ABSTRACT

William James's writings on meaning have long presented an enigma. On the one hand, his view that the meaning of a proposition or statement is its experiential consequences seems very close to a modern positivistic theory. Yet, on the other hand, he clearly considers traditional metaphysical propositions. The pragmatic maxim is used to sharpen our common-sense awareness that there is a genuine dispute by showing us the heart of the controversy. The emphasis, in other words, is on pragmatism as a tool of clarification and not on pragmatism as a weapon for undermining metaphysics. One fundamental function of the right to believe in James is to 'justify' the metaphysician's intense conviction in doctrines for which the evidence is insufficient. Hence, according to James, the absolutist has a right to believe his doctrine even though it goes beyond the evidence. On this level, the right to believe may be said to be a plea for metaphysical tolerance.