Although many would argue that pragmatism gets you farther than idealism, idealism does have its pros.

- Succeeding ideologically is more "glorious." For example, a candidate who refrains from mudslinging is praised.

- Being pragmatic tells others that you yourself don't value your ideal very highly.

- Nothing beats an undivided mind. Being pragmatic brings in self-conflict, as you struggle between cutting corners and staying true to your convictions.

- Ideals provide a unmoving holdfast to safeguard you against compromises. For example, if you become pragmatic enough, you can justify almost anything, such as euthanasia and infanticide. Idealism prevents you from that.

In essence, pragmatism can pay off in the short run, yet have severe consequences in the long run.

There is nothing written in stone that tells us idealism cannot be mixed with pragmatism. As a matter of fact I deal in this way all the time and much to my success, I believe. I do not see this as an either/or situation.

As always, one must keep their eye on the prize. In whatever conflict there might be there is a goal or two! One cannot simply use the steamroller approach and run others over just because it may be practical to do so. That would be a conflict in and of itself to my way of thinking. Practicality has its uses and its rewards but so does idealism and the greater good, I believe is in the mixture of the two. The two must also ebb and flow within the mixture especially when the conflict involves others. If the goal is enormous, again, all the more reason to look at the consequences of the pragmatic approach and the idealistic.

Pragmatism can be valued if undertaken carefully and with great thought and that's when idealism can soften and sometime diffuse a further situation. Idealism is not as valued as it should be or as you might think. In life I have witnessed the pragmatic to be somewhat more valued and therefore more often used but not without consequence. Take any situation you can think of and work it through with a friend or a teacher or anyone who might be interested in doing such an exercise and give the pragmatic a dash of the idealistic. Watch how it changes or solidifies the outcome.

Defining 'idealism' as "The act or practice of envisioning things in an ideal form" given by the American Heritage Dictionary and 'pragmatism' as "A method of understanding facts and events in terms of cause and effect, and of inferring practical lessons or conclusions from this process," from the Oxford English Dictionary, the two don't necessarily come into conflict.

However, this debate is focusing on when they do. Let's choose a hypothetical example to apply idealism and pragmatism to: Life.

Joe went to school for 12 years, and a four-year college before heading off to the work-force to a job he didn't necessarily enjoy, and stayed until he either retired at 69.

Why did Joe work for so long? If he was an idealist, he had a reason for his long years of work, be it the idea of peaceful old age, or cruises to Alaska. But what is Joe's twin brother didn't have this goal to reach towards, to motivate him? What kept him working at such a job? Why didn't he burn out long before his retirement? Well, if there are only practical results, the only thing he could look forward to was old age, or a heap of money. If it was either, how could he enjoy that? Is Joe or Bob, the brother, going to be happier come retirement? Who reached his goal - real or nonexistent?

Thus, as I see it, we come down to the idealist, who, even though it may be unrealistic, has a hope for something to come, or the pragmatist, who works toward nothing in general.