While looking through my class notes, I stumbled upon this question when we were discussing Francis Ponge in class, "Does language move us closer to things, or does it divorce us of things?" Based on my notes, our conversation attempted to answer this question by saying that language of various kinds alters our perspective of an ordinary object at hand. By using language that we are accustomed to, we have a sense of closeness and/or distance from capturing the essence of an ordinary object. Ultimately, all language is equidistant from the heart of the object (philosophy, physics, poetry, carpentry, etc.); no discipline, nor language associated with any discipline, reaches the heart of the matter more than the other. Different disciplines simply reveal different aspects of the ordinary.
Similarly, James writes, "[Pragmatism] lies in the midst of our theories, like a corridor in a hotel. Innumerable chambers open out of it. In one you may find a man writing an atheistic volume; in the next someone on his knees praying for faith and strength; in a third a chemist investigating a body's properties. In a fourth a system of idealistic metaphysics is being excogitated; in a fifth the impossibility of metaphysics is being shown. But they all own the corridor, and all must pass through it if they want a practicable way of getting into our out of their respective rooms" (98). Therefore, I feel like it is safe to assume that pragmatism works at an individual level. We use our own "chambers" (aka languages/disciplines) to disclose the relations of ordinary objects to us at an individual level. While pragmatism cannot explain where judgments derive from (predictably cultural "rules"), pragmatism empowers us as individuals to trust and formulate our own judgments, assumably based on our language/discipline of choice, to think of such relations.
I agree with you Catherine! While reading this section (and a few pages before) it reminded me of Heidegger in The World when he talks about Dasein and 'they' stating "...if I have ceded my decision to the 'they', I have, implicitly, decided to do so" (pg28). It made me think of this because of the choice of decision and how James state that pragmatism is empowering ones individual decision, much like the decision that Dasein has to think as 'they' do or think on his own.
ReplyDeleteI think you really have a good point here, particularly in the comparison between Ponge and James, whom I also compared to each other. I like the idea of pragmatism entrusting us to make our own judgements about things and I think Ponge would also like it. Since most of Ponge's writing is centered around his observations of things (and their nature), I feel as those he fits in well with pragmatism and that he trusts his own judgement as opposed to the judgements of others.
ReplyDelete