OF PHILOSOPHY AND MALAYSIA MADANI: A CASE FOR PRAGMATISM

By
M.D. Hashim
(In collaboration with ChatGPT)
“The greatest discovery of my generation is that
human beings can alter their lives by altering their attitudes of mind.” -William James

ABSTRACT:

The article explores the prospect of reviving philosophy in Malaysia and commends the efforts
made by certain groups in Malaysia to popularize philosophy among the public. It also supports
the suggestion that philosophy should be taught in schools and universities in Malaysia,
emphasizing the need to prioritize the discipline in the curriculum. The article further considers
the importance of choosing a suitable philosophy or philosophical tradition, highlighting the
potential positive and negative effects of different philosophies on individuals and society. In this
regard, the author advocates pragmatism as a suitable philosophy for Malaysians. This is due to
the transformative power of pragmatism with its focus on practical matters, human flourishing,
and the consideration of the environment that can potentially benefit Malaysians in various
aspects of life, including philosophical enlightenment, problem-solving, ethics in politics, bridging
ideological divisions, and promoting a scientific culture. The article concludes by emphasizing the
potential benefits of infusing pragmatism into Malaysia Madani and the need to educate
Malaysians, including policymakers, about the principles and perspectives of philosophical
pragmatism.

I read with interest the opinion piece 'Malaysia Madani would benefit from the
revival of philosophy' by Pravin Periasamy, published in the business news
portal BusinessToday on 25 April 2023. This is for three reasons. The first
reason is its 'novelty' since it is rare to come across philosophical content in
local popular print media. This is because philosophy does not sell well when
so few Malaysians engage in philosophical pursuits. Furthermore, universities
in Malaysia are but a philosophical wasteland. They do not offer philosophy as
a major, providing clear evidence of its marginalization. As universities
primarily focus on disciplines that ensure students' material fulfilment,
philosophy is often overlooked or marginalized. Additionally, many academics
are either oblivious to, or avoiding engagement in serious debate and
discourse on philosophical issues or problems.
The second is the suggestion the writer puts forth to get Malaysians
philosophically educated. And third (which I find most informative) is the
reference the writer makes to the initiatives taken by certain groups to
popularize philosophy among Malaysians.
I fully support the writer's suggestion that philosophy should be taught in
schools and universities. The education authorities should urgently take note
of this and prioritize the discipline in the curriculum.
Furthermore, I wholeheartedly commend the determined efforts made by the
members of the Malaysian Philosophy Society to create philosophical
awareness among the Malaysian public, foster a love for philosophy in their

1
lives, and instil philosophical wisdom in their outlook and actions. I believe
that such efforts will successfully help philosophy, the love of wisdom, gain the
respect it deserves in Malaysian public life and academia.
I wish the Society the best in its benevolent endeavour to realize these ideas
and aspirations.
Personally, however, I hold the view that in today's socio-political conditions,
for anyone who wants to engage in philosophy seriously, particularly when
their work involves advocacy, they must fully address the question, 'Which
school of philosophy should I adopt?' or 'Which philosophical tradition should
I pursue?' This is necessary to ensure that the philosophy one chooses to
espouse will have a meaningful impact and remain relevant both personally
and to the people with whom it is shared.
Admittedly, there are countless philosophies out there, just as there are
countless philosophers. Wikipedia lists 417 philosophical schools of thought
and philosophical movements, five philosophical traditions, and ten
philosophical branches. Additionally, the City University of New York website
estimates that there are over 20,000 philosophers in the world today.
However, one cannot meet this challenge by simply selecting a philosophy or
body of thought from the Wikipedia list based solely on personal preferences,
feelings, or even instinct. This process is not akin to picking a dress from a store
rack based on one's fancy. The fact is, not all philosophies are created equal,
and an 'inappropriate choice' can have far-reaching effects that extend well
beyond mere buyer's remorse.
Undoubtedly, some philosophies can have positive effects on their adherents.
They can be enlightening, enriching, edifying, and transformative when
individuals gain new wisdom, insight, and understanding of the world.
Philosophies that encourage higher-order questioning can help individuals
flourish. They empower people to think for themselves and become critically
informed. Moreover, such philosophies can have a liberating effect, freeing
individuals from prejudices, biases, fixed beliefs, stereotypes, narrow-
mindedness, self-inflicted negativity, and bigotry. They can instil confidence,
hope, and optimism in individuals, especially when facing adversity and
hardship. These philosophies teach individuals that nothing on this earth lasts
forever and that things can and should be changed for the better. They remind
us that we are not necessarily doomed to the ideas, conventions, practices,
and institutions inherited from our progenitors. Furthermore, these
philosophies foster tolerance, understanding, inclusiveness, and empathy
among individuals living as members of a community. Lastly, as the ancient
Greeks believed, they can be therapeutic, acting as medicine for the soul,
when they help individuals better understand their true situation and gain
control over their emotions.

2
On the contrary, there are a significant number of philosophies that can have
adverse and deleterious effects on their followers and others. This presents an
irony, a contradiction in terms, as the word 'philosophy' itself implies a 'love
for wisdom’. Yet, there exist philosophies that justify destruction, violence,
tyranny, cruelty, exploitation, or oppression of human beings and the
environment. Prime examples include Machiavellianism, capitalism, Nazism,
fascism, certain variants of communism, and religious fundamentalism.
Similarly, there are philosophies that evoke among their adherents a sense of
hopelessness, despair, fatalism, solipsism, apathy, asceticism, pessimism, and
defeatism. One such example is Schopenhauer's philosophy of anti-natalism,
which argues that it is better to not have been born. Another example is
Epicureanism, which seeks to live a life without pain by relinquishing social and
political commitments. Furthermore, certain philosophies entice their
followers into a state of perpetual skepticism, cynicism, doubt, and extreme
relativism, rendering them paralyzed, nihilistic, or accepting of anything that
'rots the soul or sickens the mind’. Post-modernism often comes to mind in this
regard.
Some critics also argue that engaging in philosophy itself is an unnecessary
indulgence, deeming it pointless and a 'useless waste of time’. This criticism
often arises when a philosophy delves into overly abstract, speculative,
esoteric, ahistorical, trivial, or detached matters, divorced from actual human
issues and concerns. One particular target of such criticism is analytic
philosophy, which strives to describe the world in the most linguistically
precise manner possible, utilizing formal logic and mathematical-like language
to present an accurate depiction of reality. However, it is often deemed
inaccessible to anyone who is not 'incredibly intelligent’. For instance, an
analytic philosopher might pose you this question: ‘Does the table in front of
you exist independent of your perception of it?’
How then does one precisely engage in philosophy? What are the criteria? Is
there a formula to follow?
Regrettably, there is no predetermined process or timeless formula that one
can adhere to when making this decision. I believe that individuals define their
criteria or devise their own formula based on the objectives they aim to
achieve. However, these objectives can vary significantly from person to
person, influenced by their individual temperament. Are the objectives to live
a happy, meaningful, and worthwhile life? To understand our identity and
purpose? To determine what is true and valuable? To discover our true
passions? To seek certainty? To uncover the 'Truth'? Or to answer the profound
questions of life?
These are the frequently cited goals for individuals who engage in philosophy.
However, I find these goals to be narrow and overly focused on the individual.

3
Understandably, they arise from a belief about human existence that perceives
an individual as a detached and self-contained entity. This perspective assumes
that the innermost essence of a human is purely mental (pure rationality) and
spiritual (soul), separate from the physical body. Furthermore, this view
considers experience to be confined exclusively within an individual's body and
mind, while ethics and morality are believed to emerge from transcendent
universals.
The contrasting view, to which I subscribe, posits that a human being is always
and everywhere a 'being-in-an-environment,' thereby emphasizing the
inseparable connection between the individual and their surroundings. The
environment of an individual comprises both the natural and the human (or
social) aspects, and both are equally significant.
Contrary to the individual-focused view that asserts the supremacy of 'Idea' or
'Soul' over the material and physical, which regards humans as possessing a
unique intellectual insight or faculty into the nature of things, the 'being-in-
an-environment' conception of humans 'rejects the notion that mind or
consciousness is a separate entity existing above or apart from the natural
world’. Moreover, it contends that the human brain has no direct access to the
external (material) world, let alone the 'supernatural world’. As Immanuel Kant
puts it, 'Sealed within the dark, silent chamber of your skull, your brain has
never directly experienced the external world, and it never will’. What enables
humans to experience the world, therefore, is the mental framework of
'categories' or concepts of understanding that develop in their brains through
their interaction with the environment. Through these categories, human
beings create and develop meanings as tools to guide their actions. However,
these categories, in turn, impose limitations on the experience itself, in the
sense that 'we can only think in the terms we possess, and we cannot
transcend our thoughts to grasp a nature independent of our
conceptualization of it.
With regard to the social aspect of the human environment, the insights of
John Dewey, an American philosopher, are particularly instructive. Dewey
emphasized the organic relationship between the individual and society.
Therefore, he considered it crucial for individuals to not only commune with
nature but also engage with their fellow beings, 'and to wonder at and
appreciate their achievements’. According to Dewey, the individual 'self'
cannot develop in solitude, 'nor can it grow solely through contact with
nature’. For human growth, the essential element is that individuals should
live among their fellow human beings, immersing their lives in the social fabric
of the nation. This involves engaging with the nation's social life, its laws and
regulations (nomos), and the spirit of its culture (ethos)."
Based on this 'being-in-an-environment' conception of human beings, we can
establish several criteria for defining the objectives of engaging in philosophy.

4
Firstly, we are not interested in any philosophy that is solely preoccupied with
comprehending a reality that is 'out there,' separate from our minds. Instead,
we seek a philosophy that attends to matters and affairs in the present, in this
world - matters and affairs that we experience directly. This is a philosophy
that focuses not on 'dead issues' such as 'Is the table really there?' or 'Is
everything predetermined?' but on real 'living' issues - issues that actively
impact 'how people get along in the world’. These are the issues that truly
make a difference in people's lives and decisions. In essence, it is a philosophy
or way of thinking that aims to fulfil the practical needs of life; a philosophy as
a means to an end.
Secondly, as a corollary to the above, the philosophy we aim to embrace is not
one that solely preoccupies itself with the question 'What is life?' but rather
one that helps make life worth living. This is the philosophy that can enable
individuals to flourish and become fully realized human beings. It kindles hope
in people for the possibility of improving the human condition and creating a
better future.
However, human flourishing does not occur in complete isolation. Instead,
individuals can only flourish in the company of others. As Aristotle reminds us
in Politics, 'Only a beast or a god would live outside the polis’. Moreover, as
John Dewey indicated earlier, a significant portion of human potential lies in
their interactions with others. Therefore, as the third criterion for defining the
objectives of engaging in philosophy, the philosophy one pursues must have
compelling consideration for the interpersonal and communal dimensions of
human flourishing. It should promote the possibility for different individuals to
flourish alongside each other.
Additionally, human flourishing is dependent on the connection with nature.
Humans heavily rely on nature to provide the essentials for survival, such as
breathable air, drinkable water, and nutritious food. Moreover, the ecosystem
fundamentally influences their ability to grow, realize their potential, and live
long, healthy lives. Hence, a philosophy that encompasses human flourishing
must acknowledge and honour the interdependence between humans and
nature, fostering mutual flourishing.
I will now restate the three criteria that should guide the goal-setting task for
individuals wishing to pursue and advocate a philosophy. Firstly, the chosen
philosophy should address practical matters in this world. Secondly, it should
promote human flourishing and progress. Lastly, it should give proper
consideration to achieving human flourishing both individually and
collectively. This entails individuals attaining personal goals while also living
harmoniously with their fellow human beings and the environment.
It is heartening to know that the Malaysian Philosophy Society emphasizes
these criteria in its Vision Statement, which states: 'The Malaysian Philosophy

5
Society envisions a world where philosophy plays an important and practical
role in improving the quality of lives and influencing social change’.
Which philosophy or philosophies, then, meet these criteria? In this regard, I
emphatically assert that Pragmatism fits the bill.
To clarify and perhaps digress, it is important to emphasize that the term
'pragmatism' used here refers to its philosophical meaning, which must be
distinguished from its ordinary or typical usage in commercial, sporting, or
political contexts. In ordinary language, 'pragmatism' may denote 'a practical
approach to problems,' 'addressing the practicalities of simply getting things
done based on the demands of the situation,' and 'avoiding being burdened
by doctrine, ideology, or abstract values’. It can imply an inclination towards
easy compromise, short-term expediency, and a willingness to do whatever it
takes to achieve a goal, often taking the path of least resistance.
However, it is crucial to note that when used in its crass, vulgar, and brutal
form, pragmatism can mislead by connoting a ruthless and Machiavellian
search for mercenary or political advantage. It can be associated with the
exercise of power to achieve practical and specific objectives, even if those
objectives are primarily self-serving, and the means employed are cold and
mechanical.
In philosophy, by comparison, pragmatism refers to an intellectual tradition
that acknowledges and accounts for the social experience of human beings
living and working together. It emphasizes the importance of practical
problem-solving, experimental inquiry, and the utilization of knowledge and
ideas to improve the human condition. This tradition asserts that ideas and
theories are not merely abstract concepts, but they have real-world
implications that impact people's lives and societies.
Historically, pragmatism originated in America during the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries through the efforts of several influential figures:
Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey, Jane Addams, and George
Herbert Mead. However, pragmatism experienced a decline in popularity
during the mid-twentieth century, particularly after the advent of World War
II. McCarthyism and the 'Red Scare' resulted in its purging from academia, with
many American politicians and professors becoming cautious about expressing
viewpoints associated with communism. These viewpoints often addressed
issues such as the plight of the poor and economically disadvantaged, support
for labor unions, and opposition to exploitative economic practices. Outside of
America, pragmatism began to take root in China in the 1920s, thanks to the
efforts of John Dewey's followers, led by his student Hu Shih, who aimed to
put pragmatism into practice in their pursuit of democracy. However, since the
1960s, the pragmatist tradition has experienced a significant revival and has
found congenial places to flourish within growing intellectual movements.

