Name:
Lecturer:
Course:
Date:
Philosophy
William James argues that people cannot agree on the meaning of truth. His position is mainly based on religious belief. People have a different opinion regarding different issues. The evidence of something does not necessarily make it true. Scientists and mathematicians may be an exception to this, as they have come up with facts, which people have agreed on over the years. For instance, people agree on tested and tried mathematical formulas. Other things cannot however be proven, yet people are compelled to believe and agree on them. On the meaning of truth, many philosophers and scholars have come up with theories that try to explain it (Peirce and Buchler 13). Some have based the meaning of truth on facts, in accordance with their subjective perceptions; something is true if it can be proven. The pragmatist perspective on the meaning of truth is based on the completion and satisfaction of an inquiry. Truth should remain intact at the end of an inquiry. If an inquiry changes what was generally held as facts, then the facts were not true. For instance, people believed that the earth was flat until an inquiry led one person to question the truthfulness of this fact.
The significance of people’s agreement concerning the meaning of truth is evident in their daily lives. People do not agree on the same issues, thus, they have different beliefs. In fact, it seems that everybody is always pursuing truth (Beckman 9). Although this does not necessarily involve religion, James offers a religious definition and overtime, it has led to the discovery of many religions. Initially, most individuals were Muslims, Jews, Christians or Hindus. Christianity was the main religion in many parts of the world. Presently, people’s beliefs have changed in their pursuit for truth. Vast new religions have been instituted with the followers believing that they are following truth. People no longer want to believe in something that is based on faith alone, but they want evidence of something tangible and proven, for instance Christian Science.
People pursue truth in other areas as well and in pursuit of the same, believe that they are according new meaning to truth. Note that, just as people can look at the same evidence and come to completely different results, people perceive the world in different ways. Another good example apart from religion is the environment. Some individuals are interested in conserving it, to the extent that they can be fanatical about their views and propositions. Such individuals will move to push legislation deterring others from certain practices like the use of plastic bags. Interestingly, they do not actually provide a solution to the problem – if there is any problem at all. Others may still be concerned about the environment but in a different aspect like animal rights (Peregrin11). They will seek ways to develop solutions to the existing problem, sometimes coming up with diverse ideas to deal with the issue. Another section of the populace may note even seem concerned with the environment in any way, arguing that there are more vital and pressing issues to handle. For instance, while some are pushing for the total ban on plastics, others see it as a demerit since it hinders the wellbeing of the underprivileged people around the world since plastics are affordable. All these groups of people have different views on the meaning of the truth concerning the environment. They however pursue the truth in different ways.
According to James, there are three kinds of people: skeptics, absolutists and empiricists. He asserts that it is the destiny of people to attain the truth. James argues that within the given groups, skeptics will not make it to attain this destiny of truth attainment. Although the absolutists and the empiricists have faith to seek truth, they search for it in different ways. Absolutists believe that people can know the truth and they can be certain about their knowledge. For the empiricists they believe that people can know the truth but they cannot be certain that they have attained it. The distinguishing factor is embedded in knowing and being certain of one’s knowledge. James submits that, in both cases, people know about something and they are aware about their knowledge; the only difference is in the level of certainty.
In the pursuit of truth, people are bound to make errors. James makes it clear that knowing truth and avoiding error are two different things altogether and considers them separable laws, although most individuals view them as analogous functions. He urges people to believe the truth and shun error (Peregrin 27). This is not always easy and may be conflicting at times. In seeking truth, people end up making errors and while attempting to avoid errors, people end up missing the truth. James urges people to consider whether truth is genuine or erroneous before deciding whether to pursue it. He defines genuine truth as that which is living, forced and momentous. When truth is not genuine, he advises that people should seek to avoid error rather than pursue the given truth. However, when people are faced with an option of gaining and losing the truth in genuine cases, they should seek to pursue the truth.
