I do not suggest for one moment that Pragmatism is the only philosophy (if indeed we may call it a philosophy at all) that is necessarily committed to Pluralism,[278] nor am I, of course, blind to the difficulties that Pluralism, as over against Monism, presents to many thinking minds. But I do here say that if Pragmatism be true, as it is in the main (at least as an “approach” to philosophy), it follows that the reality with which we are in contact in all our thoughts and in all our theorizing is not any or all of the “contents” of the consciousness of the individual thinker, but rather the common, personal life of activity and experience and knowledge and emotion that we as individuals share with other individuals. This life is that of an entire “world of intersubjective intercourse,”[279] of a communion of thought, and feeling, and effort in which, as persons, we share the common life of persons, and are members one of another.[280] Truth itself, in fact, as may be seen, of course, from the very connexion of the word truth with other words like “try”[281] and “utter” (and in its root with words like “ware” and “verihood”), is a social possession, implying both seekers and finders, listeners and verifiers as well as speakers and thinkers. Its existence implies a universe of discourse, as the logicians put it, in which thoughts and conceptions are elaborated and corrected, not merely by a kind of self-analysis[282] and internal development, but by the test of the action to which they lead and of the “responses” they awaken in the lives and thoughts of other persons. And it is this very sociological[283] and “pluralistic” character of Pragmatism that, along with its tendency to “affirmation” in the matter of the reality of the religious life, has helped to render it (as far as it goes) such a living and such a credible philosophy to-day.