In theory, pragmatism sounds like a fantastic solution to the problem that is the current political climate. Politicians use rational judgment to choose the best option, regardless of where the issue falls. Therefore, the pragmatist idea seems to be the most straightforward way to achieve the common good, which is the essential goal of politics and government. Furthermore, pragmatism allows for criticisms and guidance in democracies, while most current political thinking is governed by wanting to adhere to the status quo (Bacon & Chin, 2016). People get locked into political ideologies and are normally stubborn to change them. However, this is not something that can easily be changed. Studies have shown that people are “resistant to arguments against their political beliefs” and this resistance is primarily biological (Kaplan et al., 2016). This data suggests that as long as we have political ideologies in the political system, discourse will always be difficult. Due to our biological foundation, a system with political ideologies will always be unproductive. Finally, political ideologies have also been used to justify some of the greatest atrocities the planet has ever seen (i.e. the Holocaust). The Nazi party identified the Jewish people are there enemies and thus needed to be exterminated in the benefit of the state (Gerstenfeld, 2009). Without ideologies, it …show more content…
In Pragmatism in Politics, Warwick Chipman (1911, pg. 189) argues that because the doctrine of pragmatism does not acknowledge whether ideas will work today, in the long run or before “practical demonstration”, the two concepts are incompatible. Chipman continues that pragmatism gives “the handle, but not the tool” (1911, pg. 190). Here he is implying that pragmatism seems good in theory, but when actually applied to real world political decisions, it falls flat. Finally, he also mentions how you may believe yourself to be a true pragmatist, but this most likely is not true. He states that most pragmatists do not truly accomplish anything the doctrine sets out to accomplish (Chipman, 1911, pg. 191). Furthermore, American intellect Lewis Mumford also disagrees with the pragmatist ideology. In his essay The Corruption of Liberalism he argues that pragmatism ignores the impact of tradition while exaggerating the role of abstract thought (Mumford, 1940, pg. 569). Essentially, the argument he proposes in this essay is that the reason for the corruption of liberalism is a shift from ideal liberalism to pragmatic liberalism. Ideal liberalism focuses on the “experience of humanity”, while pragmatic liberalism is more concerned with “purely intellectual issues” (Mumford, 1940, pg. 572). Both of these perspectives on pragmatism