Background: Mixed methods approaches are now extensively employed in nursing and other health care research. : 225). URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/1547; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1547, Universität Tübingenmatthias.neuber[at]uni-tuebingen.de. A Winter Revery,” The Monist, 18, 298-306. , Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press. John, (1905), “The Realism of Pragmatism,”, Essays in Critical Realism: A Co-Operative Study in the Problem of Knowledge, (eds), (1910), “The Program and First Platform of Six Realists,”, The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, The New Realism: Cooperative Studies in Philosophy, William, (1904), “Does Consciousness Exist?,”, Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, A Pluralistic Universe. Also his seminal lecture series, from 1907 and especially his 1909 monograph, However, it was John Dewey who most firmly stressed the. (Ibid. 18 Boodin refers here implicitly to James’s Essays in Radical Empiricism from 1912. On Boodin’s reading, energetics provides us with the essential tools for bridging the gap between “the” subjective and “the” objective. It is only when pursued in this spirit that metaphysics can take rank as a science, and, at least in its ideal, as the science of sciences. (Boodin 1934: 148). Accordingly, metaphysics “implies, and furnishes the inspirations of, the special sciences” (ibid.). However, as Sellars repeatedly stressed (see, for example, Sellars 1924: 383), there existed two “wings” within the critical realist movement: a metaphysical (“essentialist”) wing, primarily represented by the work of Santayana, and an empirical (“naturalist”) wing, primarily represented by Sellars’s own contributions. 2 Werkmeister writes in this connection: “James was instrumental in preparing the way for realism. It “deals with the common and overlapping problems, left over by the special sciences” and it “must ever be present as a regulative ideal in all our search for truth”, Just as in “Pragmatic Realism,” Boodin defines “being” in terms of energetics (cf. Moreover, the critical realist movement joined in the format of cooperative publication as already executed by the new realists’ 1912 volume. This was the year when Boodin’s “Functional Realism” appeared in. James’s account of experience as “self-sufficient” (ibid.) He obviously knew of Peirce’s 1905 contribution for. Whereas, is, Boodin writes, “a volume on metaphysics”, . The following passages from James’s 1907 lecture series might corroborate this diagnosis: “Pragmatism […] asks its usual question. There, he primarily studied with the American idealist Josiah Royce and came in closer (friendship-like) contact with James. To be sure, the bifurcation of thing and environment figured prominently within the framework of, realism, there is no such bifurcation. 48However, a more charitable reading would account for the fact that the systematical and historical relation of pragmatism and realism, as it were, provoked the sort of eclectic fusion to be found in Boodin’s later work. And he continues: When he wrote the 1908 paper, Boodin already had a professorship at the University of Kansas. In 1932-33 he had already served as president of the American Philosophical Association, Western Division. In his opinion, “the doctrine commonly put forward as ‘pragmatism’ may be said to be a changeling, substituted almost in the cradle” (Lovejoy 1920: 80). Rather, things possess properties “only within a system, and such properties vary with the conditions which determine the system” (1916: 35). When this is accomplished, they drop out; and things are present to the agent in the most naïvely realistic fashion. Even during his lifetime, Boodin had the impression that his philosophical contributions were not sufficiently appreciated. His own approach, Boodin maintains, “has little in common with it [i.e., new realism; M.N.] The ultimate reality is the world of physical objects. I have met him repeatedly and have felt the sympathetic charm of his personality. It was the greatest disappointment of his life that this did not happen.” (Nelson 1984: 145). John E. Boodin will be remembered by the readers of, for his article ‘Philosophic Tolerance’ (April, 1908) in which he supported the pragmatism of Professor James. As I understand this method it means simply to carry the scientific spirit into metaphysics. : 606) and therefore to be abandoned. Peirce, for example, published many of his most important papers for The Monist. 