If he turns to philosophy he comes in contact with a world, not of fixed ideas, of eternal verities, but a world where all is in a state of flux. It is not that certain “eternal truths” are being attacked in order to substitute others in their places, but that the lasting validity of truths, any truths, is itself under fire. No teacher, perhaps, has been more popular or exerted greater influence than the late William James, and the pragmatism associated with his name is, in the form of its presentation at least, one of the original American contributions to philosophy. Now the essence of pragmatism is that the truth or validity of an idea depends on whether it works in practice. “The truest scientific hypothesis,” he says in one of his most popular books, “is that which, as we say, ‘works best’; and it can be no otherwise with religious hypotheses.” For the reader to add “ethical hypotheses” is to take an obvious step. Again he says: “The true ... is only the expedient in the way of our thinking, just as the right is only the expedient in the way of our behaving.” It is true that he adds “expedient in the long run and on the whole,” but if the true and the right can only be tested by their working it is evident that, as the world is made up of individuals,[Pg 72] the only experimental tests possible must be made by individuals. This philosophy is thoroughly consonant with the American temperament and natural outlook on life. We are not mentally a subtle or an abstract people. If a thing does not work, it is of no use. If it does, that is a sufficient answer to any attack, and it is this pragmatic sanction that, consciously or not, many a thoughtful young person of to-day is seeking for the new ethics. In the writings of the most influential living American philosopher, John Dewey, he again finds this sense of fluidity in life and thought. “The first distinguishing characteristic of thinking is facing the facts,” says Dewey, in words which appeal to one of the finest sides of the young people. Dewey as an ardent evolutionist, and a disbeliever in any fixed forms or species, holds out as the hope for the future—and disagreement with him would seem to plunge us in hopeless pessimism—that human nature is not unchangeable, that there is possibility of unlimited alteration by change in the environment, and that this change may be brought about by taking conscious thought and not awaiting the slow alteration of nature. This again throws open the way for a serious consideration as to whether, if we can change the environment and human nature,—and both have been enormously changed,—we keep unchanged codes of conduct.