Someone asked a really good question in section yesterday and I thought I would take the time to address it here…
Pragmatism (according to Prof. Huang): Philosophical movement which holds that both the meaning and truth of any idea is a function of its practical outcome. The example given in class was about a man adrift in a hot air balloon. He then sees a man below him and the man in the balloon asks him “where am I?” The ground-based man responded with “well you seem to be in the air.” This is an example of what the pragmatists would call a “true but useless proposition.” The ideal pragmatist is someone that gives you the answer that is the most practical at any given moment. For example, the ground-based man should have said “you are in Holland,” and thus given the balloon-man a practical response based on his location, not based on the obvious.
If you guys have any other ways of defining this rather difficult philosophical concept, please feel free to post them!
Pragmatism can be defined by the meaning of an idea or a proposition that lies in its observable practical outcomes. Therefore, pragmatism is sometimes the less desired answer, however, always yields to some sort of data or numerical evidence. Pragmatism can also be contrasted with idealism, in that idealism often offers a more socially accepted and often simplistic answer, but this is considered a “useless proposition” according to a pragmatic person.
-An idealist person would be satisfied with the answer “This home is an amazing value for the area.”
Where as, a pragmatic person would find this useless because it does not define anything about the gas mileage in observable practical outcomes.
-A pragmatic person would prefer an answer “The average price per square feet in The Mesa, for a view lot, is $500.00, whereas this home is being offered at an amazing value of $480.00 per square foot. The pragmatic answer is much more in detail and useful for an educated home purchase. One would even say the pragmatic answer is less desirable because it represents a reality that the idealist answer did not, that the house really isn’t really an “amazing” deal like the idealist answer was allowed to claim because of a lack of visible evidence.