James claims that people do not usually believe in facts and theories that they have no use. This is echoed by Peirce, who stipulates that people are interested in believing what matters to them. People’s beliefs are determined by what they know and what they are interested in knowing. Peirce is of the opinion that what people believe will guide their desires and shape their actions (Peirce and Buchler 9). Belief is therefore important in people’s lives as it involves many aspects. Belief shapes the way that people see the world around them since it determines their desires. Peirce continues in this respect and notes that beliefs do not necessarily propel people into action instantly upon acquisition. It however ensures that people behave in a certain way when the time comes for them to do so. This can be evidenced by daily activities. People believe many things but they may not necessarily act on them. For instance, most individuals have strong beliefs concerning politics yet they do not however act on the given standpoint at all times. They wait for an opportune time such as voting or any other time when their opinion is required. Therefore, beliefs influence the way people see the world around them. People’s beliefs are not influenced by what they see but by what they know and what they consider true.
James holds that “a belief is accepted as true, if and only if it is consistent with previously held beliefs or causes a minimal change in the stock of old beliefs” (Peregrin 38). People have a choice regarding which beliefs to accept as true. They can be subjective in choosing what to believe especially in cases where objective selection does not prove to be of any use. This applies in many cases where people are not dealing with proven scientific and mathematical facts. Thus, people’s beliefs are not always true. Peirce contrasts the beliefs held by an individual with those held by the community. He argues that under authority, people should not regard the opinion held by an individual as true beliefs but they should regard the opinion held by the community as true belief. The community is thus involved in influencing people’s beliefs.
When authority is affected and the beliefs that it once upheld disintegrate or fail, the people are forced to question the given belief (Beckman 16). Therefore, although a community has its beliefs and it influences individuals to trust in them, they are not always true since they can be questioned and changed. Believing that the community or authorities act as the only able people in the definition of truth is problematic. Logically, there are many communities and governments and this would compel people to believe that their authorities are the only ones capable of knowing and influencing people towards the right belief. This is detrimental to the development of that society since it limits them from gaining from exposure and knowledge of forwarded by other societies, nations and people. Common sense therefore dictates that people should be willing to accept the opinion and knowledge posited by others. However, this does not necessarily mean that they should hold the given beliefs are true.
Yearly, if not daily, individuals have led to the development of new truths, taking us to the empiricists’ view of the truth, which implies that people cannot be certain of the knowledge and the truth that they have attained. This perception can be dangerous since authorities may try to influence and oblige people into following certain beliefs. For instance, a society, which believes that people should die for minor crimes, is influencing the people to have no respect for human life. Note that, experiences do not necessarily lead people into agreeing with the truth. Many people have heard similar experiences that have bred various perspectives as concerned with truth (Beckman 19). If this were the case, people would not repeat some mistakes since they would know the truth concerning the consequences of the given actions. The empiricist theory of truth suggests that people determine what is true using the five senses. However, this is not usually the case since individuals bear varying perceptions. Two people may look at one thing and see it in different ways. They may smell and taste things differently. Experience cannot therefore be relied upon when deciding the truth.
In conclusion, it is hard for people to agree on a single truth based on experience and belief. Belief requires a person to have evidence of what they hold as true. Perhaps, the distinction of experience has to do with scientific evidence. Peirce observes that the experience of scientific methods has not led people to doubt it. It has contributed to people settling their opinions and differences in numerous instances (Peirce and Buchler 19). However, not all things can be solved using scientific methods and this includes personal relationships. James is therefore correct when he assumes the position that it is difficult to find a consensus within the global and regional populaces concerning the meaning of truth.
Works Cited
Beckman, Tad. Comments on Peirce Texts. 2000. Web. 14 September 2011.
James, Williams. The Will to Believe. n. d. Web. 14 September 2011.
Peirce, Charles, and Buchler Justus. Philosophical Writings of Peirce. Mineola: Courier Dover Publications, 1955. Print
Peregrin, Jaroslav. Truth and its Nature (if any). New York: Springer, 1997. Print
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]