6
Etymologically, the word 'pragmatism' derives its meaning from the Greek
word 'pragma,' which signifies 'activity' or 'work done’. Alternatively, some
scholars propose that 'pragmatism' is derived from the Greek word
'pragmatikos,' meaning 'practicability,' 'experimentation,' or 'utility’. Martin
Heidegger, a German philosopher, takes it a step further by drawing attention
to the Greek word 'pragmata,' the root of 'pragmatic,' which serves as a
generic term for 'things' as well as 'deeds' or 'actions’.
I have previously asserted that pragmatism, as a philosophical perspective, is
a suitable choice that aligns with the three criteria of goal-setting for anyone
intending to engage in philosophy: practicability, human flourishing, and
concern for environmental (social and natural) well-being. I hold this position
primarily based on pragmatism's key tenets, which form the foundation of its
profound commitment to achieving these goals.
1. Pragmatism essentially focuses on the 'here and now' dimension of human
life and places a strong emphasis on the importance of practicality. It
attends to the present moment and addresses immediate practical
concerns and challenges, real 'living' issues that individuals face. In support
of this tenet, pragmatism emphasizes the following ideas:

• Belief in 'practical philosophy': Pragmatism holds the belief that

philosophy is not merely a wisdom of the past, but rather a means to
solve practical problems in life. In the words of John Dewey, 'Philosophy,
in order to be philosophy, should have meaning and utility in the solution
of human problems. It should be practical and useful in influencing the
conduct of life, rather than a passive inquiry or contemplation’. William
James emphasizes the same point, stating that philosophy 'is
meaningless if it has no practical use in our daily lives’. According to
pragmatism, the 'truth' of an idea depends on its outcome and its impact
on lived experience, rather than solely on its first principles or a priori
logic.
• Empirical, experience-oriented stances: Pragmatism, being primarily
empiricist and inspired by actual human experiences, places importance
on humans' direct engagement with the world as a source of knowledge.
Pragmatists believe that humans gain knowledge and understanding
through direct experiences, interactions, and observations of the
surrounding environment. They derive their doctrines from concrete
realities of life that are directly experienced, rather than starting with
presuppositions, eternal truth, or a priori knowledge. Furthermore, they
ground knowledge on evidence and practical outcomes that can be
confirmed by science and the scientific method, rather than relying on
abstract or speculative reasoning.
• The problematic nature of the human world: Pragmatism perceives the
world in which humans live as 'a scene of risk,' characterized by

7
 uncertainty and instability, where 'dangers are irregular, inconstant, and
cannot be predicted’. According to pragmatism, human life is filled with
problematic situations and challenges. John Dewey argues that
problems will always be present, and 'we typically solve old problems at
the cost of creating new problems for ourselves’. This is because the
'reality' out there, as recognized by the ancient Greek philosopher
Heraclitus, is not static. It constantly changes due to various factors such
as the environment, human actors, and available resources. As a result,
new conditions become problematic and challenging once people realize
that their old ways of doing things or previous solutions no longer work
in different situations or at different scales. Pragmatism acknowledges
this reality of the human condition and encourages individuals to directly
confront and address these problems and challenges. It promotes the
search for new solutions and innovative practices, rather than getting
caught up in abstract or speculative contemplation that is detached from
practical realities. To paraphrase John Dewey, as organisms, we are
inevitably faced with problems to which we do not know how to
respond. This necessitates a continuous generation of knowledge in
order to adapt to a changing world.
• Practical problem-solving: Pragmatism's primary focus lies in solving
practical problems and addressing immediate needs. To achieve this,
pragmatism aims to uncover practical knowledge that effectively works
in specific situations. The acquired knowledge is measured by its
problem-solving capacity in everyday life, rather than its universal
applicability. Pragmatism encourages individuals to closely engage with
the concrete situations they encounter in the present and seek workable
solutions that yield positive outcomes. For pragmatists, philosophy
emerges when problems occur, as it involves thinking about what to do
in life situations. The emphasis on practicability makes pragmatism a
practical and matter-of-fact approach to assessing situations and solving
problems. As Dewey emphasized, the utility of an idea or theory lies in
its problem-solving power, and pragmatic coping should not be equated
with emotional consolation or subjective comfort. What is essential is
that ideas and theories prove their worth over time by consistently
solving pressing problems and addressing significant difficulties faced by
inquirers. Consequently, some scholars view pragmatism as a
philosophical method for action rather than a philosophical theory in
itself.
• The primacy of human action and purpose: Pragmatism views humans as
creatures of action before being subjects of rational thought. Action
holds fundamental importance in existence itself. Pragmatism asserts
that we seek knowledge not solely for the sake of truth, but rather for
the purpose of more effective action in realizing our goals in life.
Therefore, in pragmatism, every thought or belief is subordinate to

8
 action, and a belief functions as a guiding principle for action. Charles
Sanders Peirce, one of the early founders of pragmatism, eloquently
explained this notion: "We must not begin by discussing pure ideas,
wandering thoughts that roam the public roads without any human
habitation, but we must start with individuals and their conversations."
• Outcome-oriented approach - 'It is the fruit, not the root, that matters':
Pragmatism holds that ideas, beliefs, thoughts, concepts, or propositions
are essentially instruments and plans of action. Their meaning and
implications should be judged based on their observable practical
outcomes or real-world consequences in achieving desired goals, rather
than abstract principles or anything metaphysical or a priori. In other
words, for pragmatism, theories and models should primarily be
evaluated based on their fruits and consequences, rather than their
origins or their relation to antecedent data or facts. Simply put, there is
no meaning without practical consequences. By focusing on concrete
results in experience, pragmatism assesses ideas and beliefs based on
their fruits, not their roots. This pragmatic maxim was first stated by C.
S. Peirce in 1878: 'Examine what the practical effects of your design can
be: the design of all these effects is your whole conception of the object’.
William James expressed a similar idea: 'If there is no practical difference
in the effects of two different concepts, then they refer to the same
thing’. This maxim helps settle metaphysical disputes efficiently (more of
this later). As James points out, 'All dispute is idle' unless it has some
practical consequence, and the quicker one can arrive at this
consequence, the better. The maxim also encourages us to evaluate the
expected consequences of our practices, plans, intentions, and decisions
before implementing them in order to achieve the desired results. To this
end, we can employ various techniques such as inferences, predictions,
forecasts, and scenarios.
• Emphasis on Experimentation: As a corollary to the above, pragmatism
places special emphasis on the value of experimentation and views
human experience itself as experimentation. It advocates testing every
proposition by examining its practical implications. If these implications
are desirable, the proposition is accepted; otherwise, it is rejected.
Therefore, pragmatists deeply appreciate the accumulated wisdom of
the past but do not allow themselves to be bound by it. By highlighting
the idea of experience as experimentation, both old and new ideas can
be tested to see what they produce in experience. What worked well in
the past may not necessarily work well in the present or future. John
Dewey states, 'I affirm that the term 'pragmatic' means only the rule of
referring all thinking, all reflective consideration, to consequences for
final meaning and test’. For pragmatists, all intelligent action involves
experimentation, both at a symbolic level and a practical level.

9
 • Emphasis on the principle of utility: As a corollary to the above precept,
pragmatism emphasizes that any idea or thing does not have inherent
value but gains significance only through its utility. Essentially, only ideas
and things that have utility for humans, as proven by their actual
outcomes, are considered 'true'. In the words of William James, 'It is true
because it is useful’. In this sense, pragmatism aligns with utilitarian
philosophy. It seeks to address real-world problems and concerns by
emphasizing the usefulness and effectiveness of ideas, concepts, and
beliefs in guiding human action and decision-making. Therefore, for
pragmatists, an idea possesses qualities of truth as long as it proves
useful in helping us resolve the problems we face - the principle of
gravity is considered true based on its practical consequences.
• Contextual consideration and adaptability of ideas and actions:
Pragmatism asserts that the meaning and value of ideas, beliefs, and
actions - as demonstrated by their actual consequences, as mentioned
above - can vary over time based on the specific context in which they
are applied. Consequently, when the context or situation changes (as
previously noted, it is never static), whatever 'works' will also change.
The consequence and value of an idea or action must be adaptable to
the changing context, despite the idea or action being the same. Such a
pragmatic assessment urges us to be flexible rather than rigid when
making decisions or taking actions. We need to be aware that
unforeseen or unintended consequences may arise and align and adapt
our decisions or actions accordingly, using feedback and new
information, and even considering 'trade-offs', to maximize positive
outcomes and minimize negative consequences.
• Future looking: Unlike the absolutist vision of reality as perfect,
complete, and fixed for all eternity, pragmatism argues that reality is still
in the process of formation and development. It is being made and
redesigned to fulfil the purposes and desires of human beings to such an
extent that all their needs and requirements are fully satisfied.
Pragmatist William James further cautions that attempting to
understand life through absolute concepts is 'to arrest its movement’.
Pragmatism, on the contrary, propels life forward. It is a humanistic
philosophy that fosters an attitude that is optimistic, developing, and
progressive.
2. Pragmatism, often regarded as a 'hopeful philosophy' by many scholars,
places significant emphasis on the concept of human flourishing and
progress. As Pierce eloquently stated, pragmatism is ‘a philosophy so
instinct with life’. Pragmatism continues the Aristotelian tradition that
views 'human flourishing' as the objective of ethics and governments, with
human 'flourishing' (eudaimonia) being 'the end of all political activity’.
John Dewey, a co-founder of pragmatism, applies this idea in the modern

10
context, arguing that 'any progress (social, political, economic, etc.) is not
possible without human flourishing, without the fulfilment of individuals'
powers and capacities’. Furthermore, 'a philosophy concerned with
political and social reform does not make sense without equal concern for
individual human flourishing’. According to Dewey, these two dimensions
of human life are deeply interconnected, as 'political and social progress
occurs through individual flourishing and, in turn, individuals are the agents
of social and political progress’.
However, unlike Aristotle, who treats eudaimonia as part of virtue ethics,
pragmatism derives its deep commitment to human flourishing from the
'transformative attitude toward life' founded on the concept of 'meliorism’.
Meliorism, a term derived from the Latin word 'melior,' denotes that 'the
world and everything would be better with joint human effort’. The early
pragmatist thinkers and philosophers discussed and debated the concept
extensively, making it central to their philosophical outlook. As meliorists,
the founding pragmatists argue diligently for the possibility of
improvement in the human condition. Pragmatism, the philosophy they
helped bring into existence, ultimately embodies a philosophical
hopefulness 'about life and its amelioration’. William James, one of the
important philosophers emphasizing meliorism in pragmatism, asserts that
people should work together 'to change and ameliorate the imperfect
world into a good place’. In James' scheme of things, humans are at the
centre of the universe as curious, enthusiastic, hardworking, and
imaginative beings. Through the notion of meliorism, pragmatism
motivates them to take action 'with a high level of hope' that 'the world
can indeed be transformed for the better’.
It is noteworthy that meliorism - or the philosophical call to hopefulness -
combines two central themes in the pragmatist vision: pluralism and
humanism. It also resonates with 'the central ethical impulse at the heart
of pragmatism,' which is democracy.

• Pluralism: Pluralism, the thesis that acknowledges the existence of

multiple realities, is fully embraced by pragmatism. It rejects the notion
of a single, permanent, and all-encompassing truth or a static universe
devoid of change and contingency. William James affirms this by stating
that ‘the world we live in exists diffuse and distributed’. Pragmatism
recognizes the world as a 'pluriverse' rather than a universe,
emphasizing that there isn't a single fixed way that things are. The
world is dynamic, open, and contingent. In light of this, pragmatism
views human practices as inherently diverse and contingent, making
pluralism an integral aspect of the philosophy. By applying pluralism to
reality, itself, pragmatism holds the promise that things can always be

11
 different from how they currently are, allowing for the possibility of
better futures.
• Humanism: Humanism, closely related to pluralism, asserts that
human beings, through their actions, make meaningful contributions
to the plurality of the world. William James expresses this idea by
stating, ‘the world stands really malleable, waiting to receive its final
touches at our hands... Man engenders truths upon it’. The reality we
inhabit depends on our active contributions, interests, and purposes.
• Democracy: Pragmatism, deeply committed to the melioristic vision of
human life, strongly advocates for democracy. Democracy shares with
meliorism the goal of human progress and improvement. More
significantly, democracy emphasizes the belief that such progress and
improvement rely on nothing more than individuals, their values, and
their actions. This marks a radical shift from earlier conceptions of
human progress that depended on external powers. Democracy
refuses reliance on anything outside of human agency.
Meliorism recognizes that achieving human progress and betterment
requires a concrete and favourable social context. In this regard,
democracy serves as an ideal platform for the expression of melioristic
aspirations and the translation of those aspirations into concrete
actions.
Democracy provides a social practice dedicated to promoting individual
participation, freedom, and well-being. It grants equal opportunities
for individuals to shape their own destinies, voice their concerns,
advocate for change, and engage in collaborative decision-making.
According to John Dewey, democracy is an active process of social
planning and collective action across all aspects of communal life. It
serves as a source of moral values that guide the establishment and
evolution of social institutions that foster human flourishing. Dewey
even characterizes democracy as 'social intelligence’. Unlike other
practices or traditions, democracy enables individuals to consciously
collaborate and consult with one another to identify and address
shared problems. Within a fully democratic society, people would treat
each other with respect, demonstrate a willingness to revise their
views, and maintain a commitment to cooperative action.
3. Pragmatism, in its melioristic pursuit of human flourishing and
development, acknowledges the paramount importance of considering the
environment – encompassing both the natural and social realms – in which
individuals exist. Recognizing the interconnectedness of humans and their
environment, pragmatic thinkers hold a firm belief that human flourishing
cannot be divorced from the context in which it occurs. In their view,
individuals are fully embedded in a complex system of relationships and

12
 interactions with their surroundings, essentially the physical, social and
cultural environment. Hence, individuals’ ability to flourish and grow can
only take place by virtue of their interaction – by adapting and adjusting -
with the environment.
From this standpoint, pragmatism further emphasises that the
achievement of human flourishing should not come at the cost of others’
well-being, whether it be fellow individuals or the sustainability of the
natural world. To this end, pragmatists advocate for an ethical stance that
balances individual and collective needs, taking into consideration the long-
term consequences of actions and decisions both on human and non-
human stakeholders. To pragmatism, therefore, ‘flourishing is not only
about a single human being, but regards humanity in a wider sense’.
Above, I have outlined the key tenets of pragmatism and the related concepts
and ideas that form the foundation of its philosophical goals – practicable
human issues, human flourishing and progress, and the delicate balance
between the wellbeing of individuals and communities and the necessity of
sustaining the natural world. However, it is important to acknowledge other
foundational principles of pragmatism that not only underpin these goals but
also provide the means through which they may be realized.

