In the sequencing of World Hypotheses: A Study in Evidence (1942), _Chapter XI: Organicism_ is the last of four Relatively Adequate Hypotheses directly preceded by _Chapter X: Contextualism_, with a warning that the label of "organicism" unfortunately draws on the biological thinking too much.
_Organicism_ can be compared to other Relatively Adequate Hypotheses in Root Metaphor, Categories, Theory of Truth.
> ยง1. _The root metaphor of organicism_ > As with contextualism, so with organicism, no ordinary common-sense term offers a safe reference to the root metaphor of the theory. The common term "organism" is too much loaded with biological connotations, too static and cellular, and "integration" is only a little better. Yet there are no preferable terms. With a warning, we shall accordingly adopt these. [p. 280]
Pepper actually sees _organicism_ as close to _contextualism_, with a process orientation, yet missing the _integration_ and _duration_.
> Actually, the historic event which is the root metaphor of contextualism is a nearer approximation to the refined root metaphor of organicism than any common-sense term. > * This is so true that it is tempting to regard these two theories as species of the same theory, one being dispersive and the other integrative. > It has occasionally been said that pragmatism is simply idealism with the absolute left out, which in our terms would be to say that contextualism is simply dispersive organicism. > * But the insistence on integration which is characteristic of organicism makes so great a difference that it is wiser to consider them as two theories. > Since they contradict each other on nearly every categorial point, anyone not familiar with them might wonder how they could be thought closely related. > * The answer is that organicism has to deal mainly with historic processes even while it consistently explains time away, whereas contextualism has to admit integrative structures surrounding and extending through given events even though these structures endanger its categories. > * Organicism takes time lightly or disparagingly; contextualism takes it seriously. > There we have a flat categorial contradiction, and something that cannot be interpreted as a difference of emphasis on certain categories of one view. > * The root metaphor of organicism always does appear as a process, but it is the _integration_ appearing in the process that the organicist works from, and not the _duration_ of the process. > When the root metaphor reaches its ultimate refinement the organicist believes that the temporal factor disappears. > * How he can believe this we shall see presently. > In the meanwhile let us develop the categories of organicism from the integrative process as this is observed in progress. [pp. 280-281, editorial paragraphing added]