- Can personal struggles, whether with ideas and philosophies or with more tangible life challenges, contribute to a meaningful life and even save it?
- Should truth "mean" something to us, in the existentialist sense of meaning?
- Do you value the experiences in your life that you cannot put into words? Can you give an example? What can you say about it?
- Are you more like tough-minded Hume or tender-minded Leibniz? 132
- Is our world a "mid-world" in Emerson's sense? 133
- What is the "life-and-death significance of the pragmatic method of testing ideas against experience"? 138
- Do you agree that free will is melioristic, where determinism is not? 144
- Have you ever had a Gertrude Stein moment, during an exam? Could her response ever work for you in such a situation, do you think? 152
- How does "zest" makes us all both the same and different? 156
- Is "Hands off" good advice? 158
- Have professors displaced true teachers? 161
- Is "man is the measure" a humanist proposition? 163-5
I fully expect to see the pragmatist view of truth run through the classic stages of a theory's career. First, you know, a new theory is attacked as absurd; then it is admitted to be true, but obvious and insignificant; finally it is seen to be so important that its adversaries claim that they themselves discovered it. Our doctrine of truth is at present in the first of these three stages, with symptoms of the second stage having begun in certain quarters. I wish that this lecture might help it beyond the first stage in the eyes of many of you... (continues)
William James
I wish in the following hour to take certain psychological doctrines and show their practical applications to mental hygiene,—to the hygiene of our American life more particularly. Our people, especially in academic circles, are turning towards psychology nowadays with great expectations; and, if psychology is to justify them, it must be by showing fruits in the pedagogic and therapeutic lines.
The reader may possibly have heard of a peculiar theory of the emotions, commonly referred to in psychological literature as the Lange-James theory. According to this theory, our emotions are mainly due to those organic stirrings that are aroused in us in a reflex way by the stimulus of the exciting object or situation. An emotion of fear, for example, or surprise, is not a direct effect of the object's presence on the mind, but an effect of that still earlier effect, the bodily commotion which the object suddenly excites; so that, were this bodily commotion suppressed, we should not so much feel fear as call the situation fearful; we should not feel surprise, but coldly recognize that the object was indeed astonishing. One enthusiast has even gone so far as to say that when we feel sorry it is because we weep, when we feel afraid it is because we run away, and not conversely. Some of you may perhaps be acquainted with the paradoxical formula. Now, whatever exaggeration may possibly lurk in this account of our emotions (and I doubt myself whether the exaggeration be very great), it is certain that the main core of it is true, and that the mere giving way to tears, for example, or to the outward expression of an anger-fit, will result for the moment in making the inner grief or anger more acutely felt. There is, accordingly, no better known or more generally useful precept in the moral training of youth, or in one's personal self-discipline, than that which bids us pay primary attention to what we do and express, and not to care too much for what we feel. If we only check a cowardly impulse in time, for example, or if we only don't strike the blow or rip out with the complaining or insulting word that we shall regret as long as we live, our feelings themselves will presently be t..he calmer and better, with no particular guidance from us on their own account. Action seems to follow feeling, but really action and feeling go together; and by regulating the action, which is under the more direct control of the will, we can indirectly regulate the feeling, which is not... (continues)
==
1. What "vectors of meaning" saved James's life?
ReplyDelete“…his struggle with determinism, his excavation of free will, his emphasis on action and habit formation, his sensitive study of the stream of consciousness…” (Kaag, p. 127)
2. Embracing the pragmatic theory of truth is a commitment to what?
“…become more, much more, than a formal epistemologist, one who theorizes about knowledge…demands that one respect, always, the force of empirical fact, but also realize that all facts lead or point to consequences, the meaning of which cannot be exhaustively evaluated in a scientist’s lab.” (Kaag, p. 128-9)
3. As a professional academic philosopher, Kaag has trouble remembering what?
“…philosophy lives in words, but truth and fact well up into our lives in ways that exceed verbal formulation.” (Kaag, p. 129)
Recognition of the non-verbal upwelling of truth and fact is in my opinion James's most impressive insight. Kaag's right, professional philosophers are almost committed by their vocation to not recognize it. I'm grateful to James for insisting on it.
Delete4. James's hallway (corridor) metaphor, treating pragmatism primarily as a method in philosophy, reminds Kaag of what?
ReplyDelete“…a home, not unlike James’s house in Chocorua, with many windows and doors.” (Kaag, p. 131)
5. What's the difference between truth and facts, for WJ?
“The facts may be out there, waiting for us to find them, but the truth is our story about the facts, and it is not ‘out there,’…Truth is an attribute of our ideas…” (Kaag, p. 135) Kaag later shares an answer he gave one of his students where he said, “This isn’t just the ‘will to believe’ where you can make the truth happen in the absence of factual support.. Facts matter.” (Kaag, p. 136)
6. Embracing free will is the first step in what?
“…in affirming optimism about our ability to adapt and grow in the face of life’s challenges. ‘Meliorism,’ James’s term for this hopeful worldview dow not insist that improvement is inevitable, but that it is still quite possible.” (Kaag, p. 143-44)
I'm still waiting for a determinist to explain to me how we can intentionally adapt and grow in the absence of some variety of free will, and why scholars who disbelieve in free will seem to try so hard to do so. Saying they're determined to do so is inadequate, as it denies effective intention.
Delete7. What is Binnenleben?
ReplyDelete“…’the buried life,’ of an increasing number of student whom James regarded as ‘unhealthy-minded.’…(It is) self-mistrust…” (Kaag, p. 144-5)
8. Where does "zest" come from, according to WJ, and what is it?
“Zest…the feeling of keen passion. for James, this was the key to human meaning, ‘ever anywhere.’…it can be found everywhere—in activity, perception, imagination, or reflection—which, I have to say is little comfort when I can’t find it anywhere.” (Kaag, p. 153)
9. For James pragmatism was a protest against what proposition about salvation?
“(The Calvinist notion that) Salvation was not achieved through a persons’ effort or intellect or force of will. Instead, it was a function of some impersonal design that had nothing to do with nobodies like us. The best that we can do is resign ourselves to the Divine plan. And be grateful. James could not have disagreed more strongly. And he spent his career fashioning pragmatism in protest.” (Kaag, p. 167)
Remember the Beatles line in Revolution? "We all want to see the Plan." Well, WJ didn't want to see the Plan. No master Plan assures our salvation, on his view. Nothing does. But our various efforts and commitments make our collective salvation possible, they give us a chance, and it is in our nature to be willing to live on a chance. Note: salvation for WJ is not strictly a personal aspiration, it's a social goal.
ReplyDelete