Introduction: Where the Argument Stems from
Years after the era of debates on whether scientific investigation or a prior method should be used as a cornerstone of philosophy and the means to obtain a crystal clear truth, it seems that the concepts of Peirce have considerably more longevity and are more tied with the modern idea of a common sense than those of his opponent William James.
However, it is still questionable that all the ideas offered by Peirce have stood the time test and are still just as doubtless. Taking a closer look at some of Peirce’s arguments, one can possibly see whether James Peirce’s ideas are still just as impressive as they were decades back.
The Ultimate Problem-Solving Method Works
According to Peirce, every single problem, even the one concerning the realm of metaphysics, can actually have a solution once the practical consequences of following various ideas are considered fully. As the philosopher explained, this postulate, being an integral part of Pragmatism as a philosophical tradition, serves as the ultimate way to see the connection between the action and its consequence.
Indeed, if taking a closer look at the way things work in real life, one can claim with certainty that there are always the predictable outcomes for each situation. Consequently, if making a list of all the possible moves and the probable results which these moves will lead to, one is bound to come up with a more or less adequate solution. Therefore, Peirce’s method can be considered valid.
When Practical Consequences Cannot Be Figured out
However, when applying Peirce’s ideas into practice, one is bound to see that a complex conflict is likely to appear. On the one hand, considering all existing means of solving the issue does lead to understanding the results of these solutions; however, one can never tell if not a single opportunity has been missed.
Despite the fact that a human brain is really a nature’s work of art and a wonderful mechanism for dealing with all sorts of puzzles, it still has imperfections, which means that certain methods of solving a problem can simply slip one’s mind.
Moreover, knowing all possible solutions presupposes learning all information on a certain issue, with all the connections to seemingly irrelevant things, which is practically impossible. With the limitations of a human brain, even the use of a certain mechanism, e.g., a computer, does not seem reasonable.
Conclusion: Being a Part of the Solution
Therefore, it can be concluded that James Peirce’s arguments are yet to be discussed and need solid proofs. When applied in a certain context, the idea that every single problem can be solved once predicting its consequences might be right, yet as a common truth, this statement seems a little bit too far-fetched.
However, the factors of the situation are to be taken into account as well; once learning all the causes, as well as the prerequisites of a certain event, it can be predicted quite easily. Nevertheless, what the supporters of the given argument miss is the fact that keeping the track of all the factors and elements concerned is hardly even possible. Therefore, it seems that Peirce’s idea lacks essential details or more reasonable grounds.