3 It is, by the way, quite difficult to determine what the distinctive characteristic of “European” pragmatism could be. Difference between Idealism and Realism. For example, physical properties such as weight, for Boodin, do not exist in the abstract. As nouns the difference between realist and pragmatist is that realist is (philosophy) an advocate of realism; one who believes that matter, objects etc have real existence beyond our perception of them while pragmatist is one who acts in a practical or straightforward manner; one who is pragmatic; one who values practicality or pragmatism. Thus the weight of a body varies at different points of the surface of the earth; it is, in other words, a function of the attraction of the earth. There he studied philosophy and received his master’s degree in 1896. 28It was in Volume No. Accordingly, science, from the pragmatist point of view, is “a systematic sorting of experience in the realization of our interests” (, The following passages from James’s 1907 lecture series might corroborate this diagnosis: “Pragmati. Boodin writes: Do we come to a limit in our division where we have to deal with a final natural unity? in 1937. Its verity is in fact an event, a process: the process namely of its verifying itself, its veri-fication.” (James [1907] 2017: 74). Rather, “[t]he thing must suggest an own center of energy”, . Thus in an article from 1905, titled “The Realism of Pragmatism,” Dewey points out: It should be noted that the very term “critical realism” was used by Sellars as early as 1908 (see, It is a well-known fact that, in the further course of the twentieth century, pragmatism became the predominant philosophical current in the United States (cf. Metaphysics is science, not art.” (1916: xxi). Boodin John Elof, (1939), The Social Mind: Foundations of Social Philosophy, New York, Macmillan. In 1932-33 he had already served as president of the American Philosophical Association, Western Division. It was he who encouraged the younger men in the field to break with tradition, to explore new possibilities and new horizons.” (Werkmeister 1949: 371). However, the prevailing attitude toward pragmatism in the critical realist camp was unfavorable. One who believes in seeing things the way they really are, as opposed to how they would like them to be. 26It is clearly Royce’s version of idealism to which Boodin is alluding in the last two sentences of that passage. Whether we can realize it or not only the historical outcome of the pragmatic test can prove.” (, In this case, too, an Editorial Comment was attached. (Nelson 1984: 137), 3In 1897, Boodin eventually entered Harvard (on a Hopkins scholarship). These philosophies coincide with its own unique concepts, in which describes the approach that a teacher can take in imparting knowledge upon students. James’s account of experience as “self-sufficient”. At any rate, Boodin’s contributions to the complex discussion of realism, pragmatism, and their mutual relationship are worth reconsidering. 24On the whole, Boodin applauds the Jamesian variant of pragmatism. Hibbert Lectures at Manchester College on the Present Situation in Philosophy, New York, Logmans, Green. 13 In James’s words, the same message reads thus: “The ‘absolutely’ true, meaning what no farther experience will ever alter, is that ideal vanishing-point towards which we imagine that all our temporary truths will some day converge. Boodin knew no English when he arrived in Colchester, Illinois, in 1887. This traditional form of the distinction between realism and its opposite underwent changes during the 1970s and 1980s, largely due to Michael Dummett’s proposal that realism and antirealism (the latter term being his own coinage) were more productively understood in terms of two opposed theories of meaning. (Boodin 1911a: 85). It will be shown that Boodin’s work underwent a development from a more or less direct form of pragmatism to a certain variant of realism, which Boodin himself called “functional” realism. Boodin John Elof, (1916), A Realistic Universe: An Introduction to Metaphysics, New York, Macmillan. […] Pragmatism believes that in knowledge as a fact, an accomplished matter, things are “representative of another.” Ideas, sensations, mental states are, in their cognitive significance, media of so adjusting things to one another that they become representative of one another. Neuber Matthias, (2002), “Physics Without Pictures? However, James’s influence upon them was obviously the trend-setting factor. 4. Lewis Clarence I., (1929), Mind and the World Order: Outline of Theory of Knowledge, New York, Scribner’s. the sort of eclectic fusion to be found in Boodin’s later work. We will come back to this point in a moment. Realism looks at the stage as it is set in the world and goes through scenarios based on risk, reward and based on outcomes: the essenti. As nouns the difference between pragmatism and realism is that pragmatism is the pursuit of practicality over aesthetic qualities; a concentration on facts rather than emotions or ideals while realism is a concern for fact or reality and rejection of the impractical … A Winter Revery.” It appeared in, had appeared in 1907. 