The way I understand it it was.
The founders believed in letting each man pursue happiness, as they put it, each in his own way. They had no principles of life to force on each other; they denied the right of the state to impose on anyone, or at any rate to a degree beyond the bare minimum necessary or that which was customary.
Their revolt was against a state that sought to impose itself on the people.
“Their revolt was against a state that sought to impose itself on the people.”
Which was a revolution built upon the Enlightenment.
“Pragmatism” isn’t usually the word used to describe taking a ideological leap (and yes, it was one) like that revolt.
The founders asserted that the very purpose of government, all government, is the protection of life and liberty. So, your post doesn’t make much sense in that context.