understanding 'how to make our ideas clear'

Charles S. Peirce’s How to Make Our Ideas Clear details a new method for clarifying our ideas, which should be used on top of methods used by previous logicians like Descartes. Peirce calls this method the pragmatic maxim, or the third grade of clarity. In order to understand this last grade of clarity, we must first examine the first two: clearness and distinctness.

The first grade of clarity is known as ‘clearness.’ An idea is clear if no other idea will be mistaken for it. An issue with this first grade is that the feeling of whether we will never mistake an idea for something else is subjective. The second grade is ‘distinctness,’ where a distinct idea contains no contents or sub-ideas that are not clear. One issue with this level of clarity is that it is possible to find a case in which it is unclear whether or not it fits with the distinct definition of the idea. For example, say we define the idea of a car as a motor vehicle with four wheels. When the mechanic is replacing your car’s tires, it momentarily becomes a motor vehicle with zero wheels – does this mean that, for this period of time, that the vehicle is not a car? Peirce feels as though we must further clarify our ideas to avoid these mistaken beliefs.

Peirce defines belief as a habit which we are aware of, and one that appeases the irritation that doubt causes. When we are in doubt, we are uncomfortable and try to move to a fixed state of belief. The main reason Peirce gives for wanting clearer ideas is that we do not want to fix the wrong beliefs as a result of our unclear thinking. One way this can happen is if we were to come to the conclusion that two ideas are different simply because of the way these ideas were expressed. As an example, we can imagine someone who believes that a sheet of paper displayed horizontally is different from the same sheet of paper displayed vertically, even though this is the same object. This is what Peirce calls a ‘false belief’ or an ‘imaginary distinction.’ Another way we can fix the wrong beliefs is if we project a possible confusion about an idea onto the idea itself. For example, if I feel as though the subject of economics is unclear to me, I may mistakenly believe that economics itself is an unclear subject. Peirce mentions one more method that can also fix the wrong beliefs, which is by misunderstanding the grammatical construction or the wording of an idea.

Peirce proposes the pragmatic maxim as a third grade of clarity which he believes will solve these problems. This is the principle that our complete understanding of an idea is the sum of all the effects we see through experimentation and observation of the idea. This allows us to take the clarity of ideas from just a definition, offered by the first two grades, all the way to a complete picture of the idea demonstrated through its practical effects. Peirce goes through many examples of his maxim in order to reveal its different aspects.

He begins by examining the idea of ‘hardness,’ which he defines as a quality of a substance that makes it so that it will not be scratched by many other substances. What if we asked the question ‘What if all diamonds are soft until touched?’ Peirce indicates that this statement is pragmatically identical to the idea that diamonds are always hard, because the practical effects of the diamond being scratched are the same in both cases. That is, in the first case, we can only observe the diamond’s hardness when we touch it, and when we touch the diamond we observe that it is hard. In the second case, we again observe that the diamond is hard when we touch it, regardless of whether it is hard or soft when untouched. Clearly, when tested, both cases are the same. This shows us that the question we have posed relates only to the way we use the words ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ in conversation, and not the meanings of these ideas.

A similar example has to do with the idea of free will. Imagine that yesterday, you were having an exceptionally busy day and on the way to your destination, ended up refusing to help an old woman cross the street. Today, as you remember the disapproving looks from passerby and feel the guilt from not having helped her, you wonder whether you are to blame for this incident. Peirce claims that this question is pragmatically useless, because it is impossible to apply the pragmatic maxim to this idea. Because you now have the memory of the incident and the feelings of guilt and shame impressed onto your mind which you did not have yesterday, you can never recreate the exact conditions of the question you are posing. So, you cannot observe the practical effects of the situation and thus the statement cannot achieve the third grade of clarity. The upshot of this example is to reveal that if you had not posed the question of whether you are to blame, you would have never had a doubt about this exact situation. However, if you find yourself in a similar situation in the future, you have new information that can help you navigate it. Peirce does not deny that you are blameworthy, just that the specific question of blameworthiness does not pass the third grade of clarity.

Now, Peirce asks, what of objects that we believe currently to be unreachable? How can we discuss the properties of these objects? For example, what difference does it make whether a pearl at the bottom of the ocean is white or black? Peirce says it makes almost no difference, similar to the case of the diamond. Again, it still mainly concerns the way we arrange our language, but Peirce leaves room for the fact that this pearl may be fished up by someone at some point in time. Once this pearl has been observed, the pragmatic maxim has been applied, at which point we can come to the fixed belief about its true coloring.

Peirce then comes to his example regarding reality and what we make of this abstract concept. While most people are able to achieve a level of clearness when it comes to distinguishing what is real and what is fictional, they are unable to provide a definition of reality, and thus are unable to come up with a distinct idea of the concept. This shows us that we need to apply the pragmatic maxim. As we continue to experiment and apply the scientific method, Peirce believes that we will eventually come to realize what reality is, and come to some fixed belief regarding it. So, reality is the common truth which is agreed upon by everyone who investigates it indefinitely through the scientific method.