In James’s text, the term “pragmatist” is employed to encapsulate a flexible, outcome-oriented approach to thought and truth. James portrays the pragmatist as someone who, while perhaps unconsciously embodying pragmatic methods as in describing a writer “sans le savoir” [1][2] or by pragmatically dividing theories [3], nonetheless remains committed to concrete facts and practical effects [4][5]. He contrasts this stance with more abstract, habitual modes of philosophical inquiry [6] and even distinguishes between different pragmatic types—from the radical, anarchistic sort [7] to one who accommodates various hypotheses without rigid dogmatism [8][9]. Moreover, the pragmatist’s focus on observable consequences of belief is highlighted as central to understanding truth across a theory’s lifespan [10] and as a deliberate choice in the face of theoretical alternatives [11][12].