220 DOGMATISM AND EVOLUTION 



Suppose the fundamental assumption to be correct. 1 The 

 method is nevertheless defective. It prescribes no means of 

 determining whether the differences in conduct that are pointed 

 out are the only ones that can arise from the truth or falsity 

 of the proposition, or even that they are the sole important 

 differences. A meaning is discovered ; but no assurance is given 

 that this is the whole meaning, or even the principal meaning 

 of the proposition. Hence, even though the instrumental theory 

 of meaning be correct, the pragmatic method is intrinsically 

 fallacious. 



A possible exception to this general fallaciousness remains. 

 If it is indeed demonstrable that the truth or falsity of a given 

 proposition could in no way affect the advisability of conduct, 

 the proposition must, upon the instrumental theory, be meaning- 

 less. But when we examine the illustrations of this contingency 

 that are given by pragmatists, it becomes clear that the prag- 

 matic method is entirely non-essential to them. What is in- 

 variably proved is that the proposition in question cannot be 

 confirmed or contradicted by any conceivable experience; that 

 is to say, whether the proposition is true or false, no possible 

 experience would be different. In the words of the well-known 

 formula (already quoted), there is no difference in the "sensations 

 to be expected," and hence no difference in the "reactions that 

 are to be prepared." But in such a case the proposition is 

 meaningless, not only upon specifically pragmatist grounds, but 

 on the basis of a pre-evolutionary empiricism. In fact, Berke- 

 ley's proof of the meaninglessness of the assumption of material 

 substance that it is incapable of verification or disproof is 

 hailed by the pragmatists as an admirable application of their 

 method. But the reference to conduct is altogether lacking. 

 Now it is true that where there is no difference in the phenomenon 

 there can be none in the behavior which it calls for; so that the 

 practical reference can be freely supplied if one wishes. But it 



J It should be noted, however, that this involves an isolation of 'import' from 

 'content,' which we can by no means admit. 



