EDITOR’S PREFACE
The
present volume is an attempt to carry out a plan which William James
is known to have formed several years before his death. In 1907 he
collected reprints in an envelope which he inscribed with the title
‘Essays in Radical Empiricism’; and he also had duplicate sets of
these reprints bound, under the same title, and deposited for the use
of students in the general Harvard Library, and in the Philosophical
Library in Emerson Hall.Two
years later Professor James published
The Meaning of Truth
and A Pluralistic
Universe, and
inserted in these volumes several of the articles which he had
intended to use in the ‘Essays in Radical Empiricism.’ Whether he
would nevertheless have carried out his original plan, had he lived,
cannot be certainly known. Several facts, however, stand out very
clearly. In the first place, the articles included in the original
plan but omitted from his later volumes are indispensable to the
understanding of his other writings. To these articles he repeatedly
alludes. Thus, in
The Meaning of Truth
(p. 127), he says: “This statement is probably excessively obscure
to any one who has not read my two articles ‘Does Consciousness
Exist?’ and ‘A World of Pure Experience.’” Other allusions
have been indicated in the present text. In the second place, the
articles originally brought together as ‘Essays in Radical
Empiricism’ form a connected whole. Not only were most of them
written consecutively within a period of two years, but they contain
numerous cross-references. In the third place, Professor James
regarded ‘radical empiricism’ as an
independent
doctrine. This he asserted expressly: “Let me say that there is no
logical connexion between pragmatism, as I understand it, and a
doctrine which I have recently set forth as ‘radical empiricism.’
The latter stands on its own feet. One may entirely reject it and
still be a pragmatist.” (Pragmatism,
1907, Preface, p. ix.) Finally, Professor James came toward the end
of his life to regard ‘radical empiricism’ as more fundamental
and more important than ‘pragmatism.’ In the Preface to
The Meaning of Truth
(1909), the author gives the following explanation of his desire to
continue, and if possible conclude, the controversy over pragmatism:
“I am interested in another doctrine in philosophy to which I give
the name of radical empiricism, and it seems to me that the
establishment of the pragmatist theory of truth is a step of
first-rate importance in making radical empiricism prevail” (p.
xii).In
preparing the present volume, the editor has therefore been governed
by two motives. On the one hand, he has sought to preserve and make
accessible certain important articles not to be found in Professor
James’s other books. This is true of Essays
i,
ii,
iv,
v,
viii,
ix,
x,
xi, and
xii. On the
other hand, he has sought to bring together in one volume a set of
essays treating systematically of one independent, coherent, and
fundamental doctrine. To this end it has seemed best to include three
essays (iii,
vi, and
vii), which,
although included in the original plan, were afterwards reprinted
elsewhere; and one essay,
xii, not
included in the original plan. Essays
iii,
vi, and
vii are
indispensable to the consecutiveness of the series, and are so
interwoven with the rest that it is necessary that the student should
have them at hand for ready consultation. Essay
xii throws
an important light on the author’s general ‘empiricism,’ and
forms an important link between ‘radical empiricism’ and the
author’s other doctrines.In
short, the present volume is designed not as a collection but rather
as a treatise. It is intended that another volume shall be issued
which shall contain papers having biographical or historical
importance which have not yet been reprinted in book form. The
present volume is intended not only for students of Professor James’s
philosophy, but for students of metaphysics and the theory of
knowledge. It sets forth systematically and within brief compass the
doctrine of ‘radical empiricism.’A
word more may be in order concerning the general meaning of this
doctrine. In the Preface to the
Will to Believe
(1898), Professor James gives the name “radical
empiricism” to
his “philosophic attitude,” and adds the following explanation:
“I say ‘empiricism,’ because it is contented to regard its most
assured conclusions concerning matters of fact as hypotheses liable
to modification in the course of future experience; and I say
‘radical,’ because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as an
hypothesis, and, unlike so much of the halfway empiricism that is
current under the name of positivism or agnosticism or scientific
naturalism, it does not dogmatically affirm monism as something with
which all experience has got to square” (pp. vii-viii). An
‘empiricism’ of this description is a “philosophic attitude”
or temper of mind rather than a doctrine, and characterizes all of
Professor James’s writings. It is set forth in Essay
xii of the
present volume.In
a narrower sense, ‘empiricism’ is the method of resorting to
particular experiences
for the solution of philosophical problems. Rationalists are the men
of principles, empiricists the men of facts. (Some
Problems of Philosophy,
p. 35; cf. also,
ibid., p. 44; and
Pragmatism, pp. 9,
51.) Or, “since principles are universals, and facts are
particulars, perhaps the best way of characterizing the two
tendencies is to say that rationalist thinking proceeds most
willingly by going from wholes to parts, while empiricist thinking
proceeds by going from parts to wholes.” (Some
Problems of Philosophy,
p. 35; cf. also
ibid., p. 98; and
A Pluralistic Universe,
p. 7.) Again, empiricism “remands us to sensation.” (Op.
