Pragmatic maxim

The Pragmatic maxim is a principle, the Charles S. Peirce formulated to describe an essential perspective of his philosophy. By the term maxim he leaned aware of Kant on to clarify the normative character of his determination. The function of this maxim is to gain clarity about the meaning of a term is.

The maxim is based on the idea that thinking and thus scientific theories have the task of producing beliefs and thus habits of action. This idea was developed in the article " How To Make Our ​​Ideas Clear" (1878 ) Peirce. "Thoughts in action have to silence the only possible motive, thoughts again; and what does not refer to a conviction is not part of the thought itself "

  • 4.1 conviction and habit
  • 4.2 The concepts of force and reality as examples

Seven formulations for pragmatic maxim

Peirce formulated his maxim in a variety of variations over a period of thirty years, again and again. He has the first variant maintained without restriction at the end of this period. Each new variant is an additional indication of the importance that Peirce was his maxim.

  • The first quote appears in a text that has the shape of a lexical entry, which is suitable as a definition of pragmatism. The form of the maxim contained therein is identical to the classic first version in the mentioned article:
  • The second formulation is significant, as it shows on the one hand, that the maxim can also be interpreted as a personal recommendation. On the other hand, it has revealed that Peirce has not changed the maxim even after the renaming of his pragmatism in pragmatisism:
  • In the third version of a modification of the description of the practical effects and additionally the inclusion of the pragmatic concept of truth Peirce takes place:
  • The fourth formulation shows a clear rejection of all speculative demands on his philosophy. In the lectures on pragmatism from 1903 Peirce added immediately after the passage quoted here the original formulation in 1878 ( as the first quote):
  • In the fifth quote Peirce turns against misinterpretation and seeks to clarify his maxim:
  • In the sixth source Peirce emphasizes the methodological aspect of his maxim:
  • The seventh selected text passage is again a clarification, which suggests that Peirce saw himself misunderstood the passage of time, probably. Various other representations of a pragmatic philosophy, which was not compatible with his conception Peirce referred to the various forms of the English word " concept ", the German translation of term is often too narrow.

On the origin of the maxim

In his early years, Peirce had focused primarily on logic, philosophy of science, questions of categories and his development of the theory of thinking as a sign process ( semiotics ). In the early 1870s he founded with William James at Harvard, a philosophical discussion group, the " Metaphysical Club". Members have included Chauncey Wright and the later Federal Judge Oliver W. Holmes. The lawyer Nicholas St. John Green, a student of Jeremy Bentham, made the circle on the philosophy of Alexander Bain attention. From that Peirce took the concept that human activity on the principle of doubt and beliefs ( doubt and belief ) follows. Man is always seeking to acquire a firm conviction. If he gets on an existing convictions because of perception or thought in doubt as he seeks to eliminate the doubts and to arrive at a new well-established conviction. Due to the origin of his Pragmatic maxim Peirce later called Bain the grandfather of pragmatism.

Peirce presented and discussed his thoughts in the Metaphysical Club. As a result, he published in 1878 a series of essays " Illustrations of the Logic of Science" in the magazine " Popular Science Monthly". The individual titles are:

  • The Fixation of Belief (12/ 1877 1-15 = CP 5358-387 )
  • How To Make Our ​​Ideas Clear (12/ 1878 286-302 = CP 5388-410 )
  • The Doctrine of Chances ( 12/1878, 604-615 = CP 2645-666 )
  • The Probability of Induction (12/ 1878 705-718 = CP 2669-693 )
  • The Order of Nature (13/ 1878 203-217 = CP 6395-427 )
  • Deduction, Induction and Hypothesis (13/ 1878 470-482 = CP 2619-644 )

William James described later, the first two essays as the " founding documents of pragmatism ". The following four essays work out individual aspects that support the theses of the first two essays, and make the integration of the Pragmatic maxim in the science of thinking logical framework of Peirce clearly.