14), did not contribute to that volume. Nelson Charles H., (1984), “John Elof Boodin. the Pragmatist,” Lovejoy’s paper may be considered as one of the most unrelenting critiques of the pragmatist point of view. More generally, “[p]roperties have no meaning for science, except as energy determinations, characteristics within energy systems” (ibid. : 83). His personality as well as his philosophy had a marked and far-reaching influence upon a whole generation of American thinkers. For the time being, it is important to note that, according to Boodin, any talk of truth requires some basis in the extra-mental realm. Realism: "concern for fact or reality and rejection of the impractical and visionary." It will be shown that Boodin’s philosophical development ran through various stages, beginning with more or less “orthodox” pragmatism and ending with what he labeled “functional” realism. Boodin 1916: 3). Realism and Idealism are two competing philosophies in the field of education. Thus, if at all, then functional realism stood in sharp contrast to the essentialist version of critical realism. Drake Durant, Lovejoy Arthur O., Pratt James B., Rogers Arthur K., Santayana George, Wood Sellars Roy & Charles A. There were many. Post-positivism, experiential realism and pragmatism Leave a comment. Maybe the present volume helps to come closer to an answer to that question. Our next task will be to determine what he made out of this kind of situation. Peirce himself tells us “the one intelligible theory of ; 1 Pragmatism has long been recognized to have close ties to Idealism. Metaphysics is science, not art.” (1916: xxi). And in recent years interesting experiments have been made by Rutherford and others to prove the real existence of the atom. James William, (1909), A Pluralistic Universe. Laying the focus on what is implied by a realistic – in contrast to an idealistic – point of view, he declares: Leaving out all reference to the metaphysical stuff for the time being, realism means the reference to an object existing beyond the apperceptive unity of momentary individual consciousness, and that this object can make a difference to that consciousness so as to be known. Source(s): difference pragmatism realism: https://tr.im/I2zHB. He writes: It was certainly this very passage that provoked the following critical comment by the journal’s editors: See, in this connection, his extended critique of James’s variant of pragmatism in Carus 1908. Moreover, his Harvard student fellows, such as Holt, Montague or Perry, attempted to interpret James’s account of pragmatism within a realistic framework.2 Accordingly, a fusion of pragmatism and realism seemed to be en vogue among the younger Harvard generation. Yet, the philosophical scenario in the 1910s and 1920s was quite complex. “In art,” he maintains, “the selective activity is for the sake of permanent objects of enjoyment; in metaphysics, for the sake of understanding. : 629). Boodin therefore declares: “We must hold to the pragmatic postulate that energy is what it does.” (Ibid.). is titled “Pragmatic Energism.” By “energism” Boodin understands a thoroughly realistic interpretation of the concept of energy. As concerns his primary sources of inspiration, he mentions James, Royce and “the vitalizing influence in our country of its great teacher, John Dewey, and the Chicago School” (1916: ix). As, on the other hand, Werkmeister makes it particularly clear, Royce’s variant of idealism was by no means the only idealistic statement at that time. This plan didn’t work out, but Boodin received a funded scholarship at nearby Brown University. Matter is applicable only within a limited field. In order to adequately understand this shift in philosophical perspective, it is important to take into account both Boodin’s intellectual socialization in the United States and the surrounding philosophical context. And the only key to external reality is what we must take it as, in the realization of our purposes. 18Boodin is extremely enthusiastic about the prospects of this whole enterprise. In A Realistic Universe he changes this sort of attitude in favor of what might be called a scientifically informed account of metaphysics. At one of the Philosophy Club’s meetings, James gave a talk titled “Is Life Worth Living?”