Unification of Rationalism and Empiricism
The primary theme of the lectures and essays which comprise this volume is the establishment of a philosophy which unites the best aspects of Rationalism and Empiricism while sacrificing from neither anything which calls into question the viability of arriving at a truth. The fundamental calculus is create a philosophy unifying the logic of the rationalists with the commitment to external observation required by empiricists. James ultimately sells Pragmatism as a mode of thinking which “is willing to take anything, to follow either logic or the senses, and to count the humblest and most personal experiences.”
Practical Metaphysics
Another unification of pragmatic philosophy involves metaphysics. Metaphysics is a branch of knowledge that is concerned with abstraction rather than literal application to concrete demands. Thus, debate over the existence of things unprovable like the existence of a God or the nature of free will are not outside the realm of pragmatic approach merely because they cannot be empirically observed. James engages on the side of the rationalists by suggesting such empirically unresolvable metaphysical debates actually do lead to literal applications in a concrete world such as laws and moral codes which absolutely are dependent upon judgments of truth based on existing factual information.
Pragmatism and Truth
James rejects the notion of absolute truths, of course, but also one of the linchpins of rationalist philosophy which states that truth can exist independently of its verification. For James, the foundation of a pragmatic approach to truth is plainly stated: “Truth for us is simply a collective name for verification-processes.” This primal insistence upon verification as a requirement for the truth of a thing has long been one of the most troubling for critics who suggest that such a philosophy creates too much space for a relativistic approach to what is true and what is not. If truth cannot be determined without verification and verification is not yet experiential possible, then truth becomes simply a matter of subjective faith and belief. Supporters argue that James counters this prejudicial concern by making it quite clear that truth also involves consistency of ideas within a framework which conforms to all pre-existing facts.
