Pragmatism is not a school but a label spanning deeply divergent thinkers.

Evidence

The differences between a Peirce and a James, or between a James and a Dewey, are profound. The differences among current advocates of pragmatism are even more profound, making it possible to find greater affinities across than within the “schools”-Peirce has more in common with Putnam than Putnam with Rorty, and I have more in common (I think) with Peirce, James, and Dewey than I have with Cornel West or Stanley Fish. — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 67

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the recurring pragmatist-skeptic debates (e.g. Stanley Fish’s pragmatism, anti-essentialism) in contemporary legal theory. — connects to: Although pragmatic jurisprudence embraces a richer set of ideas than can be found in The Nature of the Judicial Process or ‘The Path of the Law,’ one can hardly say that there has been much progress, and perhaps in the nature of pragmatism there cannot be.; Pragmatism rejects Enlightenment dualisms as props of conservatism — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 17; Philosophical inconsistency can generate richer intellectual movements than rigid logical consistency. — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 2085 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Philosophical inconsistency can generate richer intellectual movements than rigid logical consistency. #expands (0.50) — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 2085
• True thinking requires an internal dialogue among conflicting viewpoints. #exemplifies (0.40) — Jordan B. Peterson, 12 Rules for Life An Antidote to Chaos, 727