The Oxford Dictionary definition for the word “truth” is “that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.” Although it seems simple enough, philosophers Rene Descartes and William James tackle the steps that are taken to arrive at the truth – both with different methods. In Descartes’ Discourse on Method and James’ What Pragmatism Means and Pragmatism’s Conception of Truth, they both bring up valuable points, of which most of us can relate to, but they do differ in terms of how they view the word truth to begin with. Descartes deals with the understanding of truth by applying reason (or in his terms, “good sense”), while James introduces the idea of ‘pragmatism,’ which deals with the practicality of truth.
Descartes shares his method on how he came to understand the process of arriving at the truth. First, it is important to take note of how Descartes essentially views the term reason and how he defines it. He begins by attributing reason to having “good sense,” which he uses to further explain how it allows us “the power of judging well and of distinguishing the true from the false,” (Descartes 1). But one might wonder if this is so, how come many of us arrive to different types of truth? This is an important question that both Descartes and James tackle. Descartes imposes the idea that some people arrive at their truths differently, or at different levels of success, because people apply their reason in a different matter than others. Different paths lead people into different understandings.
Thus Descartes develops a method that helps one conduct his or her reason well, and it is not meant to harm anyone, but instead offer it to be useful instead of the latter. He presents the model of it but does not pressure anyone to imitate it. The model consists of four laws, the first one stating, “Never to accept anything as true that I did not plainly know to be such; that is to say, carefully to...