Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1515/9780822382522-008
R. Westbrook
{"title":"Pragmatism and Democracy: Reconstructing the Logic of John Dewey's Faith","authors":"R. Westbrook","doi":"10.1515/9780822382522-008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822382522-008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":299767,"journal":{"name":"The Revival of Pragmatism","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129900319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822382522-011
Ross Posnock
{"title":"Going Astray, Going Forward: Du Boisian Pragmatism and Its Lineage","authors":"Ross Posnock","doi":"10.1215/9780822382522-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822382522-011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":299767,"journal":{"name":"The Revival of Pragmatism","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130286164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1998-11-02DOI: 10.1215/9780822382522-001
M. Dickstein
The revival of pragmatism has excited enormous interest and controversy in the intellectual community over the past two decades. By the middle of the twentieth century, pragmatism was widely considered a naively optimistic residue ofan earlier liberalism, discredited by the Depression and the horrors of the war, and virtually driven from philosophy departments by the reigning school of analytic philosophy. Now once again it is recognized not only as the most distinctive American contribution to philosophy but as a new way of approaching old problems in a number of fields. As the present volume shows, pragmatism has become a key point of reference around which contemporary debates in social thought, law, and literary theory as well as philosophy have been unfolded. It has appealed to philosophers moving beyond analytic philosophy, European theorists looking for an alternative to Marxism, and postmodernists seeking native roots for their critique of absolutes and universals. The revival has not only drawn new attention to the original pragmatists but altered our view of writers as different as Emerson and Frost, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, Santayana and Stevens, Du Bois and Ellison, all ofwhom have been reconsidered in the light of a broader conception of pragmatist thinking. Pragmatism as a branch of philosophy is exactly a hundred years old. The term was first brought forward by William James in a lecture in Berkeley in 1898, published as "Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results." In developing pragmatism as a critique ofabstractions and absolutes and as a philosophy oriented toward practice and action, James insisted that he was only building on thoughts developed by his friend Charles Sanders Peirce in Cambridge more than twenty years earlier. But the cantankerous Peirce was far from pleased with what James did with his ideas. Pragmatism's early years were as filled with controversy as its recent career. James plunged into the fray with his usual zest, and the lectures published as Pragmatism in 1907 became one of his most widely read
过去二十年来，实用主义的复兴在知识界引起了极大的兴趣和争议。到20世纪中叶，实用主义被广泛认为是早期自由主义的天真乐观的残余，由于大萧条和战争的恐怖而名誉扫地，实际上被占统治地位的分析哲学学派从哲学系赶了出去。现在，它再次被认为不仅是美国对哲学最独特的贡献，而且是在许多领域解决老问题的新方法。正如本卷所示，实用主义已经成为一个关键的参考点，在社会思想，法律，文学理论以及哲学的当代辩论已经展开。它吸引了超越分析哲学的哲学家，寻找马克思主义替代品的欧洲理论家，以及为他们对绝对和普遍的批判寻找本土根源的后现代主义者。这种复兴不仅使人们重新注意到最初的实用主义作家，而且改变了我们对作家的看法，这些作家与爱默生和弗罗斯特、尼采和维特根斯坦、桑塔亚那和史蒂文斯、杜波依斯和埃里森等作家截然不同，他们都在更广泛的实用主义思想概念的基础上得到了重新审视。实用主义作为哲学的一个分支已经有整整一百年的历史了。1898年，威廉·詹姆斯(William James)在伯克利的一次演讲中首次提出了这个术语，并以《哲学概念和实践结果》(Philosophical concepts and Practical Results)为名发表。在将实用主义发展为一种对抽象和绝对的批判，以及一种以实践和行动为导向的哲学时，詹姆斯坚持认为，他只是建立在他的朋友查尔斯·桑德斯·皮尔斯20多年前在剑桥提出的思想基础之上。但是脾气暴躁的皮尔斯对詹姆斯的想法很不满意。实用主义的早期和它最近的职业生涯一样充满了争议。詹姆斯以他一贯的热情投入到争论中，1907年出版的《实用主义》成为他最广为阅读的演讲之一
{"title":"Introduction: Pragmatism Then and Now","authors":"M. Dickstein","doi":"10.1215/9780822382522-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822382522-001","url":null,"abstract":"The revival of pragmatism has excited enormous interest and controversy in the intellectual community over the past two decades. By the middle of the twentieth century, pragmatism was widely considered a naively optimistic residue ofan earlier liberalism, discredited by the Depression and the horrors of the war, and virtually driven from philosophy departments by the reigning school of analytic philosophy. Now once again it is recognized not only as the most distinctive American contribution to philosophy but as a new way of approaching old problems in a number of fields. As the present volume shows, pragmatism has become a key point of reference around which contemporary debates in social thought, law, and literary theory as well as philosophy have been unfolded. It has appealed to philosophers moving beyond analytic philosophy, European theorists looking for an alternative to Marxism, and postmodernists seeking native roots for their critique of absolutes and universals. The revival has not only drawn new attention to the original pragmatists but altered our view of writers as different as Emerson and Frost, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, Santayana and Stevens, Du Bois and Ellison, all ofwhom have been reconsidered in the light of a broader conception of pragmatist thinking. Pragmatism as a branch of philosophy is exactly a hundred years old. The term was first brought forward by William James in a lecture in Berkeley in 1898, published as \"Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results.