Charles Sanders Peirce's Theory Of Pragmatism

ISHA. P. GHAISAS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
M.A- SEMESTER ONE
ROLL. NO- 32

INSTRUMENTALISM

The philosophical tradition of “Pragmatism’ started in the early 1870s in the United States of America. The ‘classical pragmatists’ in the field of pragmatism were Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914), William James (1842-1910) and John Dewey (1859-1952). Among these pragmatists, Charles Sanders Peirce, a logician and a philosopher, was known to be the founder of the area of pragmatism. But, however, he published a very few things and remained barely recognised for most of his lifetime. According to William James’ view, the value of any truth is depended upon its use to the person who holds the truth. In pragmatism, James (1901) argued that, the truth of

Because in that view there is no way to determine conclusively that one theory more closely approaches the truth than its rivals, the main criterion for evaluating theories should be how well they perform. Indeed, the fact that no amount of evidence can decisively show that a given theory is true (as opposed to merely predictively successful) begs the question of whether it is meaningful to say that a theory is “true” or “false.” It is not that instrumentalists believe that no theory is better than any other; rather, they doubt that there is any sense in which a theory can be said to be true or false (or better or worse) apart from the extent to which it is useful in solving scientific problems.
Types of instrumentalism:
There are actually two types of instrumentalism. They are as under:
1) Moral instrumentalism or instrumentalist morality: Moral instrumentalism defines moral rules only, as the tools for moral good. Thus, the moral code arising from a given population is simply a collection of rules that are useful to that population.
2) Political instrumentalism: It is a view developed by John Dewey, which simply sees politics as a means to an end.
Recent findings and critics

(Mastin (2008), “Social research glossary” http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/socialresearch/instrumentalism.htm) CONCLUSION

In conclusion it can be said that instrumentalist view was widely accepted in the earlier periods and in today’s world also it has been given reappraisals, although not as much as earlier times. Instrumentalist view being opposite to the realist view, many thinkers and philosophers have come to think upon it in a critical manner. But in my view, instrumentalism is what operates in today’s life i.e things aren’t the way they appear to be. The objects or even humans, at times, appear to be as mere instruments in perceiving one’s physical environment or sometimes mental environment