• Community: The concept of community plays a central role in pragmatism

as a philosophical tradition grounded in practice. This is because
pragmatism,
(a) holds that ideas and actions cannot be divorced from their social context
- the community or social setting in which ideas and actions occur largely
determine and shape their consequences and meanings, such that the
same idea may have different consequences or meanings in different social
contexts;
(b) values the significance of interaction and shared experiences among
individuals – a community provides the environment for such interactions
to happen;
(c) stresses on the importance of considering the social consequences and
public interests when evaluating ideas and actions – a community provides
a framework for assessing the impact of beliefs and decisions on the
broader society, thereby promoting a concern for the common good;
(d) fosters a culture of open dialogue, reflective deliberation, and
democratic practices that engage all stakeholders – within a community,
individuals have the opportunity to actively participate in these activities,
enabling them to explore diverse perspectives, assess the practical
implications of various options, and make informed decisions rooted in
collective wisdom and shared goals;

13
 (e) recognizes that human knowledge is not static but evolves through
continuous learning and growth - communities provides a fertile ground for
individuals to exchange ideas, test assumptions, refine beliefs and correct
actions based on shared experiences and insights;
(f) acknowledges that not only is an idea or action true if it ‘works’, it must
also be ‘good’ – a community, which pragmatism views as a ‘moral entity’
recognizes the interdependence of individuals and emphasizes the ethical
obligations and responsibilities that arise from this interconnectedness, and
hence, ethical considerations are just as crucial in selecting the means to
achieve an end as they are in determining the end itself.
In pragmatism, therefore, ‘[c]ommunity, is not only a cognitive theme …but
an aesthetic, ethical, and political one, and it contributes to pragmatism’s
fundamentally democratic orientation’. (Shusterman)

• Anti-foundationalism: Anti-foundationalism lies at the core of the

pragmatic philosophy. The pragmatic thinkers reject the idea of a single
unified whole in which everything is ultimately interrelated. Some of the
implications flowing from this view are the following.
(a) Life is defined by personal experiences, and, hence, a person's view of
life is an ‘ongoing self-corrective process’.
(b) As a corollary to this, the existence of what people refer to as knowledge
does not rest ‘on a secure foundation whether we think of this foundation
as ultimate principles or even ultimate sense data’. It only exists because
people have created it according to their needs and situations. As such
knowledge is transient; it changes with time and ‘exists only until something
better comes along to replace it’.
(c) Human reason and rationality are relative, contingent and fallible rather
than existing as a system of eternal truths. Rationality is person and
situation specific: ‘what is rational for one person at a particular socio-
historical time and place might not be rational for another person at a
different time and place; or, for that matter, what is rational for a person in
the same time and place may be irrational for another person in the same
time and place’. As anti-foundationalist, pragmatism allows, or even
encourages, the modification of beliefs.
(d) There are no fixed or standard values available in the real world. People
create their values during the course of activity. Hence, values get
themselves changed in accordance with the time and situations.
(e) Similarly, truths are man-made products and there is nothing like
absolute truth. The pragmatists’ view of ‘truth’, therefore, radically departs
from that of many other philosophers who conceive truth as something
that is ‘out there’, unchangeable, abstract, universal, and absolute. To these

14
 philosophers, truth is foundational and essential. They believe that there is
an inherent structure in the universe and we must discover what exactly it
is. ‘One merely needs to uncover a segment of the structure of the universe
and the rest of truth will reveal itself’. As one writer has succinctly
commented, in this tradition, ‘Truth can be reasoned to from the solitude
of desk. Experience does not change truth, does not touch it. Truths just
need to be gathered in’. More simply, ‘obtaining truth means getting the
concepts in our minds to mirror or correspond to that which exists ‘out
there’ in reality’. And an ‘individual’s reason can carry them to the whole of
noble, perfect truth’. By contrast, pragmatist philosophers like Charles
Sanders Peirce argue that the pursuit of truth is a collective endeavour
manifesting in what he calls ‘the community of inquirers’. For Pierce, no
single individual has a totalized view of reality. Instead, we test out the truth
qualities and meaning of our ideas, theory and doctrines according to their
practical consequences, and not what is supposed a priori. ‘By expanding
our community of fellow inquirers, we expose ourselves to a wider range of
experiences that can tell us a bit more about the practical consequences of
ideas in the lives of many people, across many times, and within particular
places’. Similarly, Wiliam James, asserts that the test of a theory, a belief, a
doctrine, must be its effects on us, its practical consequences. This is the
pragmatic test.
Always ask yourself what difference it will make in your experience
whether you accept materialism or idealism, determinism or free will,
monism or pluralism, atheism or theism… The test of truth, then, is its
practical consequences; the possession of truth is not an end in itself,
but only a preliminary means to other vital satisfactions. Knowledge is
an instrument; it exists for the sake of life, not life for the sake of
knowledge’. He further affirms that ‘Truth is not an unchanging or
inherent property of an idea; it is something that happens to an idea
when it is verified by experience… Neither is truth something we
discover in reality, as though it existed there before we thought about
it. We make truth by formulating ideas and acting upon them; the
process of verification (as the word indicates) is indeed one of ‘truth-
making’.
Bergson elaborates on the nature of truth in James’s philosophy, thus:
‘We invent truth in order to use reality, as we create mechanical
devices to use natural forces. It seems to me that we can sum up the
whole essence of the pragmatic conception of truth in a formula such
as this: while in other doctrines a new truth is a discovery, for
pragmatism it is an invention’.

• Fallibilism: For pragmatists, fallibilism is the alternative to foundationalism.

It is the thesis that any validity claim, whether founded on human

15
 knowledge, beliefs, ideas or theories is inherently fallible and subject to
challenge and revision. Pragmatists acknowledge the potential for error,
uncertainty, and revision in our beliefs and theories, and as such they
maintain a sceptical stance toward absolute certainty and emphasize the
provisional nature of knowledge. This promotes an open-minded and
flexible approach to knowledge, where ideas are subject to testing and
refinement. Understood as an ethical and political virtue, fallibilism
encourages a ‘willingness to be open-minded, to listen to others, to learn
from others, and a willingness to modify one’s views in light of public
criticism’.
• Radical contingency: Contingency and chance have always been
problematic for many traditional philosophies in their preoccupation with
the search for truth and the quest for certainty (particularly in relation to
moral goals and principles). But this is not the case for pragmatism. For the
pragmatists, contingency and chance are far from merely signs of human
ignorance, as some traditions claim. Instead, they are constituents of the
universe and our experience. This means that ‘the universe is an open
universe which can be a source of both tragedy and opportunity’. The
primary task or challenge for us is how to respond to contingency. To this
end, ‘pragmatists emphasize cultivating those critical habits that constitute
reflective intelligence’.
• Holism: This is pragmatism’s orientation toward seeing things in terms of
their continuities rather than dualisms. For instance, pragmatism
emphasizes the continuities between the body and mind, nature and
culture, and theory and practice, whereas many other traditions rigidly
treat these aspects as separate entities. Other salient continuities in
pragmatism include ‘common sense and scientific inquiry, science and art,
thought and feeling, and ethics and aesthetics’. As Dewey points out,
‘dualism rests on the mistaken belief that there are static and unchanging
metaphysical realities or "substances"’. Holism, for pragmatism, also ‘points
toward the integrative and relational nature of our beliefs, desires,
practices, and purposes’. Hence, these things do not derive their meaning
in isolation. They are instead linked together in a complex network, and
they acquire their meaning, significance, or validity through their
relationship to other elements in that network. For example, ‘the meaning
of an action is not in the physical act itself but is rather a function of the
entire context of purposes, situation, and anticipated reactions and
consequences of the act’. Similarly, the ‘identity of an individual person is
not her autonomous product but rather a function of her relationships with
other people’.
• Lived experience or active experience: The idea of ‘lived experience,’ or
active experience is central to pragmatism. Unlike thinkers of other
traditions, such as the British empiricism that conceives experience as mere
appearance or ‘being just our sensory perception of the world’, the early

16
 pragmatists (Peirce, James, and Dewey) advance ‘a notion of experience
that is communally focused, based on an ever-evolving world, and linked
closely to the art of human communication’. They (particularly Dewey) are
emphatic that experience does not exist in our heads or in our bodies but
in the interaction (or transaction) between ourselves and the world. ‘We
act on the world and it acts on us. Our actions change the world, as it
changes us. We experience our actions and their consequences’. Moreover,
our experience is not a passively mirrored reflection of external reality (as
a crude ‘correspondence’ theory of truth claims). ‘Rather it is an active
creation of sensations, pictures, models, and operations which we use to
cope with reality. Faced with some problem, we have to work out a way to
solve the problem, by inquiry’. As one pragmatist writes, ‘in a world that is
constantly changing and malleable, we must turn toward experience,
pushing against the ease of abstractions moving into the messy realities of
existence. Inquiry is not just experiential but experimental’. Lived
experience, for the pragmatists, has a significant social dimension. They
claim that our experiences are never just between us and the physical
environment. ‘They are social. We could not think without the language and
concepts that came from our cultural environment. Our experiencing is
communal, as is that of science. Like scientists, we do best when we can
exchange ideas and experiences, share thoughts, and argue out
competitive solutions. Inquiry is social and works best when cooperative'.
A further implication of the concept of lived experience for pragmatism is
that since it rejects the possibility of moral absolutes ipso facto ‘it rejects
the possibility of moral principles which are not connected to experience’.
However, this does not render pragmatism succumbing to relativism, since,
as Ruth Anna Putnam has pointed out, ‘all evaluations are firmly rooted in
and are correctible by experience’. In other terms, experience possesses the
capacity to corroborate assessments and valuations because it is objective
and general, i.e., ‘it is uniform, common to everyone, social and shared’.
I present here a quick recap of what I believe to be the primary goals of
pragmatism as a philosophical endeavour, along with its main tenets and
foundational principles that inform and guide those goals. Firstly, pragmatism
seeks to directly address practicable human issues, specifically those that
confront individuals in their everyday lives. Secondly, it strives for human
flourishing, development, and progress, placing great attention on meeting
people's survival needs and enhancing their quality of life. Thirdly, it
unreservedly maintains the delicate balance between the well-being of
individuals and their communities, while also recognizing the necessity of
sustaining the natural environment in the pursuit of human flourishing. To
support these goals, pragmatism expounds upon the following ideas or tenets:

17
• it prioritizes the practical, accessible, and sensible aspects (over the
theoretical and the abstract), focusing on addressing real-life challenges
that individuals encounter in their daily lives;
• it adopts an empirical and experience-oriented approach, diverging from
the problematic abstract and absolutist stance of traditional philosophy;
thereby, it prioritizes facts, practicality, and actionable solutions;
• it acknowledges the human world as ‘problematic’, one fraught with
uncertainty and instability thereby confronting people everywhere with
persistent problems and challenges;
• it emphasizes the pursuit of practical solutions to problems and the
discovery of effective and realistic ways to overcome the challenges
encountered by individuals;
• it gives primacy to human action and purpose such that every thought or
belief is subordinated to action, and becomes a rule for action;
• it advocates an outcomes-oriented approach, placing emphasis on results
and consequences, such that the meaning of any idea must be judged
against their observable practical outcomes, or real-world consequences in
terms of achieving desired goal/s;
• it places significant importance on the scientific principles of
experimentation, observation, and verification, and the attendant demand
for the testing and verification of every idea or statement, whether old or
new, to ascertain its actual effects in practical experience;
• it promotes the principles of utility, usefulness, and profitability in
evaluating the worth or value of any policy, belief, or idea; these values
serve as the basis for determining their significance and importance;
• it maintains that ideas, beliefs and actions are context-bound such that
their meaning and value are not absolute and eternal, but can vary over
time according to the specific context in which they are applied;
• it embraces a forward-looking perspective, recognizing that the world is
constantly evolving and shaping itself, offering a future that is both
promising and beneficial for humanity, in contrast to the present;
• it upholds pluralism and firmly rejects the notion of a singular privileged
standpoint for understanding everything, allowing for ongoing exploration,
fallibility, experimentation, and interpretation, keeping things open-ended;
• it embraces humanism by recognizing that human creativity has the power
to shape and enrich the world they encounter, which is ‘unfinished,
incomplete, and malleable’;
• it staunchly upholds democracy as the most optimal social arrangement to
guide human beings toward collaborative problem-solving, the pursuit of
shared interests, and the advancement of scientific inquiry;
• it acknowledges the vital role of the community in shaping individuals'
beliefs and values, as it is through social interactions, shared experiences,
and collective problem-solving that these aspects are formed; moreover,

18
 the well-being and progress that all knowledge of individuals are intimately
connected to the overall well-being and progress of the community;
• It embraces anti-foundationalism by rejecting the idea that all knowledge
rests on an absolute and unquestionable foundation, challenging the notion
of an ultimate 'Truth';
• it embraces fallibilism, an epistemological position that acknowledges the
inherent fallibility or potential for error in human knowledge and beliefs
and, hence, our understanding of the world and our beliefs are subject to
revision, correction, and improvement in light of new evidence,
experiences, or rational inquiry;
• it emphasizes contingency, acknowledging that chance plays an integral role
in life, and behavioural and social processes, as well as natural laws, are
matters of probability rather than of absolute necessity (that admits of no
surprises, exceptions, or aberrations);
• it adopts a holistic perspective toward things, viewing them in terms of
continuities rather than dualisms such that our knowledge, beliefs, desires,
practices, and purposes do not have their meaning in isolation, but instead
linked together in a complex network of relationships between ideas,
experiences, and the social and cultural contexts in which they occur;
• it places great emphasis on the role of human lived experience that serves
as the foundation for the acquisition of knowledge, the evaluation of
beliefs, and the understanding of meaning.
Pragmatism and Malaysians’ life
In light of the elaboration provided above, the crucial question to be asked is:
How can Malaysians benefit from pragmatism, by learning from its goals,
aspirations, and guiding principles, in order to gain a deeper understanding of
their personal lives and their roles as members of society and as citizens? I
believe that Malaysians can benefit from pragmatism, as a philosophical
approach, in several ways.

