The sun., 1909-05-23

excites admiration, all the more that
no glory has accrued TO the men who
have done It. b.
! Mr.. Mathews 10 hopeful and ,enthusi-
astic about the future Of Waterways and
carries his readers with him. 1t is to
be regretted that he seems infected with
the hostility to railroads that Is preva-
flent just now for It weakens somewhat
at times the force Of his arguments His
! hcok is q thorough and intelligent ac-
count Of one Of the greatest struggles
Of man to bring nature into his service.
matter that is likely to engage much
attention in the near future. It presents
the story in an interesting and very read
able form.
PrsSmstism.
The word "pragmatism' is about
thirty years old, and though it is not
exactly popular yet. there are signs and
portents Of It's imminent currency. In
thirty years -optimism' became really
popular but that was owing to the genius
and malice Of voltaire In his 'Candide.'
.Utilitarianisnr probably reached the
crowd sooner, and that without any sup
port from art. Philosophical terms fully
expressive OF the dominant tendencies OF
period, AZ these three are-how soon
they pass from the study to the market
place might yield an interesting COM
parative study. Here We would merely
note the significance as to our contenn-
porary movement Of an excellent little
book entitled What Is Prdgmatisn,r (Mac-
millans), by Assistant Professor j. B.
PRATT Of Williams College.
This book will hardly hasten the popu-
lasization Of .pragmatism,' nor yet i'm
depe it. That is why 1t is significant.
1t is unusually intelligent. clear and fair
minded It is successful in its purpose; 1t
hits the authors opponents squarely and
hard. Yet it is not likely to have much
effect. We do not mean that II is not
likely to be widely read. We can recon-
mend II to the layman as quite oompre-
hensibIs and in the circumstances enter
tanning. 1t deserves to be read; 1t may be
and We hope it will be road; but however
widely 1t is read We doubt its making
much difference. .' t..a.. H.
Prof. William James. with whom on
account OF his mastery treatment Of the
theme historians are likely to associate
apragmatism' rather than with the in
ventor Of the word. Mr.. C. 8. Pierce. who
first published it in the Popular Science
Monthly in is7s-twenty years before
Prof. James took it up-has told us that
-pragmatism is q temper OF mind. an
attihude.- As such he Compares it With
general soeptioism.' and doubtless he
would not refuse to compare 1t with
Optimism or -utilitarianism. As such the
public has understood and welcomed 1t.
This temper of mind may partially be de-
soribed as rebelling against scholastic
hairsplitting, obscure formulas. futile
distractions remote from life and ser
vice. and as insisting upon a more con-
crete, more human. more democratic.
more practical and useful philosophy
than the old netaphysicians issued. But
pragmatism, like optimism or utilitarian-
ism is something else than an attitude OF
mind. Leibnitz gave highly special
ized doctrine OF optimism. John Stuart
Mill OF utilitarisnism. Now Prof. James
tells US about pragmatism that lit is also
= theory OF the nature OF ideas and truth,
and finally theory OF reality
/ When the public adopted the terms
T. optimism and sutilitarianinn' 1t was far
from understanding exactly the niceties
Of Leibnitz's and Mills doctrines, and
we suppose IL does not now have any pre-
else knowledge Of pragmatism as an
ordered system OF thought. 1t is with
this less popular aspect Of pragmatism
that DIR. Pratt chiefly deals in. his book.
BE pretends to find in the attempts Of
James. Schiller, Dewey and others to con-
struct under the influence Of the prag
matte temper of mind a special theory Of
knowledge. truth and belief many logical
contradictions and inconsequences. In
our opinion he does find them. Indeed,
he could hardly miss them, for these
pra gmatists are unquestionably poor dia-
| lecticians, IL only because they despise
| dialectics. DR.. Pratts examination
seems to us eminently judicial and his
charges we'll grounded, and we can
scarcely imagine the defendants them
selves refusing to plead guilty to some OF
them; the hits are 80 palpable. But then
and this is the point to be noted-eon-
viotion on these charges il not likely to
trouble them much or to affect the popu-
lar estimate much. Tho test Of formal
| logic the pragmatists declare null and
void beforehand, and the public has never
had any sympathy with it.
When comparing pragmatism with
| general soepticismr froi. Jamee remarks
OF the latter: .You can no more kill it
on by logic than you can kill of obstinacy
or practical joking. This is why it is 30
irritating He adds: -No more can
logic kill tho pragmatst's behavior.
Mere logic. in fact. is one Of those things
which pragmatism begins by declaring
vapid and futile. DR.. Pratt may most
reasonably denounce the inconsistency
Of this claim in pragmatists who are not
content with temper OF mind but 60
on to build up on logical principles an epis-
temology. and even a metaphysics, ss DR..
Schiller does under the name OF human
ism; to which phases at least, considering
the rules Of their construction. the logical
test might logically expect to be applied.
| Pragmatism. however-and the popular
mind will support it here-turns around
and laughs at this expectation just a. soon
a. 1t becomes inconvenient. 1t admits
the logical test up to . certain point, but
not ultimately. Whether the pragmatio
theory 10 true really says Prof. James.
we cannot warrant; We can only believe
it. In the last resort the prsgmatic
test. both Of an idea and Of q metaphysical
| avatan Ia not ,lo1icnl <onaisfanCv hut