pragmatism is fine in theory, not in practice
used to remind us the sage of columbia (yes usa) sid morgenbesser...
palma, a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ
On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 3:50 AM Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
*I’m continuing to read Misak’s Frank Ramsey (am on page 130 of 508) – not
finding quite what I expected, at least so far, but am developing an
interest in other things Misak is writing about.*
*I acquired her Cambridge Pragmatism, from Peirce and James to Ramsey and
Wittgenstein. This book was published in 2016, four years before Frank
Ramsey,* *and so should provide more perspective and has (still not what
I expected, but interesting), e.g., *
*Ramsey is usually described as being influenced by Wittgenstein, but
Misak argues that Wittgenstein was just as much influenced by Ramsey.*
*Ramsey has been described as being completely original, but Misak shows
that he was influenced by Peirce. In 1923 he got a copy of Peirce’s works
and read it carefully. In the beginning of his Truth and Probability he
quotes from Peirce, and refers to him at the end as well. Much of Truth
and Probability, according to Misak, is straight out of Peirce. *
*Just as the British don’t wish American historians to “over play”
America’s role in WWII, so have British philosophers downplayed the
influence of any American Pragmatist on Ramsey. Misak (born, I think in
Montana) is setting them straight. **J*
*Just as Ramsey got much of his Truth and Probability from Peirce, so did
Misak get quite a bit of her Frank Ramsey from Ray Monk’s Ludwig
Wittgenstein, which Jessica (when she was a puppy) ripped the cover from,
chewed up one of the corners and then, perhaps because I yelled at her,
peed on. However the pages are all intact. Misak does reference Monk in
both her Cambridge Pragmatism and Frank Ramsey bibliographies. *
*My personal uninformed view after having been away for a long time from
any serious reading that might be considered even vaguely philosophical is
that modern day Pragmatism should adjust itself (and maybe it has) to
discoveries in genetics and hypotheses in anthropology. It is
understandable that James, Peirce and Ramsey would look for 10,000 (or so)
year-old human motives in regard to truth and choices of action, but if we
presuppose (as we must) homo sapiens having existed for about 200,000
years, and having descended from functionally competent species before that
stretching back a few million years, then it is difficult to escape the
hypothesis that at least some of our choices, opinions, and beliefs have
been conditioned by our very successful ancestors. . . IMO. *
*Peirce (born in 1839) and James (born in 1842) wrote in the 1870s. Frank
Ramsey was born in 1903. Peirce was a curmudgeon that other scholars
wanted little to do with and so his works, even today, haven’t received
proper scholarly treatment. Peirce died in 1914 and so for Ramsey to be
reading a potpourri of his writing sin 1923 doesn’t seem surprising, I
suppose. *
*Lawrence*
