Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


John Dewey

Lectures

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Śyāmasundara: Today we are discussing the American philosopher John Dewey. Last time we were discussing William James, who is called a pragmatist. His philosophy deals..., believes that practice is better than theory. So this John Dewey is more or less a successor in this same line of philosophizing. He says that practical consequences are the only valid test of truth, and he says that the proof of an idea consists in its being subject to predictable results. The idea is not true unless the results of the idea are predictable.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Śyāmasundara: He is also...

Prabhupāda: That is practical. That is practical. No theoretical knowledge is necessary.

Śyāmasundara: But do the results of an idea have to be predictable?

Prabhupāda: Idea may..., if it is a concocted idea, the result cannot be ascertained. If it is fact, then the result can be predicted.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Śyāmasundara: Dewey says that the ethical goals are fulfillment of human needs and desires, that all morality should lead to this goal of fulfillment of human needs and desires.

Prabhupāda: The human need is to get out of the clutches of māyā. That is the actual need. Janma-maraṇa-mokṣaya, that is the need. But the modern society, they do not know what is needed. They are making simply plans, uselessly. Śrama eva hi kevalam (SB 1.2.8). Simply laboring hard, they do not know the need. The real need is to get out of the clutches of repetition of birth and death in different forms. But people do not know this. They are simply concocting ideas. Durāśayā ye bahir-artha-maninaḥ. Durāśayā, hopeless, or they are trying to educate something which is impossible. They are making plans to be happy in this material world. And by the United Nations it is impossible. That is not intelligence. He says... We can say in the United Nations clearly that "Your, this attempt will be failure." It is already failure. (aside in Hindi) Hariṁ vinā naiva mṛtiṁ taranti. What is the solution? You cannot make any solution of this repetition of birth and death, disease and old age. What do you mean by solution? The real problems are there. So they do not know what are the problems, how to solve them. So andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānās (SB 7.5.31). Some blind leaders, so-called leaders, they are leading other blind men. This is going on. They do not know what is the aim of life, how to make solutions of the problems. They do not know.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Śyāmasundara: These utilitarians said that activity should be to achieve all that is desired by the people, but Dewey says that activity should be to achieve what is worthy to be desired.

Prabhupāda: No, no. First thing is, people are desiring happiness. Whatever one may desire, the ultimate end is happiness. Nobody can deny this. But a diseased fellow, if he thinks that "I am happy," that is false happiness. A diseased man cannot be happy unless the disease is cured. Sometimes we go to a diseased person and ask, "How are you?" "Yes, I am all right." If he is all right, why is he lying down? He is not all right. He is artificially saying that "I am all right." What is this "all right"? Similarly, these foolish people, they are thinking, "I am happy." What is their happiness? If you have to die, then where is your happiness? Janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi duḥkha-doṣānudarśanam. A real intelligent person will see that these are the things which are giving me distress: janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi. So where is the happiness? Foolishly if we accept something as happiness, that is not happiness. Real happiness is when you are free from these four principles of distress: janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi (BG 13.9). Otherwise, where is your happiness? But if you think that "Although I am dying, I am happy," that is another thing, a fool's paradise.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Hayagrīva: This is John Dewey, who believed that religions were basically myths and that experience is of the utmost necessity. He felt that philosophy was superior to religion. He writes, "The form ceases to be that of the story told in imaginative and emotional style and becomes that of rational discourse, observing the canons of logic." So it's apparent that Dewey considers religion simply to be a story told in imaginative and emotional style, and for him philosophy observes the canons of logic. So for him the Vedic accounts of Kṛṣṇa's pastimes would be imaginative and emotional, or mythic. How does one argue against this kind of a...?

Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa is historical fact. It is not imagination. It is, to think like that, is imaginative. Kṛṣṇa... The Mahābhārata is there. It is accepted by all Indian authority, and Kṛṣṇa is a historical figure. How it can be imaginative? So... he may think like that, like a madman, but India's leader will not accept that. Especially the ācāryas who are controlling the spiritual life of India, they do not accept a lunatic foreigner speaking like that.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Prabhupāda: So in this, on this platform, mostly the philosopher, scientist, they are Dr. Frogs. So their calculation is not correct. So whatever they cannot calculate, they take it as myth, imagination, that just a foreign. Even for ordinary human being to think of Brahmā's duration of life, huh, forty-three hundred thousand multiplied by one thousand, and that becomes twelve hours of Brahmā, because it is beyond your calculation, he thinks it imaginary. So unless one has got thorough knowledge of the whole universe, so for him it is imaginary. But it..., one man's imaginary may be a fact to the other man. It depends on the knowledge. So unfortunately, the so-called scientists, philosophers on this planet, they are thinking in their own terms and they are taking it final. So they must think other things as mythological, imaginary. But actually that is not the fact.

Hayagrīva: Dewey was an American writing in the early part of the twentieth century, and he writes, "Logic demands that in imagination we wipe the slate clean and start afresh by asking what would be the idea of the unseen." In other words, he feels that it's time to set aside the orthodox, what he calls superstitious religions, and create a new religion. In other words, we must define God and religion anew.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is required. Because in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is also accepted that except a Vedic religion, all others are cheating religion because they have no perfect knowledge. It is clearly stated that cheating type of religion is rejected from the Bhāgavata religion. Bhāgavata... The sum and substance of Bhāgavata religion is accepting God as the supreme controller. Satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi. This is beginning. And what is that Absolute Truth? Janmādy asya yataḥ, itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ svarāṭ: (SB 1.1.1) that there is a principal, Brahman, from whom everything has come. So unless you find out what is the ultimate source of emanation, the knowledge is perfect, hum, imperfect. But you must have to admit, from your experience, that everything has a source of emanation. Anything has. You cannot go beyond your experience. You see this table. This table has got a history. Somebody has collected the wood and he has made into a shape. So everything that you see, it has got a history. So similarly the whole creation, it has got a history, and to know who has created, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), that is perfect knowledge. If you do not know, if you cannot reach, that is your inability. Don't think that it is imaginary, mythological. That is your imperfect of knowledge. You cannot reach, and you make a conclusion like a crazy man. That is not philosophical at all.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Hayagrīva: You..., when you discussed Dewey with Śyāmasundara Prabhu, you said that Dewey wants to make God his scapegoat—why does he mention the word God, and he uses the word God to serve his own ends. His philosophic conception is the working union of the ideal and the actual. This is rather vague, but this is his definition of God: Man striving for perfection.

Prabhupāda: He can define, but he must be a very, what is called, sane man to define. The sane man's definition of God is there. Just like everyone says, "God is great." So now if he can define what is the greatness... The greatness, if one man is very rich, we consider him great man. If a man is very wise we call him a great man. If a man is very strong or influential or beautiful... Greatness according to our estimation. So all this greatness must be there in God. God must be the richest, God must be the strongest, God must be the most beautiful, God must be wisest. In this way, six opulences calculated, and when these opulences are in completeness, that is God. So that completeness we find in the history Kṛṣṇa. In the history of humanity it is very easy to find out that when Kṛṣṇa was present on this planet, so He proved the strongest, the most influential, the most beautiful, the supreme wise—everything—supreme famous. Kṛṣṇa's fame, fame is still going on. Kṛṣṇa's knowledge, stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, is still being studied all over the world. This is the proof that He is God. And all saintly persons in India, they are not controlled by these foreign Dr. Frogs. So these big, big ācāryas, like Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Nimbārka, Śaṅkarācārya, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu, all big ācāryas, they have accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. So there is complete uniformity of the authorities in the past, present and future. So here is God. If one cannot accept Him God, then he is insane. With so many evidences, and it is practical. Many evidences when Kṛṣṇa was present He showed; that is history. But these imperfect Dr. Frog, when they see God is doing something uncommon, they take it "Myth, mythology."

Page Title:John Dewey
Compiler:MadhuGopaldas, Serene
Created:14 of Jan, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=6, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:6