Fun With Pragmatism

I could not get hold of Buscaglia’s books but
found William James instead, after explaining
his Pragmatism a kindly analyst virtuously made
critical comments, complaining that James took
eternal truths away and left nothing in their place

If there is no dogma with eternal validity, he cries,
man has no hope left in the religious department
I was surprised, cannot he see man has no hope
in all eternity of deciding between all the eternal
validities confronting him in a myriad religions

How should man decide between Christ and
Krisna, Mohammed and Buddha if EVERY dogma
insists on being exclusively true? I prefer James’
theory that there are as many gods as there are
individuals on earth, satisfaction derived from

Religion is a personal choice, if James’ critic and
his cronies prefer Christianity - let them enjoy it
without fighting others who believe differently,
James’ argument creates space for other
beliefs, anybody dependent on dogma

In organised religion in order to feel safe has
many problems, I do not wish to be in their
shoes, I prefer to listen to William James
and work on finding truth through
Pragmatism…


*******************************************

http://www.the-office.com/seth/
Excerpted from Pragmatism, by William James

Books by and about William James http://radicalacademy.com/bksjames.htm

CRITICAL NOTES: James's discovery of the subconscious mind
was a great contribution to psychology. But we [author unknown]
cannot accept James's doctrine that spiritual values originate in
the irrational subconscious mind, thus founded on irrationality.

James may be the father of Modernism; but his religious position
is in opposition to basic pragmatism, it does not lead to a solution
of practical certitude and justification of the universe.

If spiritual reality is found in analysis of psychological emotions
and religious sentiment, objective Christian dogma [aha, and
Buddhism and Hinduism?] is replaced by subjective exigencies
of individuals, and every believer creates his own religion, his
own truth, Modernism.

The nature of God will be understood differently according to
religious emotions creating a pluralistic conception of Divinity.
God is finite, exists in time, a creator of His own story.

How can any satisfaction be found in such a religion? [I, on the
other hand, cannot find satisfaction in dogma.]

Our aspirations are not fulfilled, there is no certitude, no hope,
no absolute. How can a limited God guarantee the order of the
physical and human world? What is left of the world of spirits?
[The God created by mankind is such a scary, judgmental
construct, why try to believe in man’s own creations?]

Religious Pragmatism replaces dogmatic, absolute and universal
truth with the personal fancies of the man in the street. [The so-
called dogmatic is only true in so far as BELIEF is invested in it,
without belief, there is no proof and the EFFECT, pragmatically, is
highly unsalutary – wars and disrespect for opposing beliefs.]

It is immoral - if truth depends upon feeling, any action is justified
by virtue of the satisfaction it procures. Such a philosophy makes
man his own judge and leads to moral anarchy. [NO, it leads to
FREEDOM and acceptance of responsibility, the author pleads
here that HIS view of moral good be forced on all others, that
is moral dictatorship.

Once people know through experience what kind of actions bring
TRUE satisfaction, they will carry out those actions – but since all
people are attacked and reviled from birth, civilisation and society
make monsters of all of us – all criminals and perverts are the result
of our current immoral society and its hypocritical laws and tyranny.

Since society has outlawed human nature unless a person has a
high income and can hide his sin successfully, all poor people are
branded criminals for their needs and desires. Since natural
instincts like the desire for good food are criminal when you
are poor, laws stipulating the poor shall not steal while
aiding and abetting the rich to exploit the poor, make
criminals of ALL of us.]

* Essay: by William James