Frances to Chris... 
For the pragmatist, all judgement is critical and is
fundamentally based on skeptical doubt, but eventually may lead
to fallible belief. If any object like architecture ever could
conceivably be nice and right and true, then it probably will be
in the long run, regardless of whether it ever actually will be.
It is the search that counts, and not some absolute finality,
which is unattainable in any event. It is enough to satisfy the
tenets of pragmatism if a thinker merely believes in this
optimistic likelihood. The truth of a theory in science
furthermore is not dependent on any concrete practical concerns
in everyday life. Those concerns the pragmatist will leave to the
bankers and builders and busters. 

You wrote... 
One of the many "conceivable practical consequences of signs" is
that they can be ignored, and if those ignored signs will be
taking up space on a city street, eventually they will be
demolished (or never built in the first place) Which is why the
sword of judgment hangs heavier above architecture than upon any
other imaginative art. How can a "pragmatist" ignore it? The
pragmatist, who is concerned with architecture, needs to propose
on what that judgment should be based. For Sullivan, judgment
should be based on responsibility to the  public - specifically,
his American public with their "subtle ideal of self-government",
and "altruistic conception of a fundamental right to the pursuit
of happiness", the "luminous spirit of Democracy", at his
historical moment when the "national adolescence has passed" on
"the threshold of a new era" Sullivan wants the forms of
architecture to exemplify that responsibility -- to lift
Americans out of their "narrow groove of self interest" for which
the social fabric "exists only for personal profit and
exploitation"  He would attack those buildings which "signify the
morbid brain" "Nothing more clearly reflects the status and
tendencies of a people than the character of its buildings. They
are emanations of the people; they visualize for us the soul of
our people. They are an open book. And by this sign, the
tendency of today is disquieting" (above quotes taken from
"Kindergarten Chats", chapter XIX, "Responsibility: the Public")

Frances wrote:
My understanding is that the pragmatist is presumably concerned
with the "conceivable" practical consequences of signs, such as
the truth signified by theories. It is the "concept" of likely
effects that is made concrete in experience by theories that are
made from facts. 

Reply via email to