Abstract

Pragmatism can be divided between classical American pragmatism and contemporary neopragmatism. The classical pragmatists were a diverse group of thinkers. Their similarities can only be put in the most general terms: an emphasis on practice over theory; a thoroughgoing naturalism. Less diverse are the neo‐pragmatists, as they share an idea about what views of the classical pragmatists are worth preserving. They are all naturalists; they are all non‐foundationalists about justification. The interaction between the classical pragmatism and hermeneutics has been minimal. Classical pragmatism developed its own theory of signs that became a general theory of interpretation and theory of the centrality of interpretation in knowledge acquisition. Contemporary neo‐pragmatism has been influenced by philosophical hermeneutics. Some of the main figures have presented their own theories of textual interpretation that echo themes in philosophical hermeneutics, though developed from a distinctively pragmatic perspective.