cit., p. 264.) The
“empiricist view” insists that, “as reality is created
temporally day by day, concepts ... can never fitly supersede
perception.... The deeper features of reality are found only in
perceptual experience.” (Some
Problems of Philosophy,
pp. 100, 97.) Empiricism in this sense is as yet characteristic of
Professor James’s philosophy
as a whole. It is
not the distinctive and independent doctrine set forth in the present
book.The
only summary of ‘radical empiricism’ in this last and narrowest
sense appears in the Preface to
The Meaning of Truth
(pp. xii-xiii); and it must be reprinted here as the key to the text
that follows.[1]
“Radical
empiricism consists (1) first of a postulate, (2) next of a statement
of fact, (3) and finally of a generalized conclusion.”(1)
“The postulate is that
the only things that shall be debatable among philosophers shall be
things definable in terms drawn from experience.
(Things of an unexperienceable nature may exist ad libitum, but they
form no part of the material for philosophic debate.)” This is “the
principle of pure experience” as “a methodical postulate.” (Cf.
below, pp.
159,
241.) This
postulate corresponds to the notion which the author repeatedly
attributes to Shadworth Hodgson, the notion “that realities are
only what they are ‘known as.’” (Pragmatism,
p. 50; Varieties of
Religious Experience,
p. 443; The Meaning
of Truth, pp. 43,
118.) In this sense ‘radical empiricism’ and pragmatism are
closely allied. Indeed, if pragmatism be defined as the assertion
that “the meaning of any proposition can always be brought down to
some particular consequence in our future practical experience, ...
the point lying in the fact that the experience must be particular
rather than in the fact that it must be active” (Meaning
of Truth, p. 210);
then pragmatism and the above postulate come to the same thing. The
present book, however, consists not so much in the assertion of this
postulate as in the
use of it. And the
method is successful in special applications by virtue of a certain
“statement of fact” concerning relations.(2)
“The statement of fact is that
the relations between things, conjunctive as well as disjunctive, are
just as much matters of direct particular experience, neither more so
nor less so, than the things themselves.”
(Cf. also A
Pluralistic Universe,
p. 280; The Will to
Believe, p. 278.)
This is the central doctrine of the present book. It distinguishes
‘radical empiricism’ from the “ordinary empiricism” of Hume,
J. S. Mill, etc., with which it is otherwise allied. (Cf. below, pp.
42-44.) It
provides an empirical and relational version of ‘activity,’ and
so distinguishes the author’s voluntarism from a view with which it
is easily confused—the view which upholds a pure or transcendent
activity. (Cf. below, Essay
vi.) It
makes it possible to escape the vicious disjunctions that have thus
far baffled philosophy: such disjunctions as those between
consciousness and physical nature, between thought and its object,
between one mind and another, and between one ‘thing’ and
another. These disjunctions need not be ‘overcome’ by calling in
any “extraneous trans-empirical connective support” (Meaning
of Truth, Preface,
p. xiii); they may now be
avoided by
regarding the dualities in question as only
differences of empirical relationship among common empirical terms.
The pragmatistic account of ‘meaning’ and ‘truth,’ shows only
how a vicious disjunction between ‘idea’ and ‘object’ may
thus be avoided. The present volume not only presents pragmatism in
this light; but adds similar accounts of the other dualities
mentioned above.Thus
while pragmatism and radical empiricism do not differ essentially
when regarded as
methods, they are
independent when regarded as doctrines. For it would be possible to
hold the pragmatistic theory of ‘meaning’ and ‘truth,’
without basing it on any fundamental theory of relations, and without
extending such a theory of relations to residual philosophical
problems; without, in short, holding either to the above ‘statement
of fact,’ or to the following ‘generalized conclusion.’(3)
“The generalized conclusion is that therefore
the parts of experience hold together from next to next by relations
that are themselves parts of experience. The directly apprehended
universe needs, in short, no extraneous trans-empirical connective
support, but possesses in its own right a concatenated or continuous
structure.” When
thus generalized, ‘radical empiricism’ is not only a theory of
knowledge comprising pragmatism as a special chapter, but a
metaphysic as well. It excludes “the hypothesis of trans-empirical
reality” (Cf. below, p.
195). It is
the author’s most rigorous statement of his theory that reality is
an “experience-continuum.” (Meaning
of Truth, p. 152;
A Pluralistic Universe,
Lect. v, vii.) It is that positive and constructive ‘empiricism’
of which Professor James said: “Let empiricism once become
associated with religion, as hitherto, through some strange
misunderstanding, it has been associated with irreligion, and I
believe that a new era of religion as well as of philosophy will be
ready to begin.” (Op.
cit., p. 314; cf.
ibid., Lect. viii,
passim; and
The Varieties of Religious Experience,
pp. 515-527.)The
editor desires to acknowledge his obligations to the periodicals from
which these essays have been reprinted, and to the many friends of
Professor James who have rendered valuable advice and assistance in
the preparation of the present volume.