• Philosophical enlightenment: Engaging with pragmatism and understanding

its main ideas enables Malaysians to undergo philosophical enlightenment.
Contrary to the notion that philosophy is a useless endeavour, pragmatism,
through its inherent method and approach, offers a valuable perspective
that enables Malaysians to better understand the world and their own
reality. This perspective allows them to reflect and revise their pre-existing
beliefs or worldview rooted in theology, institutional and structural
prejudices (particularly racism), stereotypes, cultural influence, or other
frameworks, thereby encouraging them to consider pragmatism as a new
or alternative viewpoint.
Furthermore, at a personal level, embracing pragmatism can lead
individuals to become aware that philosophy does hold substantial practical

19
 value in human life. As pragmatist William James has famously stated,
‘knowledge is an instrument; it exists for the sake of life, not life for the sake
of knowledge’. This awareness helps inform Malaysians to discern and
differentiate between living and dead philosophies, thereby enabling them
to identify and embrace philosophies that are applicable and relevant to
their lives.

• Better appreciation of philosophy: I mentioned earlier that Malaysia is

generally considered a 'philosophical wasteland’. Influenced by
supernaturalism, idealism, and rationalism, there is a strong tendency
among Malaysians to stereotype philosophy or view it as disconnected and
disengaged from concrete human life. However, by cultivating a broader
familiarity with pragmatism, Malaysians can correct this position and finally
give philosophy the long-overdue recognition it deserves. By gaining a clear
understanding of pragmatism as a philosophy, Malaysians will be able to
redefine their conception of philosophy as a whole. This process will
significantly contribute to the development of a greater appreciation for the
field of philosophy within society. Consequently, instead of perceiving
philosophy as a distant and abstract pastime, and dismissing engagement
with it as pointless, Malaysians will come to realize that knowing philosophy
is an endeavour and pursuit in which everyone, regardless of their societal
position, should actively participate.
• Better understanding of pragmatism: Malaysians will gain a better
understanding and appreciation of pragmatism itself as a body of
philosophical thoughts by becoming familiar with and exposed to its
fundamental ideas and principles. In doing so, Malaysians can avoid the
misconceptions often levelled at pragmatism regarding its purpose and
nature. Contrary to popular connotations, which view pragmatism as
merely a practical approach to problem-solving or a ruthless and
Machiavellian pursuit of political advantage, pragmatism actually embraces
the central tenet of striving for human meliorism, development, and
progress. To this end, it places great emphasis on the well-being of
individuals, the sustainability of the natural world, democratic ethos,
values, and way of life, as well as ethics and morality when choosing the
means to achieve an end.
There is also a widespread misconception that pragmatism is a form of
ideology, consisting of dogmas, doctrines, or a faith that promotes crass
utilitarianism, hedonism, an unbridled quest for material gains and
consumption, and that also threatens people's existing beliefs and values,
religious or otherwise. However, this notion is far from the truth and
represents a clear misunderstanding and distortion of pragmatism. On the
contrary, as William James emphatically state the point, pragmatism is
primarily a method or praxis before it is a theory. James explicitly states that
pragmatism lacks any dogma or doctrine, except for its method. He

20
describes this method as ‘an attitude of orientation’, shifting focus from
foundational principles or supposed necessities ("categories") towards
ultimate outcomes, consequences, and facts. To illustrate his point, James
approvingly references Giovanni Papini, an Italian writer and pragmatist,
who likens pragmatism to a hotel corridor within the realm of world
philosophy. As James explains it, like a corridor in a hotel, pragmatism lies
in the midst of world philosophies. ‘In one chamber, someone may be
writing an atheistic volume, while in the next, another person might be on
their knees praying for faith and strength. In a third chamber, a chemist may
be investigating the properties of the body, while a fourth might be
dedicated to the development of idealistic metaphysics. Meanwhile, in a
fifth chamber, the impossibility of metaphysics is being explored.
Nevertheless, all these chambers share and pass through the corridor of
pragmatism, as it provides them with a practical means of entering or
leaving their respective rooms’.
Another prevalent misunderstanding about pragmatism is that it is
inherently anti-religion and antagonistic toward religious beliefs or, at the
very least, fundamentally contradicts religious tenets. Specifically in
Malaysia, pragmatism is characterized as opposed or antithetical to Islam.
A quick browse on Google for materials on the philosophy of pragmatism
by Malaysians would attest to this. One Sakinah Munarwarrah wrote the
following: 'Pragmatism philosophy, in general, contradicts Islam.
Pragmatism is opposed to Islamic epistemology, which is based on the
Qur'an and Sunnah, the theory of knowledge in Islam. James' writings that
promote pluralistic religious ideas and reject the notion of truth belonging
exclusively to one religion are in direct opposition to Islamic teachings,
which maintain that Islam is the only authentic religion. Kamal Azmi et al
also express a similar view in the following terms: Pragmatism's refusal to
acknowledge metaphysical claims contradicts Islamic epistemology, as the
latter does not solely rely on the scientific scale but also explores
metaphysical and religious aspects.
Another writer, Sharifah Hayaati claims as follows: Pragmatism's beliefs are
solely based on reason and rationality, which explicitly reject religious
values. In this case, is there any room for the soul of Islam if thought and
ideas become the primary focus of this philosophy? Undoubtedly, this
philosophy contradicts the principles of Islam.
With such a hostile and unfavourable portrayal of pragmatism in relation
to Islam by these writers, it is only natural for them to vilify pragmatism,
either at best, through a flawed interpretation of its principles or, at worst,
by constructing a strawman argument against it. Hence, one of the writers
alleges that based on pragmatism's unguided arguments in the 20th
century, the idea of communism emerged, which rejected Christianity and

21
nationalism while introducing the concept of a Universal Community,
perceived as ideal for world domination. Another writer, citing the late
Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian Islamic scholar, laments that pragmatism
leads to a more individualistic structure of society. Consequently, a
pragmatic society eventually falls victim to humanism, where individuals
prioritize their own benefit above all else. Moreover, materialism and
pragmatism, which have influenced the formation of Western civilization,
are inadequate in establishing the foundation for humanitarianism, which
is essential for strengthening community development.
And yet another writer contends that pragmatism shares similarities with
the ethical philosophies of utilitarianism and hedonism, which prioritize
utility, practical values, and material gains above all else. Furthermore, she
goes on to claim that the principles of utilitarianism and instrumentalism
endorsed by William James and pragmatism tend to favour hedonism.
Contrary to the assertions made by the aforementioned writers, who claim
that pragmatism is fundamentally opposed to or incompatible with
religions in general, and Islam in particular, a close examination of texts
written by prominent figures in pragmatism would reveal that this
philosophical framework is essentially neutral when it comes to religion.
This neutrality signals that pragmatism does not adopt a specific position
on religious beliefs nor does it favour any particular religious tradition. This
neutrality can be attributed to pragmatism's very own core principles and
methodology.
For instance, as previously noted, one key principle of pragmatism places
emphasis on the practical consequences and real-world results of beliefs,
ideas, and actions. Consequently, pragmatists place importance on the
effectiveness and utility of concepts and ideas, assessing them based on
their practical implications rather than strict adherence to any particular
doctrine or dogma. True to its religion-neutral position, this pragmatic
approach grants individuals the freedom to evaluate the real-world
significance and applicability of their beliefs and practices, regardless of
whether they pertain to religion or other aspects of life, within their own
lives and communities.
In spite of the above, William James, one of the early founders of
pragmatism, appears, in the opinion of many commentators, to have
adopted a position that is religion-friendly. This is because, in his writings,
such as The Varieties of Religious Experience, James acknowledges the
diversity of human experiences and concedes that individuals may find
meaning, purpose, and fulfilment through different religious or spiritual
paths. He recognizes that religious beliefs can provide a framework for
moral values, social cohesion, and personal growth for many individuals.
Moreover, James describes his well-known book on pragmatism, "The Will

22
to Believe," as a defense of our right to adopt a believing attitude in
religious matters. And he positively recommends and encourages people to
embrace religious faith. James also criticizes rationalism and scientism for
being inadequate at accounting for all experiences — especially the most
meaningful of human experiences found in the 'inner citadels of ourselves'
— religious experience. In what is perhaps his most famous application of
the pragmatic principle of truth, ‘It is true because it is useful’, he applies it
specifically to religious questions, particularly addressing the existence of
God. Thus, in his book Pragmatism, he expresses this notion: 'Based on
pragmatic principles, if the hypothesis of God yields satisfactory results in
the broadest sense, it can be deemed 'true'’.
The preceding explanation should adequately demonstrate that
pragmatism is not opposed to or confrontational toward religion. In fact,
James goes so far as to adopt a stance that portrays pragmatism as
supportive of religion or religion-friendly. When considered in the broader
context of its overarching melioristic goal of human improvement and
advancement, pragmatism, by maintaining neutrality on religious issues,
strives to cultivate an atmosphere that fosters respectful discourse, critical
reasoning, and the pursuit of practical resolutions for complex problems
and challenges faced by individuals, irrespective of their religious
convictions.
To prevent lengthy and unnecessary polemics, which are digressions that
deviate from the primary focus of this piece, I have no intention of
systematically refuting, point by point, the earlier disparaging and negative
aspects attributed to pragmatism. It suffices for me to just address one
point to demonstrate how the writers' allegations directly contradict the
fundamental principles of pragmatism (as previously explained) and how
these propositions are alien to the essence of pragmatism as articulated by
its founding fathers.
It is a gross distortion of both the philosophies of pragmatism and
utilitarianism when the writers off-handedly equate pragmatism with
utilitarianism, which, in their view, prioritizes utility and practical values in
terms of pursuing material gains and worldly pleasure or happiness above
all else.
In the first place, it is important to clarify that utilitarianism is not solely
focused on the quest of immediate gratification, akin to Cyrenaic hedonism.
Cyrenaic hedonism, an ancient Greek school of moral philosophy from the
3rd century BC, posits that the pleasure of the moment is the criterion of
goodness and the good life mainly concerns manipulating situations to
maximize hedonistic – pleasure- producing – utility. As Jeremy Bentham,
the founder of modern utilitarianism, clearly explains the central idea of
this ethical theory (utilitarianism), the morally right action is the one that

23
 maximizes overall happiness or well-being for the greatest number of
people. Utilitarianism, therefore, evaluates the morality of actions based on
their consequences in achieving the greatest overall utility or happiness.

Next, it is crucial to emphasize that no credible pragmatist has ever equated

pragmatism with utilitarianism across the board, let alone hedonistic
utilitarianism. While pragmatism, like utilitarianism, emphasizes the
consequences and practical outcomes of ideas, beliefs or actions, it does
not inherently advocate for maximizing overall pleasure or happiness as
utilitarianism does. Instead, its primary concern is practicality,
effectiveness, and the practical consequences of beliefs, ideas, or actions
towards achieving the desired goal, rather than being strictly focused on
maximizing happiness or utility. Indeed, John Dewey distinguishes his
pragmatism from utilitarianism by rejecting the notion that human nature
or 'the good' (which is associated with pleasure or happiness) for human
beings as either fixed or unproblematically ‘given’. For Dewey, individuals
should critically examine prevailing concepts of 'human nature' or 'the good
for human beings' by employing their critical intelligence.
Based on what has been discussed, I am confident that if Malaysians gain a
better understanding of pragmatism, they will come to appreciate its salient
ideas and principles. This understanding will help them clear up
misconceptions about what pragmatism is and what it aims to achieve.
Furthermore, this understanding will help Malaysians overcome the fear
that pragmatism is in opposition to religion, particularly Islam, or that it
advocates for ideologies like utilitarianism or hedonism. With this
newfound understanding and change in perspective, Malaysians will
recognize the potential of pragmatism to provide guidance, question
assumptions, and offer valuable insights into personal and societal matters.
By embracing pragmatism’s particular method of inquiry and
experimentation, which is empirical (that is, turning away from the
abstract, absolutist, a priori approach of traditional philosophy and toward
facts, practicality and action) as well as its approach, which is outcome-
oriented (where ‘ideas and beliefs are judged according to their fruits and
not their roots’), Malaysians can access the transformative power of this
philosophy and enrich their intellectual, moral, and emotional lives.

