The term comes from having taken the Kantian distinction between practical (the rational in its autonomy as a priori principle of the moral law) and pragmatic (the rational as a means to an end). However, the pragmatic conception of reason is used here in a completely different context from that of Kant and strongly influenced by the theory of evolution and the concept of consciousness as a form of behavior aimed at the defense and affirmation of life. The examination is configured as a response to some kind of disturbance of a belief to which corresponded a habit, to build a new belief able to establish a new practice more appropriate and effective. So pragmaticism addressed a radical critique to the Cartesian thought, especially the criterion of truth according to which it would be possible to intuitively grasp the clear and distinct character of ideas.

The essence of pragmaticism is to recognize the operational function of thought, whereby nothing in the abstract is a ‘datum’ or a 'problem', but what that in a in a certain disturbed and indeterminate situation is a problem, which once clarified and resolved, can become a ‘datum’ in another situation and vice versa. Pragmaticism sets itself in a different position from that of empiricism as much as from that of idealism. Against empiricism, the pragmaticism denies the reduction of thought to induction or convention and states that nothing is ever given in a discreet, separate, objective manner, but that objects are events with an evident function as embedded in a link of relations that correspond to operational projects. Against the idealism of the transcendental type, pragmaticism claims instead the evolution character of thought and its link with an undetermined situation of which is the solution through the character of behaviors suitable to determine it, so there can not be any series of forms or categories ‘a priori’ rigidly defined.

Against Platonic idealism and against any ontology of an absolute character, pragmaticism argues that the 'hypostatization' of research results in eternal and immutable ideas or in absolute structures of reality, and their opposition to the actual world of experience prevent from grasping the operational character of thinking and do nothing but reproduce unwittingly a social situation of the historical and classist division of labor. If, then, with Dewey, pragmaticism proposes in the logical-epistemological field a claim of continuity of research and of its ability to self-rectify at any level, because of its experimental and instrumental nature, in ethics this claim results in a vigorous polemic against any possible ontological division ‘a priori’ between ends and means, as if were values constituted in itself and for itself and man had no possibility  of subordinating.

In general, the pragmatist thinkers believe that the search for truth or absolute certainty is a nonsense, while confer great importance to the problem of objectivity; it is, however, of an "objectivity-for-us", that is to say of a concept always linked to the "points of view", both individual and collective, from which human beings come into contact with the reality and evaluate it. If, for example, anyone reflects on the way in which we acquire our beliefs, it is easy in their view to see that the beliefs that we entertain about the way reality is structured, and therefore our ideas, perceptions and theories form an "articulated" system.

However, very often new beliefs arise that are not easily reconciled with the previous ones. In this case the scheme proposed by pragmatists to explain our behavior in the face of novelty has a markedly Darwinian character, and is based on the concept of "struggle for survival" (similar, in the end, to the "conjecture-refutation" method proposed by Karl Popper). This means that, when it emerges a new belief, we try to place it in the network of oldest believes. It is clear that if the operation succeeds, no problems arise. But things are not always so simple, and it may be the case that a new belief proves, on the one hand, highly plausible and, on the other hand, able to change the system in depth.

And that is why we are witnessing a struggle for survival between theories, beliefs and views of the world; only the most suitable survive, as they give rise to better explanations of the surrounding reality.

The two key-concepts on which rests the edifice of speculative pragmatism are "utility" and "practice." Assuming that all human beings share a set of perceptions and representations, their representatives claim that this provides an objective basis for action. Such an objectivity is however different from the classical one, understood as perspicuous representation of a reality independent of the subject. Rather, it is a "weak" objectivity, based essentially on inter-subjective criteria, which is also the only one we have. Here, then, that we can speak of theories better than others, pointing out that they are "better" only in the sense they allow us - temporarily - to organize in a more appropriate way  the sensory perceptions. The struggle between beliefs and theories of which it was said before, however, preclude to attribute the adjective "best" any character of absoluteness, because we must recognize the character perpetually contingent of our knowledge.

It follows, among other things, that (i) the meaning of a concept is "wholly" determined by the practical consequences of its application, and (ii) it must give up all "philosophia prima" to embrace a worldview devoid of metaphysical presuppositions. Although it should be noted that there are significant differences between the various representatives of the current, there is no doubt that there exists among them a basic consensus on the thesis (i) and (ii). From these pragmatists will derive also (iii) the futility of each Cartesian theory (dualistic) of knowledge, and (iv) the underlying trend towards "naturalism", namely the reduction of all knowledge to purely natural elements . Truth and objectivity are "internal" to the cognitive practices of individuals in the first place, and of the various social groups in the second place.