. Now Boodin’s attitude in “Pragmatic Realism” was, as we have seen, non-metaphysical. Pragmatism is a philosophy that “only those things that are experienced or observed are real.” Unlike realism and idealism, pragmatism suggests that reality constantly changes and best learned when experienced. Remember that American realism had emerged in two forms, “new” and “critical” realism. The critical realists – philosophers such as Durant Drake, George Santayana, Roy Wood Sellars and the already mentioned Arthur O. Lovejoy – shared the neo-realists’ rejection of idealism. Inspired by James’s “Does Consciousness Exist?” (1904), authors such as Holt, Montague, and Perry had joined forces, in order to promote what they called “new” realism.5 The attribute “new” had partially to do with the fact that the members of that group saw themselves as participating to the new scientific endeavor (informed by both psychology and the natural sciences) which demanded a more robust realist epistemology. As Sellars further points out, critical realism is a “mediate” (77) position. According to Nelson, “Boodin lived in the continual hope that times would change and that people would increasingly look to his work […] as a source of sanity, value, and enlightenment. As Sellars makes it clear in his Evolutionary Naturalism (1922), the critical realist “is very sympathetic with the position of the pragmatist, albeit he thinks that many pragmatists are too utilitarian and do not value enough, or sufficiently admit, a theoretical interest in knowledge” (Sellars 1922: 55-6). Boodin knew no English when he arrived in Colchester, Illinois, in 1887. 15 Editorial Comment to Boodin (1910: 615). I have met him repeatedly and have felt the sympathetic charm of his personality. 6. Summing up thus far, it can be stated that Boodin, when he entered the American philosophical scene, encountered a confusing, if not chaotic, diversity of programs, movements and related -isms. In James’s words, the same message reads thus: “The ‘absolutely’ true, meaning what no farther experience will ever alter, is that ideal vanishing-point towards which we imagine that all our temporary truths will some day converge. Pragmatism is based on four things: possibility, probability, feasibility and immediate effectiveness. We believe that it has its weak points, and it is our intention to publish in the coming number of The Monist a critical discussion of pragmatism as a system of philosophy. John Elof, (1908), “Philosophic Tolerance. insofar as they aimed at a more reflected approach to the issue of cognition (especially perception) than our everyday’s “naïve” as well as philosophical “new” realism. It is simply the application of the ordinary method of the scientific testing of an hypothesis to philosophic hypotheses as well. (1916: xvii). Philosopher-Poet,”, Matthias, (2002), “Physics Without Pictures? We have at least found a motive for our ideas seeking agreement with their intended reality, for successful adjustment in the end depends upon such agreement. Boodin John Elof, (1910), “Pragmatic Realism,” The Monist, 20, 602-14. Moreover, his Harvard student fellows, such as Holt, Montague or Perry, attempted to interpret James’s account of pragmatism within a realistic framework. And he did not remain unrecognized. It is not applicable, for example, to electricity; while energy with its equivalences of transformation can be made to cover the whole extent of process, material and immaterial, physical and psychological. 22As Boodin further makes it clear, the pragmatist holds that the truth of a hypothesis stands in close connection to human habit and conduct. For Quine, the terms in theories only have meaning within those particular theories, and a decision about which “meaning” to adopt is a decision in the same order as a, decision about which “theory” to adopt. At the same time he speaks of “my friend Royce” (1908: 303), mentions the latter’s “absolute idealism” (1908: 300) and suggests that “[i]deals may prove truer than facts”, . It was particularly Sellars who, in his. James William, (1912), Essays in Radical Empiricism, New York, Longmans, Green. For a comprehensive account of Boodin’s life and work, see Nelson 1984 (on which I primarily draw h. John Elof Boodin was born in Pjätteryd, Småland (Southern Sweden), in 1869. Boodin John Elof, (1911b), Truth and Reality: An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge, New York, Macmillan. & Edward G. Spaulding (eds), (1912), The New Realism: Cooperative Studies in Philosophy, New York, Macmillan. Dating back to ancient Greece, these theories influence the philosophy of education to this day. It is all but astonishing that Boodin continues thus: ’s editors (most probably Carus) laconically commented upon this claim by raising the following question: “If pragmatism avowedly accepts the scientific method, would it not be better to call