Select your language

author: Nataliia Salnikova


Urgency of the research. Pragmatism, as a philosophical trend, did not differ in theoretical or conceptual unity. Endless discussions about the importance of pragmatism, the large number of versions and historical and philosophical interpretations testify to the relevance of the pragmatic tradition, its openness to new and important ideas and problems. W. James, the founder of the so-called “James line in pragmatism”, in contrast to the “Pearce line”, is distinguished by openness of views and elevation pragmatism to the heights of the “lifestyle”, without limiting it by philosophical school or an academic tradition.

Target setting. The importance of W. James’s achievements for understanding and solving metaphysical problems is too complicated and controversial. James’ followers are accused of over-extolling his philosophical ideas. However, the undisputed fact is that the rejection of abstractions and the recourse to “practice” at James’s works have given impetus to contemporary interpretations.

Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. Key works by William James, an eminent pragmatist, such as “Pragmatism”, “The Will to Believe”, “Variety of religious experience”, “Dependence of faith on the will and other experiences of popular philosophy” greatly clarify the author’s own position. Foreign researchers, such as Deborah Blиm and William Bush, have explored various aspects of James’s teachings, namely, the logical evidence of being and life and James’s influence on the psychological concepts of modernity. Domestic researchers consider the general philosophical foundations of the doctrine. At the same time, there are no works devoted to the diversity of the ideological forms of William James’s pragmatism.

The research objective. The purpose of this article is to illuminate, not previously explored by Ukrainian philosophers, the problem of interpreting metaphysical problems by William James within a pragmatic tradition.

The statement of basic material. The main task of philosophy W. James considered on the study of problems of metaphysics, theology and morality. In this connection, the concept of “truth” and the problem of its essence occupy one of the leading places in the concept of pragmatism. In general, James believed that the practical consequences and results of metaphysical concepts and religious teachings are shaped by the spiritual ideas of their followers. James’s concept of pragmatism does not contain any new arguments in favor of the solution of philosophical problems in accordance with logic and common sense, but there are reasons for such a decision to be considered necessary. This is due to the interrelation of metaphysical ideas with the solution of practically important problems.

Conclusions. Thus, the problem of unity and diversity in the metaphysics of W  James is not solved by choosing one of the opposing points of view. At the same time the scientist’s desire for clarity and logical consistency hinder the solution of this problem by synthesis or comparison of concepts that have different consequences in practice. James concluded that the unity and multiplicity of experience cannot be adequately understood and expressed in logical forms. But based on the intention to resolve the theoretical conflict, the philosopher chose moderate pluralism as the least dogmatic concept that allows for actual unity in the world.

Keywords: pragmatism, truth, religion, pluralism.

 

References:

  1. Blum, D., 2006. ‘Ghost Hunters : William James and the Search for Scientific Proof of Life After Death’, Penguin Press, 215 p.
  2. Bush, WT., 1925. ‘William James and Pan-Psychism’, Columbia Studies in the History of Ideas, 2, P. 15-104.
  3. Dzheyms, V., 2000. ‘Prahmatyzm (Pragmatism)’, K. : Alʹternatyva, 144 s.
  4. Dzheyms, U., 1997. ‘Volya k vere (The Will to Believe)’, M. : Respublika, 274 s.
  5. Dzheyms, U., 1993. ‘Mnogoobraziye religioznogo opyta (Variety of Religious Experience)’, M. : Nauka, 432 s.
  6. Dzheyms, U., 1904. ‘Zavisimost' very ot voli i drugiye opyty populyarnoy filosofii (Dependence of Faith on the Will and Other Experiences of Popular Philosophy)’, SPb. : M.Pirozhkov, 167 s.
  7. Tatarkevych, V., 1999. ‘Istoriya filosofiyi (History of Philosophy)’, 3, Lʹviv : Svichado, 568 s.
  8. Fokeyev, FV., 2003. ‘Plyuralisticheskaya gipoteza v pragmatizme U. Dzheymsa (A Pluralistic Hypothesis in W. James’s Pragmatism)’, Istoriya filosofii, № 10, S. 121-139