John Dewey

Transcript Preview

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 Ka's pastimes would be imaginative and emotional; or mythic. How does one argue against this kind of a...?

Prabhupāda: Ka is a historical fact. It is not imaginary. It is..., to think like that--is imaginative. Ka... The Mahbhrata is there. It is accepted by all Indian authorities and Ka 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 cryas who are controlling the spiritual life of India, they

do not accept a lunatic foreigner speaking like that.

Hayagrīva: He writes, "According to the religious and philosophic tradition of Europe, the valid status of all the highest values, the good, true and beautiful, was bound up with their being properties of ultimate and supreme being, namely God. All went well as long as what passed for natural science gave no offense to this conception. Trouble began when science ceased to disclose in the objects of knowledge the possession of any such properties. Then some roundabout method had to be devised for substantiating them." In other words, science began to investigate the phenomenal universe without admitting the proprietorship of anyone, of God and this brings a breakdown in morality and value. So Dewey attempts to reassemble these shattered values in a philosophical way, but he like science, attempts to do so without recognizing the proprietorship of an ultimate and supreme being.

Prabhupāda: That is another lunacy, because everything has a proprietor. So why this big cosmic manifestation will not have a proprietor? To accept the proprietor is natural, and that is logical--and not to accept a proprietor that is lunacy. How it can be possible? Just like we give this example: we are standing on the land, we know that there is government, there is proprietor. And a few yards after when this ocean begins, how we can think of that the ocean has no proprietor; no government? How any philosopher or man having logic can believe it? What is the answer?

Hayagrīva: Well, he felt that science dealt a death blow to the religions as we know them, to the orthodox religions.

Prabhupāda: No, religion we have repeatedly explained. Religion means to accept the laws of God. That is religion.

Continue reading full transcript in the app →