What’s the Use of Reading Emerson Pragmatically? The Example of William James

Abstract

Observes that while the recent renaissance in Emerson studies has coincided with a rediscovery of Emerson’s incipient pragmatism, the full import of his affinities to the American pragmatists has not been fully appreciated. Reconsiders this issue by examining ways James applied his pragmatic method to Emerson’s writings, recalling his assertion that the true meaning of competing philosophical beliefs lies in their practical consequences. Further notes that James insists pluralism is an antiabsolutist view, and sees him treating assertions of unity such as those in Emerson’s writings as relatively empty statements. Claims James applies these arguments in his centenary address on Emerson to demonstrate that Emerson’s vision was essentially pluralistic, locating the fundamental pluralism of Emerson’s thought in his endorsement of a melioristic activism for human behavior that prefigures the ethics of both James and Dewey. Notes the necessity for extending James’ logic beyond his own conclusions, as some of James’ comments on Emerson suggest Emerson did not achieve philosophic consistency. By contrast, contemporary critics such as Poirier and Cavell are much more likely to see Emerson’s articulation of antagonistic views as a deliberate, perspectivist strategy that anticipates James’ pragmatic emphases on action, transition, and an anti-dogmatic openness.