can get too caught up in choosing a name for a philosophy or attempting to align oneself too closely with any philosopher. That may not be pragmatic.
This was also instructive: James defines the pragmatist is the mediator between the extremes of tough-minded” and “tender-minded." The process “for pragmatism is in the making,” whereas for “rationalism reality is ready-made and complete from all eternity.”
This also aligns with fav writer Rebecca Solnit's constant exhortations to not engage in "premature defeatism" or "naive cynicism" in political thought or when discussing campaign strategy. In fact, one can get too caught up in choosing a name for a philosophy or attempting to align oneself too closely with any philosopher. That may not be pragmatic.
February 6, 2016
William James does a good job defining Christian pragmatism.
His essays were mostly originally lectures at universities in the
early 1900's. I found many of his insights good. His illustrations
are interesting and make a rather serious subject more understanding.
Some of the material is somewhat dated, but still interesting from an
historical point.
His essays were mostly originally lectures at universities in the
early 1900's. I found many of his insights good. His illustrations
are interesting and make a rather serious subject more understanding.
Some of the material is somewhat dated, but still interesting from an
historical point.
July 31, 2020
Excellent intro to pragmatism, divided into bite-sized segments. Minus one star for the religious tangents.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews