The criticism of pragmatism that is repeated in all three items is that truth cannot be explained using the abstract real of ideas that are independent of social relationships or actions. However, reality can be justified when the active process of engagement is aligned with the world and can be verified. Therefore, one cannot claim to be telling the truth if their claims are not justified by the actions or the events taking place in the world. This means that a repeated lie cannot be passed as the truth or justified. Ethical precepts, values, and beliefs are propositions of truth that promise to fulfill an act; thus, they can be explained as ethical truths only if they assist a person in achieving the desired outcome.
Douglas Groothuis' criticism of pragmatism is the strongest as it implies that James' concept of truth is valid since an idea, belief, or value can be justified to be true if its effects are witnessed. This notion disregards the idea that a repeated lie can be passed as the truth as their lacks evidence to support the claims or values that an individual bases their thoughts on. James' concept of truth is useful as it fits into the pragmatist's view, which suggests that before a belief or value is considered as the truth, events or actions must occur as proof.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Dew and Foreman's pragmatic view is the least clear as one struggles to understand the concepts provided by the authors. Dew and Foreman's explanations are somewhat contradictory as they do not give a clear definition of truth; rather, the authors attempt to justify why the statements made cannot be used in substantiating the truth claim. Compared to the other two items Dew and Foreman's pragmatic view is the weakest.
References
Dew, J. & Foreman, M. (2014). How Do We Know?: An Introduction to Epistemology. IVP Academic