• Improved habit of mind: One crucial aspect of Malaysian society where the
transformative power of pragmatism can profoundly impact and hold
significant cultural, intellectual, and psychological importance relates to the
cultivation of an empirically-grounded and evidence-based habit of mind.
This cultivation marks a shift away from the prevailing thinking approach
that heavily relies on formalism, abstractions, idealistic speculations,
reifications, fixed principles, and closed systems as the starting point.

24
 Pragmatists challenge this mode of thinking because it often leads to
‘artificial and irresolvable problems’ that can harm human well-being. The
fundamental flaw lies in its starting points, which treat reflective products
as if they were originally given. This approach, which Dewey describes as
‘the conversion of eventual functions into an antecedent existence’, is a
‘philosophic fallacy’ that runs through both ancient and modern traditions.
The fallacy occurs when an end or goal is mistakenly treated as something
actual or real and then used as an explanatory idea or concept. In so doing,
it disregards the specific context, conditions, and the actual experience
from which it was derived. As the pragmatists point out, when context is
ignored, ‘these abstractions become pernicious reifications’. They distort
and oversimplify reality, obscuring the subtle understanding of
phenomena.
The problem lies in the tendency of people and philosophers alike,
influenced by idealism and rationalism, to favour starting with a theoretical
view and explanations about the reality around them, where they perceive
themselves as subjects or spectators of a world to be known. Pragmatism
challenges this mental habit by turning toward a more practical way of
thinking, insisting that we should begin from where we actually are - in the
midst of our concrete, pre-theoretical, practical, everyday lived-experience
- and continuously return to it for confirmation.
Overall, therefore, a better understanding and appreciation of pragmatism
in Malaysian society has the potential to bring about significant positive
changes by encouraging Malaysians to adopt an empirically-grounded and
contextually aware approach in their way of thinking. In this way, they
would have a better explanation and understanding of phenomena around
them and help promote human well-being and peaceful living.

• Effective problem-solver: Furthermore, as a corollary to the previous point,

pragmatism possesses transformative power that can foster the cultivation
of effective problem-solving skills among Malaysians. This power stems
from pragmatism's method and approach, which are grounded in science
and the scientific method, prioritizing practical solutions to problems.
Richard Shusterman who challenges the notion of theory and practice,
philosophy and life, being opposites, suggests that American pragmatism,
in virtue of its nuanced methodology, represents a return to a practical
outlook on philosophy, akin to the Hellenistic tradition. For Shusterman,
this tradition views philosophy as an 'art of better living through self-
examination and self-creation,' reconciling the immediate and theoretically
mediated aspects of our lives. This understanding of the pragmatic view of
philosophy highlights the interdependence of theory and practice,
emphasizing their mutual importance.

25
 Therefore, Malaysians can greatly benefit from this philosophy by directing
their efforts toward discovering effective and realistic resolutions to the
various challenges they encounter in areas such as politics, governance,
education, or social issues. By consciously prioritizing practical outcomes
and consequences confirmed by science-based evidence, and by
emphasizing the interdependence of theory and practice, Malaysians can
actively strive for more efficient issue resolution, which necessitates setting
aside preconceived notions, conventional wisdom, and ideological biases.

• Amicable settlement of metaphysical disputes: The methodology and

procedure of pragmatism have the potential to create a positive
environment in Malaysia that fosters the development of essential skills,
knowledge, and wisdom crucial for people to resolve disagreements
concerning abstract metaphysical ideas. Malaysia is a society deeply
influenced by religious beliefs, superstitions, animism, supernaturalism,
and metaphysics. In addressing conflicts related to these beliefs, a
pragmatic approach proves useful. As mentioned earlier, pragmatism
encourages individuals to prioritize practical results of ideas and beliefs,
and focus on tangible outcomes supported by empirical evidence. By
adopting this mindset, Malaysians can effectively address disputes arising
from conflicting metaphysical beliefs. Rather than engaging in endless
debates on abstract and intangible matters, or holding onto rigid beliefs,
they can concentrate on real-life problems and find practical solutions. This
approach ultimately promotes societal harmony and progress.
In his exploration of the question, 'What is pragmatism good for', Francisco
Mejia Uribe presents a compelling argument regarding this particular
aspect of pragmatism. He paraphrases William James, emphasizing that
pragmatism is a method for settling metaphysical disputes and is not
suitable for resolving non-metaphysical (factual) disputes. For factual
matters, he points out that we have observation, verification, and the
scientific method. In other words, everything we dispute or hold beliefs
about is either based on facts or not. Regarding factual disputes they can
be resolved through observation and verification. Hence, when facts are
available, pragmatism becomes unnecessary. For example, the occurrence
of an earthquake and tsunami in Japan on March 11, 2011, is a verifiable
event that depends on facts, not pragmatic considerations. Thus, as long as
something can be verified, pragmatism is not needed and may even be
incorrect if mistakenly applied.
Mejia emphasizes that pragmatism truly shines when it comes to
metaphysical disputes. He describes the pragmatic approach to
metaphysics as follows: since metaphysical disputes are beyond the realm
of facts and observation, the best way to settle them is by transforming the
disputes into discussions about the practical consequences resulting from

26
different metaphysical beliefs. The crux of the approach is that while a
metaphysical belief may not be supported by facts, holding it as a true belief
has observable and predictable effects on our behaviour. (Bear in mind that
for pragmatists beliefs are rules or guide for actions). Therefore, evaluating
these practical consequences of non-verifiable beliefs is where pragmatism
excels.
Mejia further points out that this approach differs markedly from that of
logical positivism, which argues that metaphysical disputes are nonsensical
because they cannot be settled by facts. Pragmatism, however, submits that
any metaphysical disagreement can be reframed as a factual discussion,
focusing on the practical consequences of alternative or conflicting
metaphysical beliefs. By its methodology, pragmatism transforms
metaphysical disputes into debates grounded in facts, reintroducing the
verification and empirical evidence into metaphysics. Mejia writes as
follows to illustrate his point:
The nature of morality is a typical metaphysical dispute. There is nothing
that we at present could observe that would settle the dispute about how
moral values really are. The ongoing battle between those who believe that
moral values are absolute, those who believe that they are relative or those
who believe that they are a chimera has been going on since the dawn of
philosophy and probably will still be going on forever. Faced with this
prospect, the pragmatist stops the metaphysical train in its tracks by
proposing an alternative way to solve the quarrel: let’s forget about how
moral values really are and instead let’s evaluate the practical consequences
of believing moral values are absolute, or relative, or irrelevant. In other
words, let’s have a factual discussion about which position is better suited
at helping us cope more successfully with our current existential conditions.
If one day we miraculously manage to grasp the true nature of morality that
would be wonderful, but in the meantime, we need to act. The quest for the
true nature of morality is a fascinating philosophical endeavour but one that
cannot be settled. Only a pragmatic discussion about the factual
consequences of different ways of understanding morality can offer some
concrete alternatives.
Overall, the ability to transform metaphysical disputes into factual inquiries,
thus avoiding lengthy, unnecessary, emotional, and potentially acrimonious
controversies and conflicts, represents the most powerful and relevant
virtue of pragmatism. In today's interconnected world, characterized by
diverse cultural backgrounds, our conflicting metaphysical beliefs are
becoming more evident. As Mejia also reminds us, the days when
metaphysical disputes were merely academic discussions, such as William
James' pondering about a man going around a squirrel or not, are long
gone. Nowadays, metaphysical disputes revolve around conflicting beliefs

27
 in crucial and emotionally-charged matters, such as moral values,
institutional arrangements, and notions of social justice, among others. The
combination of metaphysical beliefs that cannot be disproved by facts,
along with increased interconnection between people, poses challenges as
well as dangers in societies, particularly in a context like Malaysia.
Pragmatism offers a promising method to address these challenges and
dangers. To reiterate, this can be achieved by introducing falsifiable or
refutable premises into people’s rigid set of metaphysical ideas,
establishing an open, fair, and ongoing conversation among different
practical outcomes resulting from alternative beliefs (as exemplified by
Papini’s hotel corridor analogy). Given Malaysia’s prevailing environment
characterized by persistent and acute ethnic, religious, gender,
generational, economic, and political conflicts and fissures, this is perhaps
the best available path for us to take in building a vibrant, successful,
sustainable, and peaceful plural society.

• Promoting scientific culture: Pragmatism, as a philosophical outlook and

method, can play a crucial role in fostering a scientific culture within
Malaysian society. In the context of promoting scientific culture, it is not
enough for a society to simply use and consume the products of science.
Instead, it should strive to embrace the scientific way of thinking and acting
in all aspects of life. Otherwise, as I wrote elsewhere, the situation is akin
to us watching Malay-Muslim dancers on stage performing movements
from the Indian classical dance form of, say, bharatanatyam, without their
understanding and appreciation of the inner spiritual and profound
devotional meanings inherent in those movements.
Presently, the level of scientific culture among Malaysians is still relatively
low. The finding of a survey about evolution carried out in 2008 in six
Muslim countries that included Malaysia showed only about 15 percent of
the respondents considered evolution to be ‘true’ or ‘probably true’. The
Academy of Sciences Malaysia, in its 2017 publication, Science Outlook,
emphasizes that more needs to be done to make science a mainstream
aspect of Malaysian culture. Similarly, in a piece published by the Institute
of Islamic Understanding Malaysia (IKIM) in 2019, the writer states that the
government of Malaysia has been concerned to instil a strong and resilient
scientific spirit and culture in Malaysian society. Hence, to address this
issue, it will be argued that pragmatism's methodology and procedures can
significantly contribute to the development of a robust scientific culture.
As variously stated earlier, pragmatism emphasizes that the meaning and
value of ideas lie in their practical consequences. This aligns well with the
pursuit of scientific knowledge, which aims to understand, control and
predict the natural and social world. By emphasizing practicability and the
application of ideas in concrete situations, pragmatism encourages

28
 individuals and society generally in Malaysia to see science as a means to
improve their lives and solve real-world problems.
Similarly, pragmatism prioritizes lived-experience and empirical results. As
such, one of its tenets requires that ideas, theories and hypotheses must
be tested and verified through experimentation. This fully aligns with the
scientific method, which relies on observation, experimentation, and
evidence to formulate and validate scientific knowledge. By understanding
pragmatism and adopting its perspective, Malaysians will be able to engage
with science by valuing the empirical evidence and experiential aspect of
scientific inquiry, which forms an important aspect of scientific culture.
Science upholds the free speculation and inquiry as essential components
of the pursuit of knowledge, the spirit founded on ‘faith in the possibilities
as yet unrealized’ and motivated by desire to know, to discover, to a certain
extent, for its own sake, where nothing is held sacred, permanent, but
everything is open to investigation and questioning. In a similar way,
pragmatism promotes an open-minded and questioning attitude,
encouraging individuals to challenge existing beliefs and ideas. In the
context of the cultivation of scientific culture in Malaysia, therefore,
pragmatism can foster a mindset of curiosity and critical thinking, where
individuals actively engage in the process of questioning and seeking
knowledge.
Pragmatism, being religion-neutral as emphasised earlier, allows for a clear
demarcation between the roles of science and religion within society. It
recognizes that science and religion operate in different domains of human
experience, and both can coexist without contradicting each other. Further,
in virtue of its ‘maxim’, to use the term that Charles Sanders Pierce uses,
pragmatism encourages both scientists and theologians to focus on the
practical effects of their respective beliefs and ideas, rather than asserting
them as absolute truths. This pragmatic outlook can promote mutual
respect, trust, and cooperation between the scientific and religious
communities, which are essential for the development of scientific culture
in a country such as Malaysia.
In summary, a pragmatic outlook will help Malaysians inculcate the
scientific way of thinking and acting in their daily lives. This scientific culture
can generate progress, innovation, and an active engagement with scientific
knowledge for the betterment of individuals and society as a whole.

• Bringing back ethics into politics and educating the public with new politics
toward participatory democracy: In Malaysia, there is a prevailing cynicism
that perceives politics as a dirty game, devoid of ethics and morality. This
belief suggests that once individuals enter the political arena, they abandon
ethical considerations and prioritize gaining and maintaining power

29
through any means necessary. However, it is crucial to challenge this notion
and strive for a political landscape where ethics, morality, and the well-
being of citizens are at the forefront. By embracing pragmatism and
participatory democracy, Malaysians can bring about a transformative shift
in politics and cultivate a society that values truth, critical thinking, and
collective problem-solving.
For ages, Malaysian politicians generally have perpetuated the belief, or
even a myth, that ethics and politics are mutually exclusive. They have
fostered a culture where loyalty, identity politics, and manipulation reign
supreme, perpetuating division among the populace. However, it is
imperative to raise Malaysians' awareness that politics should be a call to
serve the people, prioritizing action over mere rhetoric and demagoguery.
Embracing a pragmatic approach, where outcomes and results are
paramount, will aid in aligning politicians' motivations with the needs and
aspirations of the Malaysian population.
By comprehending and assimilating the ideas and principles that underpin
pragmatism, Malaysians will be able to foster a healthier political climate.
Of particular significance in this regard is pragmatism's conception of
"Truth." As previously mentioned, pragmatism perceives truth as the
practical consequences that ideas, beliefs, and propositions have on
individuals and society—truth is determined by what works in practice. This
perspective, therefore, challenges blind allegiance based on ethnicity,
religion, or location and urges citizens to critically assess politicians, their
promises, and the potential impact on their lives. By subjecting politicians
to stern tests and withdrawing support, when necessary, Malaysians can
hold their leaders accountable and ensure that the pursuit of truth and the
common good takes precedence over identity-based affiliations.
Another crucial aspect of reshaping the Malaysian polity is embracing
‘participatory democracy’, as advocated by the likes of John Dewey.
Democracy should extend beyond mere governance and permeate all
facets of society, fostering cooperation, common interests, and scientific
inquiry. Dewey emphasizes the importance of empowering ordinary people
through education and enabling them to engage intelligently in politics. By
rejecting top-down reforms and encouraging democratic participation,
Malaysians can drive social and political reconstruction from the grassroots
level, ensuring the inclusion and representation of all citizens.
Some critics point out that the two foundational principles of pragmatism
mentioned above—truth as what works and participatory democracy—
intersect in their aim of social and political reconstruction. Pragmatists
recognize that political systems frequently marginalize and harm minority
and less privileged groups. Hence, they urge progressive political
philosophy to advocate for feasible institutions that address the material

30
 needs of the marginalized and grant them an active role in decision-making.
This approach resonates with the Malaysian experience, where pragmatism
can serve as a resource to overcome concrete (but not imagined) problems,
reject outdated traditions and practices, prioritize ‘progressive’ education
as a catalyst for reform, and trust the people to determine their own path
to liberation.
Pragmatism also emphasizes that inquiry is a collaborative human
interaction rather than an isolated, private endeavour. It advocates for a
social conception of reason, which values equal and inclusive participation,
open-mindedness, tolerance of differing opinions, and cooperative
resolution of conflicts. Pragmatism's anti-authoritarian stance challenges
rigid beliefs and fosters a democratic culture or ethos that embraces the
importance of reasonable doubt. By creating an environment where
individuals are equally accountable to doubt and by promoting critical
thinking, Malaysia can shift away from divisive ideas and long-standing
ideologies that have dominated its political landscape. Instead, the nation
can strive towards a society that thrives on shared knowledge, mutual
respect, and collective problem-solving.
By bringing back ethics into politics and embracing pragmatism and
participatory democracy, Malaysians can overcome the prevailing cynicism
that politics is a dirty game.

