REALITY AND TRUTH 375 



unnecessary and impossible for every one to form judgments about 

 everything. A pragmatist need not in any way diminish his regard 

 for authority, provided that this authority represents active inquiry and 

 reasoned judgment. The usages of science suffice to indicate this, for 

 in science there is no arbitrarily constituted authority, and yet the 

 leaders receive their full share of respect. "Were we all pragmatists, 

 we should not individually undertake to decide the questions most 

 important for us, but working together we should keenly strive to have 

 them decided on a proper basis. In other words, pragmatism is not 

 only not necessarily individualistic, but must have a socialistic trend if 

 it is to be successful. 



For any individual there can be no doubt that a certain ballast due 

 to usage, custom, inertia, or what you will, is necessary. It must be 

 so, also, with society as a whole, and neither for the individual nor for 

 society is it possible to have a complete working philosophy, with all 

 the machinery in view. Mallock once remarked that philosophy is like 

 a coat which can not be buttoned up in front without splitting in the 

 back, and this felicitous image certainly sets forth that inconsistency 

 in the heart of things which has so far baffled all attempts to construct 

 a universal logical system. The reason is, no doubt, that we work only 

 in some, not all, of the dimensions of reality. 



There is, therefore, danger in being too pragmatic. An excess of 

 pragmatic zeal, under the best possible conditions, might possibly lead 

 to the adoption of a too rigid system of values, logically deduced from 

 the physics and metaplrysics of the day, but in spite of everything, 

 fatally incomplete. It is the sense of this that gives us pause from time 

 to time, when our intellectual judgment bids us proceed. It has been 

 shown so often that science may stand in her own light, that we have 

 come to regard all things as possibly to be revised. This hesitation, 

 this doubt on the part of those who have done their best for progress, is 

 made the most of by those who cling without thought to the old, and 

 all in all forms too great, not too small, a check on the advancement 

 of the race. 



The general outcome of our inquiry seems to be, that if we regard 

 philosophy as an attitude of mind, the pragmatic philosophy may be 

 welcomed as representing a changed emphasis, according well with the 

 spirit and needs of our evolving democracy. At the same time, like 

 every other good thing, it has its dangers, and in some hands it may 

 even be disastrous. As a practical example of pragmatism, we may cite 

 a recent case familiar to all — I mean Mr. Eoosevelt's criticism of the 

 Supreme Court. Lawyers had asked, what is written in the law? 

 Mr. Eoosevelt asked in truly Jamesian fashion, what difference does it 

 make if this or that decision is rendered? To ask such a question is to 

 find the answer ready at hand, intelligible to the least learned inquirer. 



