How did Charles Sanders Peirce’s pragmaticism differ from other forms of pragmatism?

Charles Sanders Peirce introduced the term "pragmaticism" to distinguish his specific logical and semiotic approach from other interpretations of pragmatism that he found dubious. While later thinkers like William James and John Dewey expanded pragmatism into psychological, moral, and instrumentalist frameworks, Peirce’s version remained rooted in a rigorous theory of signs and scientific logic.12

Key differences include:

• Focus on Meaning vs. Utility: Peirce’s pragmaticism functioned as a method for clarifying concepts by identifying their "effects" or consequences within a conditional, experimental framework. In contrast, James focused on the psychological and moral value of beliefs, viewing truth as whatever proves "good" or satisfying in human experience.13
• Scientific Inquiry: Peirce emphasized the community of investigators and the "infinite long run" of scientific inquiry to determine truth. While Dewey also valued experimental inquiry, his "instrumentalism" treated ideas primarily as tools or plans of action designed to solve specific problems and direct natural or social processes toward human benefit.14
• Scope: Peirce’s work was part of a comprehensive theory of thought and signs, aiming to resolve conceptual confusion rather than merely facilitating practical action.12