Meaning of Truth (Great Books in Pphilosophy) [Paperback]

William James (Author)

Book Description

Series: Great Books in Pphilosophy | Publication Date: May 1997

In this sequel to "Pragmatism", one of America's outstanding philosophers, William James (1842-1910), responds to absolutist critics - believers in immutable truth and innate or inherited knowledge who misrepresent the philosophy of pragmatism as just another form of positivism or regard it as mere egoistic solipsism. Objective truth exists, James argues, but it can only be known in terms of experience; truth isn't 'out there' waiting to be discovered. And knowledge derives from a process of inquiring in which a chain of mental and physical intermediaries connect thought and things.

Product Details

• Paperback: 334 pages
• Publisher: Prometheus Books (May 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1573921386
• ISBN-13: 978-1573921381
• Product Dimensions: 8.5 x 5.5 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,909,977 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Intellectual Fun, October 20, 2001

By 

peculiar "andrew_eccentric" - See all my reviews

This review is from: Meaning of Truth (Great Books in Pphilosophy) (Paperback)

In 1907 William James published a book of his recently delivered lectures called "Pragmatism" in which he detailed the links he found betwen the pragmatic frame of mind and the philosophical situation of his time. They caused a storm of controversy. Most particularly James's pragmatic musings on "truth" went down, with some, like a lead balloon. With "The Meaning of Truth" James meant to buttress his claims about truth and repel the barbs of his rationalistic enemies.

The key essay in the book in many ways is the third "Humanism and Truth". "Humanism" is James's preferred name for pragmatism. Here James lays out his thesis on truth as being a matter of continuity of experience and of useful relations with things. James always resisted the notion, commonly ascribed to many so-called pragmatists and relativists, that they "make it all up". Here James suggests that experience as a control is no mere fancy. James claimed to be constrained in his theorising about truth and constrained by the world that is empirically there all around us.

Read this book if you want a statement of James's position on truth or if you want pragmatist insights into the same topic. Or read it for plain intellectual fun. Its arguments are deceptively simple and particularly persuasive.

5 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars What Do We Mean When We Mean 'To Be True'?, July 28, 2004

By 

Kevin Currie-Knight "Education Grad Student" (Newark, Delaware) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (TOP 500 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: Meaning of Truth (Great Books in Pphilosophy) (Paperback)

William James' 'Meaning of Truth' is a book consisting of 15 articles defending his pragmatic definition of truth against defenders both empiricist and idealist. Most essays had been previously published in philosophy journals and a few were printed in this volume for the first time.

To explain the backdrop briefly, William James, in his book 'Pragmatism,' had devoted a chapter to what is meant when we call something true. James told us that by calling something true, we are suggesting that the thing work in experience, and that the true is what works in experience. Further, James wrote that truth doesn't exist 'out there' in the world of objects without a knower, but exists ONLY in ideas ABOUT those objects. This, of course, is contra the longstanding philosophic view that the truth exists 'out there' in the objects (and would exist thus even if there were no knower to confirm them). Also, the longstanding view James writes against, has it that the true is the true regardless of whether it works in experience. Working in experience does not a true belief make.

All this is necessary to say because one can easily see how uphill James' battle was. Did he succeed? Well, as much as I liked this book (and am wild about James' writing style and wit), I gave the bookk three stars because the book did not fulfill its mission either historically or ideationally.

Why? Probably for the same reason this book did not meet its ideational goals. James aimed to convince the reader that his theory of truth was not only consistent, but a corect account. Now, while James' theory should not be ignored and he DID show that many of the criticisms (like the thought that pragmatism leads to anti-realism or solopsism) are hooey, inconsistencies can easily be spotted in this book, and what's more, he still doesn't see those areas where his theories DO break down.

I'll give just one example of each: As for incongruency, James repeats several times that his theory is unique because it starts and ends with experience. By his account, "expeirence as a whole is self containing and leans on nothing." But he also says, equally as fervently, that the "notion of a reality INDEPENDENT OF [experience] LIES AT THE BASE OF a pragmatist definition of truth." [217-8, my caps] On the one hand, then, James exalts the fact that his theory need rely on nothing outside of experience, and on the other, he states that it is dependent on the existence and postulation of an independent reality.

As far as those areas where James' theory breaks down: James makes explicit the fact that what we mean by truth is 'that which works in experience,' and by converse, that which works in experience may be called true. Of course, there is a problem. In politics, say, I might find that one way of redistributing income works better in experience than another, and even works well in experience for all the things I want it to do. But does it not sound a bit akward to conclude therefore, that "the policy is the true one becuase it works best in experience," (rather than simply saying that the policy 'works better,' than the other? Without going into undue explanation, James might give an account of a NECESSARY condition for truth (To be true, an idea has to work in experience.) rather than a sufficient condition (Any idea that works in experience is true.).

I dislike being so long-winded and apologize for it, but it needs to be emphasized that while this book is a phenomenal read and explicates a theory that should not be ignored or blithely dismissed (James gets as much right as he does wrong), the careful reader is bound to come away from the book being less than satisfied.

4 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars I'D RATE IT A 11 OUT OF 10!, May 3, 2000

By A Customer

This review is from: Meaning of Truth (Great Books in Pphilosophy) (Paperback)

This is a great book, I really recomend the reading. Talk about very important issues about men, woman and the society in general. Is very insteresting we undestand the live phases involving the person you are.