Chapter 1: William James and the Value of Beliefs

William James (1842–1910), an American philosopher and brother of novelist Henry James, transitioned from a medical career to philosophy. He is renowned for authoring The Principles of Psychology (1890), which established psychology as a credible science in the U.S. Building on Peirce's ideas, James integrated pragmatism into daily life. He asserted that the role of philosophy is to explore how various beliefs influence our lives. His quest focused on identifying truths that yield practical benefits. Key texts include The Will to Believe (1897) and Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking (1907).

For James, the central question for humanity—and thus for psychology and philosophy—is the practical utility of beliefs.

> "Will you or won't you have it so?" is the most probing question we are ever asked; we are asked it every hour of the day, and about the largest as well as the smallest, the most theoretical as well as the most practical, things. (The Principles of Psychology, 1182)

His early psychological work led him to recognize that we each experience the objective world through our subjective perceptions. He acknowledged the existence of an objective reality but emphasized that our lived experiences shape our understanding of it. Consequently, James redirected philosophical inquiry toward the individual's perspective and the significance of experiences and actions.

Like Peirce, James posited that truth hinges on the usefulness of a belief. He claimed that truth occurs when an idea successfully predicts new experiences, suggesting that we actively participate in shaping what is true. While he shared Peirce's empirical stance, James emphasized individual interpretation of beliefs' consequences in personal contexts. For him, truth is what is beneficial to each person, determined by their unique experiences.

This perspective might suggest a subjective free-for-all regarding beliefs, but that would be a misinterpretation. Individuals must base their truth claims on solid empirical evidence. James dismissed the notion of truth as a detached, objective reality, asserting instead that truth serves as a practical tool. He famously described truth as having a "cash value," with the utility of a belief ascertainable only by the individual. Knowledge, he argued, is derived solely from experience, and each person's experience is lived subjectively. A belief is true for an individual if it proves beneficial in their context, provided that they sensibly evaluate what works based on evidence.

James's philosophy centers around practical utility. Truth arises not merely from desire but from our actions. A scientific hypothesis is validated only after sufficient testing, while personal goals are authentic only post-action. He recognized the pluralistic nature of truth—what works for one person may not work for another, and various beliefs may be applicable in different contexts. There are multiple truths because numerous methods exist to accomplish tasks.

James's ideas sparked controversy. Critics accused him of promoting excessive subjectivity and relativism, challenging the traditional view that truth must be universal. Yet, he argued that truth's utility reflects how people have always behaved in their daily lives. Truth becomes a matter of usefulness; if an idea is beneficial, it is true—this is how we operate. Moreover, he suggested that truth serves as a means to facilitate our thinking. Interestingly, his ideas parallel those of Nietzsche, though James likely had no access to Nietzsche’s writings, as they had not yet been translated.

Similar to Peirce, James's pragmatism balances subjective experience with objective reality. Critics wrongly assumed he believed that willful belief alone determines truth. He clarified that asserting a belief is effective does not imply it merely feels good; it requires tangible evidence of its efficacy: "Experience, as we know, has ways of BOILING OVER and making us correct our present formula" (Pragmatism, VI.44, emphasis his).

James maintained that no absolute truth exists; however, we must diligently strive to align our beliefs with available evidence and adjust them in light of new experiences.

> Meanwhile we have to live to-day by what truth we can get to-day, and be ready to-morrow to call it falsehood. Ptolemaic astronomy, Euclidean space, Aristotelian logic, scholastic metaphysics, were expedient for centuries, but human experience has boiled over those limits, and we now call these things only relatively true, or true within those borders of experience. (Pragmatism, VI.45)

Truth serves as the most straightforward path to what works, and understanding what works leads to growth and learning throughout life, including in scientific inquiry.

Chapter 2: The Right to Believe

In The Will to Believe (1896), James addressed a paper by mathematician William K. Clifford, who contended that it is always morally wrong to believe without sufficient evidence. Clifford's position, targeting religious belief, posed a larger dilemma: adhering to his principle would lead to an inability to believe anything at all.

James highlighted the impossibility of attaining absolute knowledge, a reality overlooked by Clifford and other empiricists. He argued that belief formation is a complex process, involving multiple dimensions in making choices about what we believe and how we act. He distinguished between "living" and "dead" options, among others, defining a living option as one that holds appeal.

For example, the hypothesis that "aliens built the pyramids" is a dead option; it lacks plausibility and relevance. In contrast, genuine options—those that are forced, living, and momentous—entitle us to believe based on practical considerations, even with insufficient evidence. James illustrated this with the notion of developing a friendship, arguing that without belief in the possibility of connection, one is unlikely to cultivate it.

Religious beliefs represent live options, profoundly influencing our lives. If the concept of God proves beneficial—if it possesses cash value—then it is true for us on pragmatic grounds.

We Have Free Will

One genuine option we face is the belief in our own free will. The hypothesis is simple: we can choose our actions freely. Whether this belief holds true or not remains unprovable through reason alone, yet it represents a living and significant choice. James asserted that we are compelled to decide, advocating for the belief in free will as a practical choice.

In "The Dilemma of Determinism" (1884), James countered deterministic views, which claim all actions result from prior causes, leading to fatalism. He outlined a contradiction in determinism: if we regret actions, we imply the potential for alternatives, challenging the deterministic viewpoint.

James concluded that if determinism were correct, it would render our moral judgments nonsensical, leaving us with no practical framework for our lives. Embracing the idea of free will, he maintained, enriches our choices and actions.

In summary, James's philosophy underscores the importance of individual psychology. Each person navigates freewill choices based on their unique circumstances. Our beliefs are maintained as long as they serve a purpose, forming the foundation of a pragmatic worldview that has implications for science, philosophy, and personal life.