• A solution to problems in a partisan society and building a human

community on common ground: In a society like Malaysia, characterized by
the dominance of partisan politics and ideological divisions in public
discourse, the significance of pragmatic approaches and finding common
ground cannot be overstated. While Malaysia may enjoy relative political
stability, it is essential to lay a strong foundation of peace and stability that
can benefit future generations. Pragmatism, with its transformative power
and salient ideas, offers an approach and a method that can inspire
Malaysians to bridge communities, address complex social realities, and
foster unity based on shared existential needs and challenges. By
embracing the practices and perspectives of pragmatism and transcending
narrow ideological assumptions, both citizen-voters and politicians can play
a pivotal role in leading Malaysia towards a peaceful and prosperous future.
The prevalent toxic partisanship in Malaysian society today is a matter of
great concern for all. This is because, drawing on the experiences of
societies worldwide, hyper-partisan politics consistently hinder progress
and obstruct community progress and development. Such a political
practice, fuelled by vested interests, self-righteous positions, and narrow
ideological inclinations, fails to provide effective solutions to the problems
faced by people. It is crucial for discerning Malaysians to recognize that
addressing the challenges at the national, state, and local levels requires

31
collective efforts and collaboration, rather than the dominance of one party
over another. To this end, valuing pragmatic problem-solving and
compromise over partisan posturing is imperative.
As stated earlier, pragmatism wholly embraces pluralism, which encourages
tolerance, open-mindedness, respect for others, and a willingness to
consider differing points of view. In a diverse society like Malaysia, where
numerous ethnicities, religions, and cultures coexist, adopting a pragmatic
approach to community living can foster dialogue, understanding, and
cooperation. By actively seeking common ground based on actual lived-
experiences and being willing to make compromises, Malaysians can
collaboratively pursue shared goals, ultimately promoting social cohesion
and national unity.
However, the Malaysian political landscape is often dominated by identity
politics based on race and religion. This focus on ideology obscures the
genuine concerns of average Malaysians, which revolve around everyday
needs, job opportunities, affordable housing, reliable public services, and
personal security. These practical issues transcend ideological divisions and
should be at the forefront of policymakers' considerations.
Unfortunately, vested interest groups driven by partisan agendas create
unnecessary distractions based on cultural, ethnic, or religious issues.
These distractions divert attention from the common goals that Malaysians
share. Hence, it is essential for both citizens and politicians to acknowledge
the manipulative nature of these distractions and shift their focus toward
addressing the genuine concerns of the people.
William James, a proponent of pragmatism, emphasizes the vital
importance of continuous self-evaluation and re-evaluation, while rejecting
fixed principles, closed systems, and absolutes. He cautions that ideas and
beliefs, once valuable, may not retain their value in the future. However, in
the Malaysian political landscape, the politicians and the broader political
space appear either ignorant or oblivious to this fact. Consequently, the
foundation of Malaysian society rests on abstraction and insufficiency,
which promotes narratives of dominance, supremacy, entitlement, and the
preference of one ethnic group and its cultural practices and symbols over
others. Despite the adverse effects these dynamics have on the lives of
Malaysians, politicians in positions of power, driven by vested interests,
persist in safeguarding and perpetuating these deficiencies and
abstractions rather than addressing and rectifying them.
Furthermore, Malaysia operates within a closed system characterized by
policies and narratives that are considered absolute and unchanging. The
Rukun Negara, New Economic Policy, Vision 2020, Islam as the official
religion, and national cultural policy, to cite a few examples, all contribute

32
 to this closed system. However, this approach fails to consider the diverse
ethnic, cultural, religious, linguistic, and economic backgrounds of the
Malaysian people who came to settle in this part of the world at varying
periods of its history. Consequently, the country has experienced persistent
ethnic and religious crises since its independence.
To move forward, Malaysia must adopt a pragmatic approach that
recognizes the diversity of its people and embraces continuous evaluation
and re-evaluation of ideas and policies. This approach necessitates
transcending ideological divisions and prioritizing practical solutions to
address the genuine concerns of Malaysians from all walks of life, regardless
of their ethnicity, culture, or religion. Only by doing so can Malaysia truly
strive toward unity, progress, and a better future for all its citizens.
In conclusion, pragmatism presents a viable path forward for Malaysia,
allowing politicians and the general populace to transcend the long-
standing partisan divides that have plagued society. It offers an opportunity
to find common ground by focusing on shared existential needs and
challenges. By embracing the wholeness of humanity, unlearning narrow
ideologies, and fostering inclusivity, Malaysia can build a harmonious
society for future generations. Through pragmatic problem-solving,
collaboration, and compromise, Malaysians can overcome societal
challenges, promote social progress, and create a more equitable and
united nation.

• Adapting to Changes: Learning to Accommodate Changing Realities:

Accepting change in any society, group, or organization is a challenging
process influenced by various factors. The fear of change arises from the
unknown outcomes it brings, contradicting our innate desire for certainty
and familiarity. Uncertainty leads to worry and anxiety as we create
scenarios in our minds. Lao Tzu, an ancient Chinese Taoist philosopher,
highlighted the importance of recognizing change and warned against
sticking to the same direction without embracing it, as it might lead to
undesirable destinations.
In the contemporary world, we face a global phenomenon characterized by
a longstanding distrust of strangers (read as foreigners), fear of the future,
defensive reflexes resulting in withdrawal, prejudices influenced by news
presentations, and occasional cycles of violence intertwined with
aggression and defence.
Our innate desire for stability leads us to associate ourselves with specific
roles or statuses within groups or society, providing a sense of belonging
and security. Establishing an identity connected to the organization or
society we belong to fosters stability and a feeling of connectedness.

33
However, change often brings about uncertainty, anxiety, and stress for
many individuals. There is an impending fear of losing something dear, and
the disruption of established order and routines can unsettle people from
their assured and secure position. In Malaysia, this fear, whether real or
imagined, is particularly prominent among a significant portion of the
Malay community. As the majority, they are deeply influenced by
institutionalized narratives of entitlement, preference, predominance, and
supremacy over other ethnic groups. As a result, they harbour deep
concerns about losing their special status in the Malaysian polity and the
privileges, benefits, and easier access to public resources that accompany
it. Consequently, they find it challenging to accept, adapt to, or even resist
the process of change in society.
Nevertheless, adapting to change is unavoidable and crucial in today's fast-
paced and ever-evolving world. By embracing pragmatism, Malaysians can
gain knowledge and confidence to best navigate the shifting realities.
Pragmatism encourages prioritizing practicality and effectiveness over
clinging to outdated ideas and traditions. By adopting a pragmatic mindset,
Malaysians can embrace change, let go of beliefs that no longer serve them,
and remain open to new possibilities.
Furthermore, pragmatism emphasizes practical outcomes and the real
impact of ideas and actions. It recognizes that what matters is not
adherence to some abstract absolute truth but the tangible benefits
something can bring to individuals and society. This flexible and adaptable
approach allows for evaluating and adjusting beliefs and practices based on
their practicality and usefulness in the present and future.
Embracing pragmatism may require a shift in mindset, challenging the
accustomed traditional thinking and deeply rooted beliefs. However, by
cultivating a pragmatic outlook, Malaysians can learn to reflect upon and
reassess their truth beliefs, weigh practicality, and adapt their worldview to
changing circumstances.
Pragmatism is also closely tied to the ability to adapt to new realities. It
acknowledges that life and ideas are dynamic and subject to change. By
embracing pragmatism, Malaysians can effectively navigate the
complexities of modern life and respond to the evolving social, economic,
and technological landscape.
In the context of education, pragmatism promotes creating an environment
that allows students to explore and learn through their own experiences. It
prioritizes meaningful learning and the development of critical thinking
skills over rigid adherence to a predefined curriculum. Embracing
pragmatism in the classroom empowers students to adapt, innovate, and
solve real-world problems.

34
 Compared to other philosophical traditions, pragmatism recognizes
knowledge as a continuous process shaped by changing realities. It
encourages individuals to be open to new information, re-evaluate their
beliefs, and adapt their actions accordingly.
In conclusion, embracing pragmatism can guide Malaysians and individuals
in general to adapt to changing realities, overcome their fear, and
successfully navigate the complexities of modern life. By prioritizing
practicality, flexibility, and openness, individuals can effectively respond to
new challenges, learn from diverse perspectives, and create meaningful
change. Pragmatism offers a valuable framework for personal growth,
societal progress, and the pursuit of a better future in the ever-evolving
present world.

• Overcoming prejudices, bigotry, and stereotypes: Prejudices, bigotry, and

stereotypes are deeply ingrained in Malaysian society, resulting in
suspicion, biases, and animosity among its members. Prejudices involve
maintaining negative attitudes, beliefs, and judgments towards individuals
based on their race or ethnicity. On the other hand, bigotry refers to an
excessive attachment or fondness for one's own party, belief, or religion,
often influenced by racial, religious, or cultural differences. These issues
have had a profound impact on Malaysian society, leading to significant
social divisions and conflicts. Additionally, it is important to acknowledge
that gender discrimination remains a pervasive issue.
Given such a toxic Malaysian social milieu, public issues frequently assume
racial and religious undertones, exacerbating tensions further. The
presence of self-serving and opportunistic politicians and religious leaders,
ever eager to exploit these issues, only serves to fuel these prejudices. This
aligns with the findings of experiments, such as the one conducted by
Stanley Milgram, which demonstrate that authority figures or group
leaders have a significant and disproportionate impact on public opinion,
worsening prevailing prejudices. The distressing incidents of Kampong
Medan sectarian violence, the Kelantan trader incident, the Jill Ireland case,
opposition to ICERD, the KLIA incident, and unilateral conversion to Islam
cases starkly exemplify the deep-seated manifestations of these biases.
Recent studies have also shed light on higher levels of discrimination
against ethnic Indians within the education system, alongside a troubling
resurgence of racial discrimination generally in Malaysia. Minority groups
have even coined the term "kulit-ology" to describe the prevailing racism
in the country.
To effectively address these prejudices, bigotry and discrimination,
Malaysia must adopt a comprehensive and methodically sound approach
that is both pragmatic and actionable.

35
 The existence of deep-seated prejudices in Malaysian society hinders
progress in addressing social issues that affect different ethnic and religious
groups. Consequently, disagreements often end-up in the imposition of the
dominant group's will (what American sociologist Kai Erikson describes as
‘symbolic cultural superiority’) upon others, or otherwise, threats of
violence. However, these approaches prove ineffective and unproductive in
resolving the underlying problems, ultimately causing unresolved issues to
resurface in the future.
Pragmatism, as exemplified in the influential works of William James, John
Dewey, Jane Addams, and Alain L. Locke, challenges metaphysical
absolutism and the notion of social groups as objective entities, while
rejecting value-based bigotry. It asserts instead that race is a social
construct without a defensible biological basis, and that it does not
necessarily determine distinct racial behaviours. This perspective offers a
promising approach to overcoming prejudices, bigotry, discrimination, and
stereotypes in Malaysian society.
Moreover, by prioritizing practical effects and consequences in real-life
experiences rather than engaging in abstract debates about fixed principles
and assumptions, pragmatism empowers individuals to critically evaluate
various perspectives. This reverse approach of visualizing the solution to a
problem and working backward through various ideas to realize it stands
contrary to idealism or rationalism. Through active dialogue, mutual
understanding, and principled compromises, pragmatism further fosters an
inclusive and harmonious society. Embracing pragmatism also allows for
the continual challenge and reduction of prejudices, stereotypes, and
discrimination, promoting the pursuit of shared goals and social well-being.
While it is difficult to completely eliminate prejudices, they can be identified
and challenged whenever they manifest themselves. Recognizing and
respecting the diverse perspectives and values of individuals is crucial for
promoting mutual understanding. Actively listening to others and engaging
in constructive criticism can facilitate the discovery of shared values among
different groups, promoting mutual improvement and preventing animosity
and distrust. Pragmatism, with its scientific method, offers a philosophical
framework that enables effective implementation of these measures and
initiatives.