it the ‘Philosophy of Science’?” (Editorial Comment to Boodin 1910: 614). Regarding their relation to pragmatism, the critical realists no doubt saw certain affinities. Being one of nineteen children of a farmers family (his father had married twice), he, at the age of 18, decided (like a couple of his siblings) to emigrate to the United States. The principle aim of this paper was to establish “functional” realism as a “third way” within the realist movement. Boodin attended the talk. He points out: While such a theory, with abundant illustrations from natural science, accounts for how knowledge can control the world of processes, it leaves us in the dark as to the real question – the relevancy of knowledge to its object. They both assume that to say that substances and qualities exist independently of the environment has a meaning. However, Carus’s own philosophical outlook was that of a Spinozist and a Buddhist (cf. Right at the beginning he makes the following critical statement: Naïve [i.e., new; M.N] and critical realism have one fundamental assumption in common. And the same holds true for the following passage (although it could likewise be read before the Peircean background): In James’s words, the same message reads thus: “The ‘absolutely’ true, meaning what no farther expe, On the whole, Boodin applauds the Jamesian variant of pragmatism. On the other hand, it should be seen that his entire academic education took place in the United States. It is for this reason that Boodin assumes that things cannot be infinitely divisible. It is a place where everybody has something to do. Besides idealism, neo-realism, and pragmatism there existed a further influential movement, namely so-called, realism. There he studied philosophy and received his master’s degree in 1896. 14 In this case, too, an Editorial Comment was attached. It is apparent that Boodin seeks some sort of “idealized” as well as “humanized” conception of reality and truth. However, James’s theory of. Accordingly, science, from the pragmatist point of view, is “a systematic sorting of experience in the realization of our interests” (ibid. Holt Edwin B., Marvin Walter T., Montague William P., Perry Ralph B., Pitkin Walter B. : 50). Holt, Montague and Perry all had studied under Royce at Harvard. 0 0. d_r_siva. Whether we can realize it or not only the historical outcome of the pragmatic test can prove.” (Ibid. He argued: An hypothesis, whether of atoms or morals, God or devil, is true because it works. It should be noted that Ostwald – unlike Boodin – not only rejected materialism, but also atomism. His model shaped the modern classroom that … Among Boodin’s fellow graduate students were the later influential realist philosophers Arthur O. Lovejoy, William Pepperell Montague, Edwin B. Holt, and Ralph Barton Perry. I wish him all possible success and the honor of merited renown. In the preface to that volume, the authors pointed out: Furthermore, they demarcated their understanding of the term “critical” from the, As for the movement’s label, the critical realists were. In its opening paragraph the following is cla, In 1910, Boodin’s paper “Pragmatic Realism” appeared in Volume No. 30In Truth and Reality, Boodin attempted to tackle this sort of challenge. Hibbert Lectures at Manchester College on the Present Situation in Philosophy, A History of Philosophy in America, 1720-2000, Mind and the World Order: Outline of Theory of Knowledge, Arthur O., (1908), “The Thirteen Pragmatisms,”. Maybe his Swedish rural growing up, as it were, predestined him in terms of viewing the world from a primarily realistic point of view. Rather, idealism was a multifaceted movement. However, the prevailing attitude toward pragmatism in the critical realist camp was unfavorable. Indeed, there have been arguments that pragmatism must itself be a form of idealism.1 I do not think such arguments hold up, but I would not deny for a second that there is a deep relationship between idealism and pragmatism. 10It can hardly surprise that statements like these provoked a realist reaction. Here worship is work and work is worship. 3. (Ibid.). They make, at the outset, a bifurcation of thing and environment as though they were only externally related. 15 of, , published in 1909. an exposition of his views without reference to the controversy in question.” (Editorial Comment to Boodin 1910: 614). But for all that I can not agree with or accept the philosophy of the great Harvard Professor, and I go so far as to look upon its wide acceptance as a symptom of the immaturity and naivite that obtains sometimes even in the professional circles of our universities. “Truth in science is what gives us the maximum possible sum of satisfaction, taste included, but consistency both with previous truth and with novel fact is always the most imperious claimant.” (Ibid. Carus 1908; M.N.]