How did William James’s pragmatism differ from Peirce’s pragmatism?

While Charles Sanders Peirce and William James are both foundational figures in pragmatism, their approaches differed significantly in scope and intent.12

Peirce’s pragmatism was primarily a logical method for clarifying meaning and resolving conceptual confusion. Rooted in his scientific work, he viewed pragmatism as a theory of signs and inquiry, where the meaning of a proposition is defined by the practical effects of its experimental verification. For Peirce, truth is an objective goal achieved through the long-term consensus of a community of scientific investigators.3

In contrast, James transformed pragmatism into a broader, more psychological and moral framework. He applied the pragmatic method to a wider range of human experiences, including religious and metaphysical beliefs. James argued that the truth of an idea is determined by its "working"—the value and satisfaction it provides in helping individuals navigate their lives. Where Peirce focused on the logic of scientific inquiry, James emphasized the purposive, adaptive nature of mind and the individual's right to believe in ideas that offer vital psychological or moral benefits.12