Machiavellian

So, here we go.

Let’s start off with a quote, from my good friend Tab’s father, “Philosophy is great son, but will it fix the kitchen sink?”

Yes, in the first instance, pragmatics is about philosophy.  Except, I’m afraid that philosophy errantly hijacked the term, as often happens, and morphed into something, as the above quote points out, less than useful.  In  philosophy, pragmatics is about meaning in context of linguistics.  That’s nice isn’t it?  Something all of the human species does on a moment by moment basis of existence, to help with navigating their place in the social constructs.  The action of this would be pragmatism, the actor, a pragmatist.  Except, philosophy interjects itself again, most notably through Charles Sanders Pierce and William James. Pierce coined the term for philosophy, William James solidifying his credit for such.  I’m thoroughly unimpressed, and pragmatics in philosophy is a redundancy of semiotics.  Basically, logical dissection of words and meanings which ends with a lot useless academia that tells us nothing about ourselves, especially in our most prevalent construct, societal interaction.

Great, back to the opening quote, which I will augment with one of my favorite phrases; “It’s a lot like watching a pack of monkeys, trying to hump a greased football”.  Meaning, sure, it can provide some entertainment, but what are we getting done?  The answer nothing, beyond a whole lot of mental masturbation for getting the dopamine dump which ends in us having happy thoughts that we’re really academically bright.

The problem is that pragmatics, and thereby, the pragmatist, is looking for something actually meaningful.  Ideas that can actually do something, and more importantly, do it correctly.

If philosophy won’t help us understand this, whatever will we do?  Here’s an idea, how about we go back before these cerebral stroking clods, and get back to the man that introduced the concept with stunning disseminations; Niccolo Machiavelli.  If you happen to go out to that page, you’ll notice this point, “Machiavelli never seems to have considered himself a philosopher—indeed, he often overtly rejected philosophical inquiry as beside the point”.  Well now, that’s an interesting bit.  A man who spent his best years in socio-political commentary, attempting to explain to the ruling Medici family, that they were basically lacking the fundamental understanding of human social behavior, and how that lack of understanding, coupled with their effete antics as rulers were working to their detriment, and the detriment of those they ruled; he found philosophical dialog and inquiry to be a less than useful aside.

Simply, the man understood human nature for the rulers and the unwashed masses, and he wanted to see things get done.  That is a primary point of the pragmatist; to see what is, not what makes people feel good about themselves or the situation.  His no non-sense approach to socio-political commentaries earned him the wrath of the church, which set about maligning him almost directly after his death.  This lets us know something else about the pragmatist; they aren’t going to make friends, especially with the unthinking crowds.  Machiavelli commented fairly consistently on the points of human repetitive behaviors, especially with morality/immorality, their need of recognition, their drive to ambition, and how that drive ends in corruption, mob rule/groupthink, etc.  From my perspective, the things he stated five hundred years ago about the socio-political behavior of the human, hasn’t shown itself to be non-factual.

At the root of it then, the pragmatist seeks what is correct, regardless “feelings”, morals, and/or perceptions.  Not because they are intent on being heartless tyrants, not because they are aberrant and unconcerned with human suffering; but that the bigger picture is getting done, what needs done, which usually ends up angering a fair number of people in the short run, but works out to the greatest benefit in the long run.

If there seems to be gaps here, have no fear, they’ll be plenty of revisiting to round out the case; life has an unerring ability to present case after case for inspection for the pragmatist.