. (Drake et al. Misak 2013). There were many kinds of idealism (and many pre-eminent idealists) in the United States around the 1890s, such as the Hegelian-inspired St. Louis Group around Henry C. Brokmeyer and William Harris, the “personalisms” of Borden Parker Bowne and George H. Howison and several explicitly religious versions of idealism. Ultimate reality is utility. Truth is objective-what can be observed. Sellars Roy Wood, (1922), Evolutionary Naturalism, Chicago, Open Court. Peirce, for example, published many of his most important papers for. This becomes obvious from his rejection of Kantian “things-in-themselves” (cf. At any rate, Boodin starts his article with the following characterization: In the first place, pragmatism as a doctrine is so simple and so old as a matter of scientific procedure that it is impossible to understand why so much dust should have been raised about it by its opponents. “In art,” he maintains, “the selective activity is for the sake of permanent objects of enjoyment; in metaphysics, for the sake of understanding. On the whole, Boodin’s philosophical work fell into oblivion with the death of its author. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. But the artists get practice and the temple is first of all a school for artists. 40Ontologically, atoms, according to Boodin, have the status of energy centers: they must be conceived as “more or less stable dynamic clusters within dynamic systems” (ibid. The principle aim of this paper was to establish “functional” realism as a “third way” within the realist movement. The Social Mind: Foundations of Social Philosophy. Realism. With all due respect for Professor James, for whose extraordinary and fine personality I cherish an unbounded admiration, I must confess that I would deem it a misfortune if his philosophy would ever exercise a determining and permanent influence upon the national life of our country.” (Carus 1908: 361-2). Suzuki 1962). It is for this reason that Boodin assumes that things cannot be infinitely divisible. His main target in “Functional Realism” is George Santayana’s. A certain form of atomism recommends itself. Most people who are in government are pragmatists and therefore politicians. In the preface to that book he made the following announcement: In the bewildering amount of discussion and misunderstanding to which the pragmatic movement has led, there is need for fresh emphasis of the main issues. It runs on all fours with the perfectly wise man, and with the absolutely complete experience.” (James 2017 [1907]: 82). John E. Boodin will be remembered by the readers of The Monist for his article ‘Philosophic Tolerance’ (April, 1908) in which he supported the pragmatism of Professor James. Would Boodin have focused on Sellars’s account of critical realism, his critique, I maintain, would not have worked. As, on the other hand, Werkmeister makes it particularly clear, Royce’s variant o, Before discussing the details and the development of Boodin’s philosophical position, it is instructive to take a brief look at the surrounding philosophical context. James’s “Does Consciousness Exist?” is a good example in this respect. “In it,” Sellars writes, “both pragmatism of a chastened sort and neo-realism of a less doctrinaire type may ultimately find the satisfaction of their insights.”, . 16Boodin’s chronologically first publication to be considered here is a paper titled “Philosophic Tolerance. Besides idealism, neo-realism, and pragmatism there existed a further influential movement, namely so-called critical realism. Each one is allowed to choose his own task, make his own plan and fix his own salary. Consequently, “we cannot resolve reality, whether conscious or unconscious, into bundles of perception, or into experience of any form, altogether. Professor Boodin has not made use of the invitation, but prefers to offer to the readers of The Monist an exposition of his views without reference to the controversy in question.” (Editorial Comment to Boodin 1910: 614). from 1923 (see Boodin 1934: 149-57). 38It is at this very point that, according to Boodin, pragmatism and realism coincide. He argued: Apparently, pragmatism stood in need of being defended (or at least of being clarified) against its opponents. In fact, the actual problem is to understand why Boodin thinks his own approach needs to be so sharply distinguished from critical realism. James’s conception of philosophy stands, according to Boodin, in that very tradition. 6 For the latter, see the insightful reconstruction in Slater 2011. And he did not remain unrecognized.