What criticisms were made of William James’s pragmatic theory of truth?

William James’s pragmatic theory of truth faced several significant criticisms regarding its definition and implications.1

• Equivalence of Truth and Utility: James argued that "it is useful because it is true" and "it is true because it is useful" mean the same thing. Most scholars have rejected this equivalence, arguing that utility and truth are distinct concepts.1
• Subjectivity: Critics accused James of reducing truth to a subjective play of opinions, suggesting that an idea could be considered "true" simply because it is useful or satisfying for one person to believe, even if it is inexpedient for others.1
• Rationalization of Business Ethos: Pragmatism was sometimes unfairly characterized as a mere rationalization of the American business ethos, a critique often made without careful scrutiny of the philosophers' actual writings.1

In response to these charges, James maintained that beliefs must still be measured against the "verdict of the rest of experience." He warned that individuals cannot simply believe whatever they find "good," as beliefs must remain consistent with the realities encountered in one's experience.1