• Abandoning the futile quest for universal truths and returning to learning
from experience: In the pursuit of understanding existence and purpose,
religion serves as a pertinent example. It is a concept crafted by humans to
seek solace and answers to profound questions. All religions encompass
belief systems cantered around deities who govern our lives. However,
attempting to prove the existence of supernatural beings can be a

36
perplexing endeavour, entailing convoluted principles and paradoxes that
challenge the notion of a 100% confirmation.
Pragmatism, on the other hand, dismisses the need to engage in proving
the existence of a higher power. Instead, it values the practical benefits that
religion can bring to an individual's life. A pragmatist directs their attention
to the usefulness of religion, focusing on how it provides comfort and
solace. According to William James, if a belief in God brings something
productive to a person's life, such as alleviating human suffering, fostering
inner peace, and promoting positive behaviour, then it is considered good
enough to validate its existence from a pragmatic perspective. This aligns
with James' philosophy, which embraces the idea that if religion and faith
contribute to these beneficial outcomes, there is no need for further debate
or argument.
The philosophy of pragmatism centres on the practical, accessible, and
sensible aspects of life. While few individuals today advocate for absolute
views or celebrate arbitrary claims, our arguments and inquiries often
gravitate toward these two extremes. On one hand, some people regard
their claims to truth as more certain or pure than others, leading to
attempts to silence those who disagree with them. Throughout history, the
belief in possessing absolute truth has been used to justify the persecution
of those who do not share it.
Experience holds valuable lessons, but its ability to teach relies on our
willingness to learn. Recognizing this, American pragmatists in the
nineteenth century embraced fallibilism, which had long been a defining
characteristic of the natural sciences. They returned to the fundamental
existential questions that underpinned the Wisdom Traditions of the past,
aiming to explore the personal, social, and political challenges of the
present. These thinkers established a new intellectual tradition that
advocates for "learning from experience."
Classical pragmatism stood in opposition to the prevailing current of
European philosophy, which revolved around Immanuel Kant's emphasis on
the limits and conditions of "pure reason" devoid of empirical content. In
contrast, American intellectuals such as Charles Sanders Peirce, William
James, Jane Addams, Ella Lyman Cabot, and John Dewey believed that
philosophy should concern itself with the complexities of human meaning.
They recognized that philosophy must be the product of human beings
reflecting on the meaningful questions of life as embodied, thoughtful
organisms. These questions cannot exist solely in the realm of the mind;
they are intertwined with emotions, navigated in daily life, and intensified
during personal and social crises. Thus, they are inherently empirical and
experiential. Experience became the enduring guiding principle for
American pragmatism, replacing the notion of pure reason.

37
The principal task of pragmatism became the reconstruction of experience.
This task was necessary to effectively respond to the recurring crisis that
philosophy faced in the early twentieth century and continues to face.
Academic philosophy has gained a reputation for being detached from the
realm of human affairs, a criticism that dates back to the time of Socrates
and Aristophanes. John Dewey noted in 1917 that the "recovery of
philosophy" is only possible when philosophers align themselves with the
sciences and other academic disciplines based on human experience.
Pragmatism is fundamentally anti-metaphysical. According to pragmatist
theory, a statement can only be considered true if there is potential
experimentation or observation to support it. For example, when stating
"Glass is brittle," its truthfulness lies in the practical consequence that
hitting it with a hammer causes it to break into tiny fragments. There is no
hidden quality or ‘essence’ of "brittleness" apart from this fact. Similarly,
the statement "Glass is transparent" is true because we can see through it,
not due to any mysterious property within the glass. As a pragmatist writer
puts the matter, ‘If words mean anything, we should be able to test them.
But if they relate to qualities about which we cannot discover any practical
effects, then they are meaningless’. Hence, pragmatism encourages us to
avoid abstract metaphysical theories that lack practical implications. Such
theories are either meaningless or nonsensical.
Pragmatists, as noted many times earlier, prioritize practice over theory.
They perceive the validity of standards regarding meaning, truth, and value
as ultimately rooted in practical efficacy and "what works out in practice."
The significance of a belief or thought is determined by its effects.
Philosophers have long sought a single principle, whether it be called God,
Matter, the Absolute, or Energy, that could unlock the secrets of the
universe. However, with the pragmatic method, we can no longer rest on
self-evident ideas; instead, we must evaluate each concept's practical
worth. We must consider how the world would be different if a particular
idea were true.
Pragmatism draws inspiration from actual human experiences, deriving its
doctrines from the concrete realities of life that are directly experienced. It
does not rely on presuppositions, eternal truths, or a priori knowledge.
Instead, pragmatism emphasizes that notions of reality should remain open
to verification and modification through experiences. According to
pragmatists, truth is a belief that evolves through individual and social
experiences. Any belief that is disconnected from the real conditions of life,
untested and unverified through actual experiences, is considered invalid.
The verifiability of truth through experiences becomes its real test. Thus,
pragmatism can be described as ‘a living truth’, contrasting with static
constructions that aim to capture and reflect truth for eternity. In fact,

38
 pragmatism holds a strong suspicion towards 'hardened truths,' as they
often become tools of prejudices, violence, oppression, and
dehumanization. As Charlene Haddock Seigfried describes this situation,
‘we crave moral certainty but we reap moral oppression’.
In abandoning the futile quest for universal truths, pragmatism offers a
return to learning from experience. By embracing the practical and tangible
aspects of life, we can gain valuable insights, wisdom, and understanding.
Through this approach, we find meaning and navigate the complexities of
existence with a grounded perspective, firmly rooted in the realities of our
shared human experience, rather than being guided by prejudices, biases,
absolute fixed beliefs, and speculative assumptions.
In addition to the above, pragmatism, with its emphasis on abandoning the
search for universal or absolute truths and embracing a flexible and
adaptable approach, can greatly enhance one's willingness to reach a
compromise in conflict situations. By examining what practical difference
ideas or beliefs make and recognizing the existence of a grey area between
two extreme positions, pragmatism allows for the consideration of multiple
perspectives and the exploration of nuanced solutions. In the Malaysian
context, this is particularly crucial in the realm of public policy decision-
making. Rather than getting caught up in rigid dogmatic or ideological
battles of black versus white, a pragmatic approach encourages finding the
sweet spot in the grey area or exploring alternative options. By shifting the
focus towards practical outcomes and solutions, rather than ideological
purity, pragmatism enables a more constructive and collaborative approach
to problem-solving. It acknowledges that issues are rarely defined by binary
extremes and opens up possibilities for creative compromises and win-win
situations. Embracing pragmatism empowers individuals to see the value in
partial truths (but which work) and diverse perspectives, expanding their
range of beliefs and enabling a more inclusive and effective resolution of
conflicts.
To sum up this section, the transformative power of pragmatism can benefit
Malaysians in several ways, fostering philosophical enlightenment, a better
appreciation of philosophy, and a deeper understanding of pragmatism itself.
By cultivating an empirically-grounded habit of mind, Malaysians can become
effective problem-solvers and settle metaphysical disputes. Pragmatism can
also promote a scientific culture, bring ethics back into politics, and educate
the public on participatory democracy. It offers a solution to partisan society,
builds a human community on common ground, and helps Malaysians adapt
to changing realities. Additionally, pragmatism can aid in overcoming
prejudices, bigotry, and stereotypes, while encouraging the abandonment of
the futile quest for universal truths and a return to learning from experience.
How Malaysia Madani would benefit from the philosophy of pragmatism:

39
I will conclude this piece by addressing the issue alluded to in the title of the
opinion piece that prompted this writing: the potential benefit of infusing
philosophy into Malaysia Madani. However, within the context of this
discussion, I will highlight how Malaysia Madani can be enhanced through the
principles of the philosophy of pragmatism.
Understanding Malaysia Madani: Malaysia Madani is the government slogan
that provides a framework for its policies, conceptualized by Anwar Ibrahim,
the 10th Prime Minister of Malaysia. MADANI is the Malay acronym equivalent
to its English acronym SCRIPT, representing the core values of Sustainability
(keMampanan), Care and compassion (Ihsan), Respect (hormAt), Innovation
(Daya cipta), Prosperity (kesejAhteraan), and Trust (keyakiNan). Additionally,
etymologically, "madani" is an Arabic word connoting politeness, urbanity, and
civilization.
According to Anwar, the Malaysia Madani slogan encapsulates the vision of
Malaysia as a civilized, skilled, innovative, future-oriented, and inclusive
society. The goal is to restore the country's dignity and glory in the global
arena. Anwar emphasizes that the envisioned society will prioritize prosperity
and development while also valuing human dignity (karamah insaniah). This
vision is based on confidence, trust, values, morals, fair and effective
governance, and the elimination of corruption, censorship, financial
mismanagement, and social disunity. The aim is to address Malaysia's complex
issues of race and religion by fostering mutual respect and recognizing the
rights of every Malaysian citizen, regardless of their background. The
government intends to establish shared trust with the citizens based on
transparency and cooperation.
Anwar expresses confidence in the relevance and realization of the Malaysia
Madani concept, asserting that good governance will boost investor
confidence, enable the country to face upcoming economic crises with
confidence, and drive economic growth convincingly.
However, critics maintain skepticism regarding the concrete initiatives that
Anwar's administration can effectively implement under this overarching
slogan. While they have high hopes for Malaysia Madani in fostering a more
inclusive and democratic Malaysia, there are concerns that it may be reduced
to mere prime ministerial sloganeering, serving as a superficial public relations
exercise or a populist gesture peppered with Islamic-Arabic flavour primarily
to appeal to Malay-Muslim voters, rather than a substantive governance
approach with a focus on lasting impact.
Nonetheless, I firmly assert that the timely adoption of pragmatism by
Malaysians and political leaders would greatly contribute to the successful
realization of Malaysia Madani's goals and aspirations. Pragmatism offers a
valuable perspective in politics and governance, encouraging us to prioritize

40
practical solutions, flexibility, and collaboration. By embracing a pragmatic
approach, we can transcend ideological divides and focus on problem-solving,
evidence-based policymaking, and the pursuit of progressive improvement.
Pragmatism in politics and governance: Pragmatism, as a philosophical
perspective, provides a practical and experiential approach to comprehending
the world and resolving problems. While its relevance has been examined in
various domains, its connection to politics and governance holds significant
importance. In order to understand how pragmatism relates to the concept of
Malaysia Madani, we explore the relationship between pragmatism and
politics, emphasizing the necessity of practical solutions, flexibility, and
collaboration in tackling societal challenges and promoting progressive
change.
As emphasised earlier, pragmatism encourages individuals to resist abstraction
and stay grounded in experience when formulating their beliefs and making
decisions. Instead of seeking absolutes or certainty, pragmatists advocate for
a focus on what works and makes sense in light of one's experiences. This
mindset aligns with the pragmatic way of approaching political issues and
governance.
At the heart of pragmatism lies a meliorist sensibility—a commitment to
progressive improvement. Pragmatism, according to Colin Koopman, offers
political theory a perspective that actively seeks to enhance individual and
societal development. It is a philosophy that urges us to channel our efforts
and energies towards constructive and forward-looking solutions.
In politics and governance pragmatism emphasizes the importance of
practicality and problem-solving. Being pragmatic means adopting a flexible
approach to society, making decisions based on what works best in a given
context. Pragmatists value pluralism, appreciating different types of
knowledge and recognizing that learning is an ongoing process of problem-
solving and experimentation.
Pragmatic policy makers prioritize evidence-based policymaking, valuing the
role of knowledge in shaping and implementing policies. By integrating
scientific insights with democratic deliberation and societal values,
pragmatism offers a framework for effective governance that relies on
empirical data and informed decision-making.
Further, pragmatism necessitates a willingness to compromise and
collaborate, focusing on practical solutions rather than rigid ideological
positions. By seeking common ground and promoting consensus-building,
pragmatic approaches can yield meaningful results in addressing complex
political challenges. While idealistic aspirations inspire us, pragmatism urges
us to pursue them practically, mobilizing available resources and expertise.

41
Pragmatism calls for a shift in focus from advancing specific political ideologies
to finding practical solutions for the betterment of society. By prioritizing
problem-solving and data-driven approaches, pragmatic governance
transcends partisan agendas and broad presumptions. Instead, it seeks to
address issues from the ground up, utilizing available evidence and research
to guide policy decisions.
The philosophy of pragmatism promotes deliberative democracy as a crucial
governance strategy for questioning, refining, and advancing values.
Recognizing the problematic nature of governance, pragmatists emphasize
public deliberation as a means to air and reconcile diverse values. This
humanistic concern for values, combined with an openness to
experimentation, creates opportunities for creative action and learning in the
pursuit of improved governance outcomes.
Malaysia Madani core values and pragmatism’s foundational principles:
Undoubtedly, the six core values of Malaysia Madani align perfectly with the
foundational tenets and principles of pragmatism, as outlined earlier. The
promotion of Sustainability under Malaysia Madani corresponds harmoniously
with pragmatism's recognition of the importance of striking a balance
between individual development and a sustainable natural environment.
Similarly, Malaysia Madani's advocacy for the value of Prosperity resonates
with pragmatism's aspiration for human progress and improvement, which is
captured aptly by the concept of meliorism.
In addition, Malaysia Madani's emphasis on Innovation and Respect aligns
with pragmatism's encouragement of inquiry, experimentation based on the
scientific method, and the fostering of pluralism, tolerance, and openness to
differing perspectives. Moreover, the values of Trust and Compassion upheld
by Malaysia Madani align with pragmatism's recognition of the significance of
community, collective life, and shared goals, while emphasizing humanism and
care for others. As a commentator puts the matter, in its most ethical
form, pragmatism is informed by love and compassion.
This alignment between the core values of Malaysia Madani and the
foundational principles of pragmatism underscores the relevance and
potential effectiveness of pragmatism in realizing the goals and aspirations of
Malaysia Madani.
Foremost, pragmatism's rejection of abstraction, dogmas, and ideology in
favour of practical experience holds significant relevance for Malaysia's current
context and the realization of Malaysia Madani. As the country prioritizes
reviving the economy and ensuring the well-being of its people, a pragmatic
approach becomes crucial. By setting aside the pursuit of absolute certainties
and ideological agendas, pragmatism encourages a flexible approach to

