William James starts his article “Pragmatism’s Conception of Truth” focusing on the idea of truth and what makes it work. Like his contemporary writers, Schiller and Dewey, James subscribed to the pragmatism school of philosophy. The pragmatist idea of truth relies less on a theoretical concept and more on its practical side: true ideas, as he describes, “are one we can validate, corroborate and verify” (James, 1907, p. 142).
A series of questions accompany it: what difference will it make for an idea to be true, to what extent, and for what purpose? The central logic pragmatism follows is that an idea is true because it works, and it works because it is true. James defends pragmatism, claiming that only through testing ideas in life can one achieve the absolute truth. While rationalism believes that ideas do not need to be tested but rather intellectually asserted, pragmatism verifies them instead by testing them and applying them to real life to see if they work.
Rationalism as a theory relies specifically on the intellectual understanding of an idea rather than practicality. The rationalist approach opposes the pragmatic one in the aspect of “agreement” between an idea and reality. For a follower of the rationalist philosophy learning the truth can be achieved through reason alone, regardless of whether it is applied a practical use or not. James opposes this view, as he considers it essential that an idea must work in reality before it can be regarded as true (James, 1907, p. 148-149).
Rationalism and pragmatism contrast each other: while pragmatism seeks to understand how an idea applies to reality, objects, and experiences, rationalism instead cares if it can be theorized alone. Where pragmatism connects ideas to experiences, rationalism separates them instead.
Reference
James, W. (1907). Pragmatism’s conception of truth. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 4(6), 141-155.