\" In developing pragmatism as a critique ofabstractions and absolutes and as a philosophy oriented toward practice and action, James insisted that he was only building on thoughts developed by his friend Charles Sanders Peirce in Cambridge more than twenty years earlier. But the cantankerous Peirce was far from pleased with what James did with his ideas. Pragmatism's early years were as filled with controversy as its recent career. James plunged into the fray with his usual zest, and the lectures published as Pragmatism in 1907 became one of his most widely read","PeriodicalId":299767,"journal":{"name":"The Revival of Pragmatism","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1998-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126770450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
William James was stuck. Facing the publication of Pragmatism in 1907, he had to decide whether to stress the novelty of his philosophy or its continuity with earlier ideas. James joked that pragmatism would launch "something quite like the protestant reformation" and predicted that it would be "the philosophy of the future." Yet he also believed that he and his fellow pragmatists were building on a foundation laid by philosophers from Socrates to the British empiricists. To soften the blow he was about to deliver, James dedicated Pragmatism to the memory of the venerated John Stuart Mill and added the subtitle A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, hoping that such a pedigree might restrain those inclined to denounce his progeny. As my inversion of James's subtitle suggests, a historian seeking to analyze and explain the current revival of pragmatism confronts the same question James faced: Have contemporary pragmatists resurrected the ideas of earlier thinkers or rejected everything but the name?' The return of pragmatism is something of a surprise. When David A. Hollinger recounted the career of pragmatism in the Journal of American History in 1980, he noted that pragmatism had all but vanished from American historiography during the previous three decades. In 1950, Hollinger recalled, Henry Steele Commager had proclaimed pragmatism "almost the official philosophy of America"; by 1980, in Hollinger's judgment, commentators on American culture had learned to get along just fine without it. "If pragmatism has a future," Hollinger concluded, "it will probably look very different from its past, and the two may not even share a name." Yet pragmatism today is not only alive and
威廉·詹姆斯被困住了。面对1907年《实用主义》的出版，他必须决定是强调他的哲学的新颖性，还是强调它与早期思想的连续性。詹姆斯开玩笑说，实用主义将引发“类似新教改革的东西”，并预测这将是“未来的哲学”。然而，他也相信，他和他的实用主义者同伴们是建立在从苏格拉底到英国经验主义者等哲学家奠定的基础之上的。为了缓和他即将带来的打击，詹姆斯把实用主义献给了受人尊敬的约翰·斯图亚特·穆勒，并加上了副标题:一些旧思维方式的新名称，希望这样的血统可以抑制那些倾向于谴责他的后代的人。正如我对詹姆斯副标题的倒置所暗示的那样，一位试图分析和解释当前实用主义复兴的历史学家面临着詹姆斯所面临的同样问题:当代实用主义者是复活了早期思想家的思想，还是拒绝了除了名字之外的一切?实用主义的回归有些出人意料。1980年，大卫·霍林格(David A. Hollinger)在《美国历史杂志》(Journal of American History)上讲述实用主义的职业生涯时，他指出，在过去三十年里，实用主义几乎从美国史学中消失了。霍林格回忆说，1950年，亨利·斯蒂尔·科马格(Henry Steele Commager)曾宣称实用主义“几乎是美国的官方哲学”;根据霍林格的判断，到1980年，美国文化评论员已经学会了不用它也能相处得很好。“如果实用主义有未来，”霍林格总结道，“它可能会与过去大不相同，两者甚至可能连一个名字都没有。”然而，今天的实用主义不仅充满活力，而且
{"title":"Pragmatism: An Old Name for Some New Ways of Thinking?","authors":"James T. Kloppenberg","doi":"10.2307/2945476","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/2945476","url":null,"abstract":"William James was stuck. Facing the publication of Pragmatism in 1907, he had to decide whether to stress the novelty of his philosophy or its continuity with earlier ideas. James joked that pragmatism would launch \"something quite like the protestant reformation\" and predicted that it would be \"the philosophy of the future.\" Yet he also believed that he and his fellow pragmatists were building on a foundation laid by philosophers from Socrates to the British empiricists. To soften the blow he was about to deliver, James dedicated Pragmatism to the memory of the venerated John Stuart Mill and added the subtitle A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, hoping that such a pedigree might restrain those inclined to denounce his progeny. As my inversion of James's subtitle suggests, a historian seeking to analyze and explain the current revival of pragmatism confronts the same question James faced: Have contemporary pragmatists resurrected the ideas of earlier thinkers or rejected everything but the name?' The return of pragmatism is something of a surprise. When David A. Hollinger recounted the career of pragmatism in the Journal of American History in 1980, he noted that pragmatism had all but vanished from American historiography during the previous three decades. In 1950, Hollinger recalled, Henry Steele Commager had proclaimed pragmatism \"almost the official philosophy of America\"; by 1980, in Hollinger's judgment, commentators on American culture had learned to get along just fine without it. \"If pragmatism has a future,\" Hollinger concluded, \"it will probably look very different from its past, and the two may not even share a name.\" Yet pragmatism today is not only alive and","PeriodicalId":299767,"journal":{"name":"The Revival of Pragmatism","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123320060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：