Pragmaticism and Idealism

'Pragmaticism' and 'Idealism' are commonly thought to be in conflict. The 'idealist' is usually understood to be someone who is guided by goals that are difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. In contrast, the 'pragmatist' will only pursue what is reasonably attainable, often by whatever means necessary. But true Pragmatism, the doctrine invented and developed by Americans such as C. S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, runs deeper than that. It tries to combine Theory and Practice by holding that the meaning of words, the truth of assertions, and the value of principles, all lie in practical application, not in mental entertainment. For example, the meaning of the term 'Ideal' means not 'abstract perfection', but 'the best attainable under the circumstances'. Furthermore, it rejects, also as an abstraction, the typical conception of the means-end distinction, asserting, instead, that a means is an earlier phase, and an end the latest, of a continuous course of action. Hence, Pragmatism is not to be confused with expediency in authorizing questionable methods in the pursuit of some ambition. Instead, a more precise formulation of the Pragmatist principle is 'Follow the course of action that is determined to be best under the given circumstances'. In other words, rather than, as conventional wisdom has it, 'Idealism' being the High Road, and 'Pragmatism' the Low, Pragmatism holds that Idealism is no road at all, and that it is the Highest available Road which should be followed. So, it is not so much that Pragmatism opposes Idealism as much as it is that it reconceives it.