The strengthening of conviction

Doubt and belief

Peirce's question revolves mainly around an epistemological justification of knowledge. Scientific activity presupposes the experiment and conclusions with the methods of logic. Correct reasoning is that true conclusions are drawn from true premises. "That which determines us to draw conclusions from given premises one conclusion rather than another, is a habit ( habit ) of mind, whether it is now constitutional or acquired. " (CP 5.367 ) The final is regarded as valid, irrespective of its truth. Such a habit of thought as the basis of an inference is called a " guiding principle ". In everyday life, and such a guiding principle does not matter because it is not aware and just follow a habit. But in unfamiliar situations, it is sometimes useful to know the guiding principle of an inference.

On closer examination, it is found that a conclusion many facts deemed obvious lie often as a condition based. This sometimes leads to confusion when terms which are the subject of logical reflection are, to mix with ordinary thoughts. This includes, for example, the concept of quality, which can never be observed as such. "We know in general, when we ask a question and when we pronounce a judgment, because there is a difference between the feeling of doubt and the conviction. " (CP 5.370 ) beliefs are guiding principles for conduct, where they become a habit.

Doubt is an unpleasant condition that makes people want to always change in the state of conviction. "With the doubts and the fight begins with the cessation of doubt it ends. Consequently, the sole objective of the investigation is to establish an opinion. We like to imagine that this was not enough for us and we were looking for not just an opinion, but a true opinion. But one examines this notion and it proves to be unfounded; because as soon as a safe belief is reached we are entirely satisfied, whether the belief is true or not. " (CP 5.375 ) doubt in this consideration is not a theoretical doubt as in Descartes. Rhetorical doubt helps the research no further. Theories should be based on accepted statements, but are always prepared with the expectation that they prove to be wrong. It is useless to deal with issues that are already resolved, ie for which there is no longer any doubt.

Methods of achieving a firm conviction

Beliefs is not won by standing in doubt arguments simply repeated again and again, critical arguments ignored or clinging to existing arguments. Putting one's head like an ostrich in the sand, is irrational. People who follow this method of tenacity for example, from religious motives may be satisfied. You want it to give. Over time, it will roll over to the Community engines. For sustained the people are determined beliefs are not in the individual, but in the community.

Now, if institutions or systems that have sufficient power to enforce a certain opinion with violence and keep people in ignorance, as this is the method of authority. For such theological or political lessons there are plenty of examples. Probably the most complete is that of the Catholic Church. This includes aristocracy and guild system. Such systems are often founded by individual leaders, life of companionship and are capable of the worst atrocities. But the doubt can not suppress permanently such systems. And doubt is the engine of the decay of such systems.

Can you dominate the general public opinion, so beliefs are formed by questions of taste and pleasing argument. The history of philosophy in which the pendulum varies between materialistic and spiritualistic philosophies back and forth, is full of such assumptions without reference to facts. " Plato found, for example, the reason according to the distances of the celestial spheres are proportional to the different lengths of strings which produce harmonious chords. " (CP 5.382 ) also in Descartes, Kant or Hegel, Peirce found such statements. By induction opinions arise with random and arbitrary elements. Peirce called such an approach to obtain convictions, is not based on facts, a priori method. This method is clearly preferable to those of the persistence and authority from the standpoint of reason here. But it is unsatisfactory because they often do not really eliminates the doubt.

It will therefore be looking for Peirce, a method that brings the doubt effective to rest. This method should not not depend on the individual, from the purely human, but look outside the scale of the subject, because truth is something public. Only when the conclusions of every human being are ultimately the same, there is an objective standard, and this is the reality. The assumption of reality is indeed a hypothesis, but it is the only one with whom is the scientific method in harmony. Doubt means that two statements contradict and that presupposes a reality. The scientific method is the only one with which one can recognize truth. This is especially true when compared to the alternatives listed as an example. On facts to pass, as well as such a behavior habit is always justified, Peirce regarded as dishonest and immoral. The decision to recognize the standard of truth, as the decision for a bride. "One should love and revere the genius of the logical method. " (CP 5.387 ).

From the clarity of thought

Conviction and habit

The talk of the clarity of a thought had in the history of logic, first the importance of familiarity with a thought. Expanding the criterion of distinctness ( clara et distincta ) was introduced by Descartes. Leibniz clarified further by the clarity equated with recognition and these separated again in clarity and confusion. Leibniz tried to create particular by Definition clarity.