42
politics, considering what is in the best interests of the people, acceptable to
the public, and conducive to maintaining social stability and cohesion.
In Malaysia, where the political landscape is often dominated by the ideologies
of race and religion, it becomes crucial to transcend ideological divides.
Pragmatism offers a framework for parties and individuals to move beyond
rigid ideological positions and seek common ground through practical
solutions. Embracing pragmatism, particularly by moving beyond religiously-
based ideology, allows Malaysians to create a space where the pursuit of
spiritual life remains a personal matter confined to the private domain. This
separation helps prevent tensions and conflicts that may arise from the
spillover of religious or ideological differences into the public sphere.
Pragmatism and practical approach to problem-solving: When it comes to
measuring the practical effects and outcomes of public policy implementation,
such as the Malaysia Madani government policy and governance framework,
pragmatism offers valuable insights through three fundamental questions:
What is problematic? What values are at stake? And what is possible?
The pragmatist perspective directs our attention to the concrete situations in
which policy issues arise, emphasizing the opportunities and demands for
action inherent within these situations. By focusing on the concrete,
pragmatism recognizes the embeddedness of individuals and groups in
historically specific webs of activity, shedding light on the problems that arise
within these contexts. For pragmatists, problems themselves are problematic,
as their precise contours and definitions often remain uncertain and
contested. This prompts inquiry and deliberation about the meaning of the
problem and how to address it. Problem-solving, according to pragmatism,
requires skill and creativity, acknowledging that individuals and groups may
differ in their ability to tackle problems. As problems trigger reflection,
learning, and growth, a pragmatist approach to public policy values the
problem-solving strategies employed by individuals and groups. Therefore,
from pragmatism’s perspective, problem-setting or problem definition
becomes the initial step in any problem-solving process. Nonetheless,
pragmatism recognizes that problem definition is not a static stage preceding
problem-solving but a dynamic and ongoing process that necessitates
revisiting in light of feedback from attempts to solve the problem.
Pragmatism's focus on problem-solving is rooted in a humanistic concern for
the origin and destiny of values. This concern aligns with Malaysia Madani's
value of compassion and care. Pragmatism views values as contextual and
valuation as a process, rejecting the notion of fixed moral rules or objective
qualities of things. It acknowledges that ethical considerations underpin any
action taken, emphasizing the importance of ethical decision-making in policy
formulation and implementation.

43
After addressing what is problematic and examining the values at stake,
pragmatism asks what can be done to improve the situation. This perspective
is influenced by the concept of meliorism, the belief that the world can be
made better through human effort. However, pragmatism goes beyond mere
moral optimism. It considers the possibilities that lie ahead, weaving together
the past, present, and future. By asking ‘what is possible?’ pragmatism infuses
the problem with a forward-looking orientation. It seeks to determine what
actions can be taken in the present, building upon the lessons of the past, to
effectively progress into the future. This problem-solving triangulation
between past, present, and future has important implications for governance
and policy-making. It emphasizes the creativity of action, the value of
experimentation, and the active search for governance structures that
enhance the quality of public policies and democratic governance.
Pragmatism's emphasis on practical effects and outcomes, therefore, provides
a valuable measure for assessing the implementation of public policies. By
addressing what is problematic, considering the values at stake, and exploring
what is possible, pragmatism offers a framework that promotes effective
problem-solving, ethical decision-making, and an ongoing pursuit of improved
governance and policy outcomes.
Promotion of participatory democracy: Pragmatism, with its commitment to
cooperative inquiry and pluralism, upholds the belief in participatory
democracy as a means of effective government policy implementation and
governance. It challenges the notion of rule by "enlightened" experts and
emphasizes the direct involvement of the people themselves in developing
their culture and meeting their needs through pooling their perspectives and
experiences. Therefore, by encouraging participatory democracy, Malaysia
Madani can harness the collective wisdom and diverse perspectives of its
citizens to drive effective problem-solving and decision-making processes.
Participatory democracy will further help engender Malaysia Madani's vision
of producing individuals with madani values, such as politeness, urbanity, and
civilization. By actively engaging citizens in the decision-making process and
encouraging their participation in various spheres of collective life, including
family, work, and social relations, participatory democracy extends beyond
mere politics. It fosters a sense of community and shared aims, allowing for
critical evaluation and reformulation of common goals based on changing
circumstances. This inclusive approach helps ensure that government policies
and governance practices realize the lofty madani values envisioned by
Malaysia Madani.
Moreover, participatory democracy, as advocated by pragmatism, promotes
the intrinsic social nature of self-realization. It challenges the atomization of
society caused by individualistic approaches and emphasizes the active
inclusion of individuals in public deliberation and action. By universalizing the

44
scientific method through widespread participation and critical inquiry,
participatory democracy fosters a "freedom of mind" that promotes the full
development of each individual. In this way, it aligns with the goals of Malaysia
Madani by enabling individual self-realization within a socially engaged and
cohesive community.
The infusion of pragmatism in the democratization process addresses the
alleged failures of representative institutions, which dominate Malaysian
political life, and ensures efficient problem-solving. By incorporating
participatory and deliberative innovations, Malaysia can correct purported
flaws in its current governance practices. Through innovative political means,
participatory democracy enhances the participation of civil society, leading to
improvements in equality, redistribution, and the delivery of public services. It
strengthens the voice of disadvantaged and marginalized groups, ensuring
their needs are considered and their rights are protected.
By combining representation, participation, and deliberation, pragmatism's
approach to democracy offers a pragmatic solution for effective policy
implementation and governance. It disrupts traditional liberal institutions of
representation by adapting them to a post-liberal logic that recognizes
democracy's intrinsic social meaning. The interplay between political means,
such as participatory and deliberative devices, and social ends, including
equality and redistribution, fosters a new pattern of relations between the
state and civil society, resulting in democracies grounded in philosophical
pragmatism.
To reiterate, pragmatism's inherent quality of promoting participatory
democracy aligns with the objectives of Malaysia Madani by facilitating
effective government policy implementation and governance, efficient
problem-solving, and individual self-realization. By actively involving citizens
and harnessing their collective wisdom, Malaysia can nurture individuals with
the lofty madani values of politeness, urbanity, and civilization. Through the
adoption of participatory democracy, Malaysia can foster an open, educated,
and democratic society that continually learns, engages in dialogue, and
strives for the betterment of society.
Pragmatism in Malaysia Madani implementation: There are already glimpses
of pragmatism's perspective and approach to problem-solving and policy
formulation within the Malaysia Madani framework. This indicates the
potential for further synergy between the concepts of pragmatism and
Madani. For example, when questioned about the origin of the 'Rahmah'
concept, Salahuddin Ayub, the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister,
prioritized the people benefiting from government efforts rather than claiming
credit for its initiation. The Rahmah initiative was introduced by the current
government to assist those in the B40 category in coping with the rising cost
of living. Salahuddin emphasized that he did not mind if others claimed to have

45
initiated the Rahmah concept, as long as the intended benefits reached the
people. Similarly, Mohd Puad Zarkashi, an UMNO Supreme Council Member,
stressed that it was unnecessary to engage in a polemic about the concept's
origin. He believed that the content of the initiative was crucial and should be
sustainable rather than transient.
These two statements reflect a pragmatic outlook – where ‘the fruit, not the
roots’ that counts - and resonate with Deng Xiaoping's famous epigram,
originally a Sichuan proverb: "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as
long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat." Deng Xiaoping believed that as long
as China's productive forces could be developed, whether through a planned
economy or a market economy, it should be utilized. This implies that being a
socialist country does not negate the need for a market economy, nor does it
dismiss the planned economy in the face of challenges. Both the planned and
market economies should serve as tools for the development of productive
forces and not become ideological symbols. Thus far, China's adoption of this
pragmatic approach has proven highly beneficial for its progress and
prosperity.
Furthermore, the alignment between Malaysia Madani's approach and
pragmatism's perspective in policymaking and governance is evident in
Anwar's declaration that the Malaysia Madani framework is designed as an
evolving process open to changes and constant revisions. It is also portrayed
as a participatory endeavour that encourages involvement and inputs from all
segments of society.
Anwar's declaration aligns closely with pragmatism's fallibilist approach, which
is not merely a philosophical exercise but holds significant relevance in the
realm of politics, particularly in terms of justification. According to Thayer,
pragmatist fallibilism asserts that policy decisions and values should be subject
to critical revision and inquiry, rather than being based solely on unwavering
belief or closed convictions. This is crucial because pragmatism itself does not
provide a definitive framework for determining specific policies, and it does
not align exclusively with any political ideology, as it transcends such
categorizations. Instead, pragmatism focuses on the process of selecting and
evaluating policies, examining how they are chosen and assessed.
The glimpses of pragmatism in the implementation of Malaysia Madani above
may, however, lead to the assumption that as long as a "what works" approach
brings positive outcomes, it can be considered pragmatism, even if those
implementing such policies are not consciously adhering to its philosophical
principles. However, critics argue that a lack of understanding of philosophical
pragmatism may lead people to view this ‘political pragmatism’ as
synonymous with Realpolitik, realism, or utilitarianism, which most
pragmatists reject. Therefore, while positive outcomes can be achieved
through a pragmatic approach to politics, it is crucial for policy-makers to grasp

46
the philosophical foundations of pragmatism. This is to ensure that policies
themselves embody the essence of pragmatism while their implementation
truly reflects the values and benefits of pragmatism.
Furthermore, while critics claim that political pragmatism and philosophical
pragmatism are essentially the same and do not require reconciliation, the
concern lies in the misconception that political pragmatism is merely a
practical application of philosophical pragmatism, without recognizing its
underlying philosophical meaning and significance. Therefore, even though
Malaysia Madani's approach and pragmatism's perspective in policymaking
and governance intersect at various points, their alignment should be
deliberate, purposeful and well-informed.
Educating Malaysians on pragmatism: From the above observation, the
significance of educating Malaysians, including political leaders and
policymakers, on the principles and perspectives of philosophical pragmatism
cannot be overstated. It is crucial to ensure that policymakers have a
comprehensive understanding of pragmatism that goes beyond a mere
practical "what works" approach and encompasses its philosophical
foundations.
To fully appreciate the value of philosophical pragmatism, it is beneficial to
explore the works of influential pragmatist thinkers. Charles S. Peirce, who
renamed his pragmatism as pragmaticism, argued that it was a powerful
empirical and philosophical tool because it demanded that ideas be examined
for their consequences, rather than ‘the elegance of some abstract
metaphysical models’. In his words, ‘It will serve to show that almost every
proposition of ontological metaphysics is either meaningless gibberish—one
word being defined by other words, and they by still others, without any real
conception ever being reached—or else is downright absurd; so that all such
rubbish being swept away, what will remain of philosophy will be a series of
problems capable of investigation by the observational methods of the true
sciences’. Another prominent pragmatist, John Dewey, sought to reconnect
philosophy with everyday life by demonstrating its relevance to reflective
intelligence and practical problem-solving.
While there are parallels and contrasts with other philosophers such as Martin
Heidegger and Ludwig Wittgenstein, Dewey's approach to practical philosophy
stands out. He did not dismiss the ordinary and everyday in favour of higher
concepts but emphasized the importance of reflective social criticism and the
practical enhancement of human experiences. Dewey's philosophical
naturalism, rooted in Darwinian principles, rejected the notion of a separate
realm of eternal values and instead highlighted the dynamic wholeness of
nature and humanity's place within it.

47
Educating Malaysians on philosophical pragmatism involves dispelling
misconceptions and misunderstandings. It is essential to demonstrate that
pragmatism extends beyond narrow scientism or reductionism and embraces
fallibilism, inquiry, and the aesthetic enhancement of human practices. By
fostering an understanding of pragmatism's holistic and inclusive approach,
Malaysians, including political leaders and policymakers, can internalize its
maxims, tenets, perspectives, and methods as elaborated above.
Incorporating philosophical pragmatism into the collective psyche and mental
framework of society will foster an environment that embraces evidence-
based thinking, encourages inquiry and experimentation, values diverse
perspectives, and strives for continual progress and improvement. As
pragmatist writers suggest, by treating ideas as 'lived hypotheses' and
experimenting with them, we can identify those that are most valuable to us.
Moreover, we can confidently discard those that corrode the soul, impair the
mind, and hinder our well-being, thereby enabling us to meaningfully
contribute to the betterment of our communities. The Malaysian Philosophy
Society can play a significant role in achieving this goal.
By way of a rider, I wish to add that pragmatism, as a philosophical approach,
is not universally embraced. It is not everyone’s cup of tea. So, why do some
people resist adopting pragmatism? Their resistance stems from pragmatism's
acknowledgment of our fallibility, the understanding that truth is an ongoing
pursuit rather than a fixed entity, and the recognition that 'the good' comprises
a multitude of ideas that have been discovered, tested, and discarded across
centuries and cultures. Nevertheless, what unites most pragmatists is the
hope for a better future, a commitment to democracy, pluralism, and the social
construction of truth, and a willingness to continuously reevaluate our core
values without holding anything as sacred. In this regard, I echo William
James's optimism and hope, beautifully captured in the epigraph of this piece:
“The greatest discovery of my generation is that human beings can transform
their lives by changing their mindset.” Pragmatism, in this context, presents
itself as a promising compass on this transformative journey.
Acknowledgment:
I am not a professional philosopher, and my understanding of pragmatism is
still work in progress. While crafting the arguments presented in this piece, I
have heavily relied upon the works of specialists and commentators,
particularly those available on the Internet. However, I find comfort in Goethe's
counsel to an author accused of plagiarism, where Goethe said, 'What is there
is mine, and whether I got it from a book or from life is of no consequence. The
only point is whether I have made a right use of it’.
e-mail address: darbihashim@yahoo.co.uk

48
49