William James offers us a philosophy called Pragmatism which seems designed to steer between previous philosophical positions on what constitutes the truth. For James, a thing is true insofar as it is useful. James would refer, in what seems to be a self-consciously American way of speaking (not unlike Mark Twain), to the "cash value" of an idea -- or as James expounds it "Pragmatism asks its usual question, 'Grant an idea or belief to be true...what concrete difference will its being true make in any one's actual life?" This is where the applicability of William James' philosophy becomes particularly apparent -- not only is Pragmatism concerned with uses, but it is also concerned with how to maintain a kind of "tough-minded" (in James' words) philosophical stance within "pluralism" or "the pluralistic universe" as James called it. This entails negotiating between multiple truth claims and selecting them on the basis of utility. But it also leads to some fascinating stances which I personally...

Now from the standpoint of science -- or traditional philosophy -- there is no "truth" to astrology. Yet William James would inform me that -- if somehow reading my horoscope allows me to get a handle on my day, if it in some way provides me with directionality or performs some other useful function in my daily life, then I need not worry about the scientific status of astrological prognostication.
Now this is by no means an unproblematic concept on James's part. Soccio notes the similarity of James' view to "self-fulfilling prophecy," the way in which the act of belief can make something happen. Obviously there is no empirical scientific way to prove that there…