Peirce regarded the outdated provision conceptual clarity not more than timely. With the concept of doubt and conviction, he saw the opportunity to introduce a third level of clarity for familiarity and clarity. Doubt concerns while also very simple operations, such as the choice of coins when paying. Whenever a reflection takes place, which leads to a belief about a course of action, a doubt is eliminated. Even studying a schedule while waiting at the station aims to reinforce a belief by knowing then that one has the timetable properly understood, is confirmed when and where the own train departs and can judge what the other platforms before him goes. "The thinking in action than only possible motive to bring the thought to rest, and which does not relate to a conviction is not a part of thinking itself " (CP 5.396 )

The concept of belief has three properties:

  • She is aware of.
  • It soothes the irritation caused by doubt.
  • It allows the establishment in our nature of a rule for action, just a habit of thought and behavior ( habit ).

Different beliefs are distinguished by the different behaviors that are associated with them. The basic function of thought is to produce habits of action is. Sensations that are not related to (future) actions, not part of the thinking. A habit is determined by when and how it encourages someone to act. There are " no difference in meaning, which is so fine that it would be in something other than a possible difference in practice ". (CP 5.400 )

In the pragmatic maxim, the relation between thought, belief, habit and action is brought to a point:

This maxim is the third degree of clarity of a concept for Peirce dar.

The terms power and reality as examples

Peirce explained the meaning and practical application of the maxim based on the concepts of forces and reality.

The concept of force is the explanation of motion changes. Without the application of force body would maintain speed and direction. After an explanation of forces Peirce describes the fact that embodies the concept of force, as follows: " if the current motion changes experienced by the different parts of a body, each dissolves in its own true nature, then every component of the acceleration accurately described by a particular law of nature, obtained by the body in accordance with their current relative position of a predetermined acceleration, wherein the summary is given by geometric addition the acceleration of the total body. " (CP 5404 ) describe the test the concept of force as an entity after Peirce an absurd self-contradiction. "The idea that triggers the word force in our minds has no other task than to determine our actions, and these actions have no other force than by reference to their effects. So if we know the effects of power, we are with every fact known to be connected with statements about the existence of force, and there is nothing more to know. " (CP 5.404 )

Similar to consider is the term reality. In the sense of familiarity of this term is clear; because everyone knows in everyday use, what is meant. A definition (clarity in the 2nd grade) falls even harder. What is reality, for example, to distinguish from fictions and dreams? Dreams on as events in the brain have real existence, but not the dream content. As a definition lends itself to denote the real as that whose properties are independent of a thought. If we take the pragmatic maxim to help, it is clear that the real sensations excited that appear in consciousness as beliefs. But how can true beliefs, which refer to real, of errors ( false beliefs ) are different, referring to the fictional? Peirce saw here the approach to the review by the scientific method.

On the other hand, all the representatives of science are supported by the joyful hope that the processes of research, if they are far enough ahead to each question to which they are applied, a safe solution will arise. [ ... ] You may first get different results, but if everyone perfected its methods and processes, you will find that the results steadily moving toward a predetermined center. This applies to all scientific research. Different spirits like to start with extremely opposing views, but the progress of the investigations she brings by a lying besides them strength to the same conclusion. This activity of thought that does not bring us to where we want, but to a predetermined target, is like a work of fate. [ ... ] The opinion, which must be agreed at the end of all researchers fateful, is what we mean by truth, and the object that is represented by this opinion is the real. (CP 5.407 )

Peirce took a " convergence theory of truth" that in the future in a correspondence of what is thought opens in a fictitious infinitely distant time with reality. Until then, all knowledge is fallible. For Peirce, although the intersubjectivity was a precondition of the truth. The connection is often made ​​by Peirce with a consensus theory of truth is here but not seen. The concept of truth Peirce also differs substantially from the concept of truth, the William James advocated the notion of usefulness of the truth. The Peirce's truth is an objective, measured on an independent reality truth.

As long as the theoretical time that all beliefs are true, has not yet come, as long as man has to make do with the fact that he is bound to his beliefs that may be true, but need not be true. But by building on the method of science and can not be guided by methods such as persistence, authority or intuitive a priori, it can gain knowledge progress and thus a continuous approximation to the truth. This is ensured by the growing importance of concepts, and thus the growth of their possible effects imaginable.

659510
de