All the
critics, neglecting the essay, pounced upon the title.
Psychologically it was impossible, morally it was iniquitous. The
"will to deceive," the "will to make-believe," were wittily proposed
as substitutes for it.
THE ALTERNATIVE BETWEEN PRAGMATISM AND RATIONALISM, IN THE SHAPE IN
WHICH WE NOW HAVE IT BEFORE US, IS NO LONGER A QUESTION IN THE
THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE, IT CONCERNS THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNIVERSE
ITSELF.
On the pragmatist side we have only one edition of the universe,
unfinished, growing in all sorts of places, especially in the places
where thinking beings are at work.
On the rationalist side we have a universe in many editions, one
real one, the infinite folio, or edition de luxe, eternally
complete; and then the various finite editions, full of false
readings, distorted and mutilated each in its own way.
So the rival metaphysical hypotheses of pluralism and monism here
come back upon us. I will develope their differences during the
remainder of our hour.
And first let me say that it is impossible not to see a
temperamental difference at work in the choice of sides. The
rationalist mind, radically taken, is of a doctrinaire and
authoritative complexion: the phrase 'must be' is ever on its lips.
Pages:
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215