Abstract
This article critically considers “Object-Oriented Philosophy vs. Radical Empiricism” written by Graham Harman, and then explores the theory of pure experience in James’s philosophy in comparison to Harman and New Realists. In his essay, Harman regards James to be “too close to the traditional empiricists” and “too close to idealism.” But I will show that his interpretation of James is too narrow and inaccurate to prove his claims. Next, I will outline the major trends in realism at the turn of the century. In particular I will deal with New Realism or Neo-Realism, which was led by such younger philosophers as Edwin Bissell Holt, Ralph Barton Perry and William Pepperell Montague, and which earnestly refuted the old-fashioned idealism that had dominated American philosophy through the nineteenth century. In this article I aim to bring to light the realistic aspect of James’s philosophy.
