Chandigarh, Sept 17 — When American philosopher William James stood before a lecture hall at Harvard in the late 1800s, he put forward a strikingly simple idea: truth, he said, is not some eternal, untouchable concept but something tested by experience and shaped by its usefulness in real life. That idea — pragmatism — would become one of the most influential schools of thought born in the United States.
More than a century later, pragmatism still resonates in unexpected places: from classrooms where teachers experiment with new methods, to boardrooms where companies decide strategies, and even in politics, where leaders are often judged not by ideology but by results.
Pragmatism emerged in the late 19th century through the writings of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and John Dewey. It was America’s original contribution to philosophy, contrasting sharply with Europe’s metaphysical traditions.
Peirce, a mathematician and logician, first proposed what he called the “pragmatic maxim”: to understand the meaning of a concept, look at its practical effects. William James, often seen as the movement’s popularizer, went further, arguing that beliefs become true not because they correspond to some abstract reality, but because they “work” in guiding human action.
“Truth happens to an idea. It becomes true, is made true by events,” James wrote in Pragmatism (1907), his most famous lecture series.
John Dewey, meanwhile, extended the philosophy into education and democracy. For him, schools were laboratories of learning, and democratic societies should be judged by how well they solved collective problems. “Democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living,” Dewey once remarked.
Unlike other philosophies that chase eternal truths or metaphysical certainties, pragmatism keeps its feet firmly on the ground. It asks a basic question: Does this idea or belief help us solve a problem?
Dr. Kavita Sharma, a Delhi-based philosophy professor, explains it this way: “If you tell a pragmatist that a new teaching method is the ‘right’ one, they’ll ask — does it improve learning outcomes? If yes, then it has truth-value. If not, it needs to be discarded.”
This flexibility, scholars say, makes pragmatism more of a method than a rigid doctrine. It doesn’t claim to provide ultimate answers but encourages experimentation, testing, and adaptation.
Not everyone has been comfortable with pragmatism. Critics argue that it reduces truth to mere expediency. British philosopher Bertrand Russell once accused pragmatists of confusing what is useful with what is true. Others fear it can slide into relativism — the idea that anything “useful” can be considered true, even if it’s misleading or harmful.
But defenders respond that pragmatism doesn’t deny reality; it only insists that human knowledge of reality is always provisional, always subject to revision when experience shows otherwise.
Outside the ivory tower, pragmatism often goes unnoticed — yet it shapes how people make decisions daily. A farmer who experiments with new irrigation techniques and sticks with what gives the best crop yield is practicing pragmatism. A start-up founder who pivots from one business model to another based on customer feedback embodies the same spirit.
“Most of us are pragmatists without knowing it,” said Dr. Anirudh Sen, a management consultant in Gurugram. “We try things, we see what works, we adapt. That’s exactly the pragmatic cycle.”
In politics, the language of pragmatism often surfaces when leaders position themselves as problem-solvers rather than ideologues. Voters, too, sometimes respond less to abstract promises and more to whether policies deliver tangible improvements.
In India, political analysts often describe leaders who focus on development and governance — regardless of party line — as taking a pragmatic approach. “Pragmatism in politics is about prioritising what works for the people, even if it means compromising on ideology,” said analyst Shweta Kapoor.
Perhaps nowhere did pragmatism find such fertile ground as in education. John Dewey’s ideas about experiential learning influenced generations of teachers worldwide. Instead of rote memorisation, Dewey argued, children should learn by doing, testing, and reflecting — the same cycle of inquiry that pragmatism champions.
In recent years, educators in India have also drawn from Deweyan principles. Pilot programs that encourage project-based learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving are modern echoes of Dewey’s pragmatic vision.
In an age of rapid change — from artificial intelligence to climate challenges — some scholars suggest pragmatism may be more relevant than ever. “We live in times where fixed answers often don’t exist. We need flexible, adaptive thinking, and that’s precisely what pragmatism offers,” said Dr. Sharma.
The COVID-19 pandemic offered one example. Governments, scientists, and communities often had to make decisions with incomplete information, relying on what seemed to work best at the moment. Masks, vaccines, lockdowns — each was judged by its practical outcomes in saving lives. “That was pragmatism in action, whether people realised it or not,” said Sen.
While philosophers continue to debate its finer points, pragmatism’s legacy lies in its resilience. More than a century after its birth, it remains a living, evolving approach — shaping thought in philosophy, psychology, law, education, and business.
William James once described pragmatism as “a new name for some old ways of thinking.” In many ways, he was right. Human beings have always judged ideas by their results. Pragmatism simply gave that instinct a philosophical framework.
As the crowds in that Harvard lecture hall discovered more than 100 years ago, it is a philosophy that refuses to float in the clouds. Instead, it stays rooted in the earth, in the messiness of life, asking the same practical question every time: Does it work?
