Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T23:22:01.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How American Is Pragmatism?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Alexander Klein
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay examines the provenance of a single, curious term that William James often used in connection with his own pragmatism. The term is Denkmittel, an uncommon German contraction of Denk (thought) and Mittel (instrument). James’s Central European sources for this now forgotten bit of philosophical jargon provide a small illustration of a bigger historical point that too often gets obscured. Pragmatism—James’s pragmatism, at least—was both allied with and inspired by a broader sweep of scientific instrumentalism that was already flourishing in fin de siècle European philosophy.

Type
Realism and Epistemic Humility
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 88 , Issue 5 , December 2021 , pp. 849 - 859
Copyright
Copyright 2021 by the Philosophy of Science Association. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

An early version of this article was given at the European Pragmatism conference at the Vienna Circle Institute. I thank organizers and participants for helpful feedback. For further discussion and feedback I am also indebted to Don Howard, Johannes Steizinger, Clinton Tolley, and especially Trevor Pearce, who first urged me to look into the Lasswitz connection.

References

Aikin, Scott F., and Talisse, Robert B.. 2017. Pragmatism, Pluralism, and the Nature of Philosophy. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, F. Thomas. 2013. What Pragmatism Was. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chimisso, Cristina. 2008. Writing the History of the Mind: Philosophy and Science in France, 1900 to 1960s. Science, Technology, and Culture, 1700–1945. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Cohen, Hermann. 1883. Das Princip der Infinitesmal-Methode und seine Geschichte: Ein Kapitel zur Grundlegung der Erkenntnisskritik. Berlin: Dümmler.Google Scholar
Ferrari, Massimo. 2017. “William James and the Vienna Circle.” In Logical Empiricism and Pragmatism, ed. Pihlström, Sami, Stadler, Friedrich and Weidtmann, Niels, 15–42. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giovanelli, Marco. 2016. “Hermann Cohen’s Das Princip der Infinitesimal-Methode: The History of an Unsuccessful Book.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science A 58:9–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giovanelli, Marco. 2017. “The Sensation and the Stimulus: Psychophysics and the Prehistory of the Marburg School.” Perspectives on Science 25 (3): 287–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, William. 1892/1983. “A Plea for Psychology as a ‘Natural Science.’” In Essays in Psychology, ed. Burkhardt, Frederick H., Bowers, Fredson, and Skrupskelis, Ignas K., 270–77. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1907/1975. Pragmatism. In The Works of William James, ed. Bowers, Fredson and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1909/1978. The Meaning of Truth. In The Works of William James, ed. Burkhardt, Frederick H., Bowers, Fredson, and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1912/1976. Essays in Radical Empiricism. ed. Bowers, Fredson and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1987. Essays, Comments, and Reviews. In The Works of William James, ed. Burkhardt, Frederick H., Bowers, Fredson, and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1988a. Manuscript Essays and Notes. In The Works of William James, ed. Burkhardt, Frederick H., Bowers, Fredson, and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1988b. Manuscript Lectures. In The Works of William James, ed. Burkhardt, Frederick H., Bowers, Fredson, and Skrupskelis, Ignas K.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1992–2004. The Correspondence of William James. ed. Skrupskelis, Ignas K. and Berkeley, Elizabeth M.. 12 vols. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
Jerusalem, Wilhelm. 1895. Die Urtheilsfunction: Eine psychologische und erkenntniskritische Untersuchung. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar
Jerusalem, Wilhelm. 1905. Der kritische Idealismus und die reine Logik: Ein Ruf im Streite. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar
Klein, Alexander. 2008. “Divide et Impera! William James’s Pragmatist Tradition in the Philosophy of Science.” Philosophical Topics 36 (1): 129–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Alexander. 2016. “Was James Psychologistic?” Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 4 (5): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Alexander. 2019. “Between Anarchism and Suicide: On William James’s Religious Therapy.” Philosophers’ Imprint 19 (32): 1–18.Google Scholar
Klein, Alexander. 2020. “The Politics of Logic.” Aeon, February 2. https://aeon.co/essays/philosophy-at-war-nationalism-and-logical-analysis.Google Scholar
Klein, Alexander. 2021. “On the Philosophical and Scientific Relationship between Ernst Mach and William James.” In Interpreting Mach: Critical Essays, ed. Preston, John, 103–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kusch, Martin. 2019. “Georg Simmel and Pragmatism.” European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1490.Google Scholar
Lasswitz, Kurd. 1878. Atomistik und Kriticismus: Ein Beitrag zur erkenntnisstheoretischen Grundlegung der Physik. Braunschweig: Vieweg.Google Scholar
Lasswitz, Kurd. 1883. Die Lehre Kants von der Idealität des Raumes und der Zeit im Zusammenhange mit seiner Kritik des Erkennens allgemeinverständlich dargestellt. Berlin: Weidmann.Google Scholar
Lasswitz, Kurd. 1885. “Zur Rechtfertigung der kinetischen Atomistik.” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie 9 (2): 137–61.Google Scholar
Lasswitz, Kurd. 1890. Geschichte der Atomistik vom Mittelalter bis Newton. 2 vols. Hamburg: Voss.Google Scholar
Lotze, Hermann. 1858. Mikrokosmus: Ideen zur Naturgeschichte und Geschichte der Menschheit; Versuch einer Anthropologie. 3 vols. Leipzig: Hirzel.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst. 1883. Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung: Historisch-kritisch dargestellt. Leipzig: Brockhaus.Google Scholar
Menand, Louis. 2001. The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.Google Scholar
Perry, Ralph Barton. 1935. The Thought and Character of William James. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Poincaré, Henri. 1905. La Valeur de la science. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1945. A History of Western Philosophy, and Its Connection with Political and Social Circumstances from the Earliest Times to the Present Day. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Scheffler, Israel. 1974/2012. Four Pragmatists: A Critical Introduction to Peirce, James, Mead, and Dewey. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stadler, Friedrich. 2017. “Ernst Mach and Pragmatism—the Case of Mach’s Popular Scientific Lectures (1895).” In Logical Empiricism and Pragmatism, ed. Pihlström, Sami, Stadler, Friedrich, and Weidtmann, Niels, 3–14. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuhr, John J. 1997. Genealogical Pragmatism: Philosophy, Experience, and Community. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Uebel, Thomas. 2014. “European Pragmatism? Further Thoughts on the German and Austrian Reception of American Pragmatism.” In New Directions in the Philosophy of Science, ed. Galavotti, Maria Carla, Dieks, Dennis, Gonzalez, Wenceslao J., Hartmann, Stephan, Uebel, Thomas, and Weber, Marcel, 627–43. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Uebel, Thomas. 2019. “Wilhelm Jerusalem, the Social Element in His Pragmatism, and Its Antecedent in Völkerpsychologie.” European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1497.Google Scholar
West, Cornel. 1989. The American Evasion of Philosophy: A Genealogy of Pragmatism. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, H. H. 1894. “Kant’s Doctrine of the Schemata.” Monist 4 (3): 375–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willmann, Françoise. 2012. “Leibniz’s Metaphysics as an Epistemological Obstacle to the Mathematization of Nature: The View of a Late 19th Century Neo-Kantian, Kurd Lasswitz.” In New Essays on Leibniz Reception: In Science and Philosophy of Science, 1800–2000, ed. Krömer, Ralf and Chin-Drian, Yannick, 25–39. Basel: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar