Final answer:
The pragmatic principle espouses that propositions are true if they produce satisfactory practical results, but it is false that this principle can be universally applied as it is often context-specific. It also confuses truth and justified belief, leading to relativism.
Step-by-step explanation:
The pragmatic principle, as it relates to the theory of truth, suggests that propositions are true if they yield satisfactory practical results. This notion was formulated by William James, who believed that this would lead to a convergence of opinions on a stable body of scientific propositions that are successful for human action. However, the application of the pragmatic principle is not without criticism. It suggests that conflicting views can be true simultaneously, based on the utility of those views to different people or societies. This approach can lead to tolerance of diverse viewpoints but also to controversy when it comes to empirical, aesthetic, and ethical claims. Since pragmatic principles are based largely on the outcomes and practical applications of ideas, they can be subject to debate regarding their universal applicability.
A major critique of pragmatism is that it does not always distinguish between truth and justified belief, leading to potential relativism in asserting what is right or wrong. When it comes to principles like ethics, pragmatism encourages a view that takes into account varying circumstances and the notion that morality progresses through experience and discourse, not from absolute proclamations.
As for the applicability of pragmatic principles across all areas, it is false that pragmatic principles can be applied universally without exception. Some principles, like Pascal's principle in fluids, are less broadly applicable and are context-specific, demonstrating that not all principles can be extended across all domains.