Dowey and Nietzsche: Their Aethiology Compared Aled L Coste Careful comparative scholantip ba shown cleat that John Dewey's Anstanentalm fe not powiely unique formal auton af the ‘alts and democrat temper of the American peopl. Student of the internal history of Hess, ta. those who examine the “elaonship ‘between what some mun wile oF Sa and what eter men write © sy." Inve aotedsimdartes Between Dewey's experimental and Hume's ‘empire snap, Ken's phenomena, Hegel’ phonomenoloy, the sci ‘entation ofthe Uttara, the posta of Comte and Haeckel nd Berpon’s emphasis on acti)? Dewey secoglzd and expounded upon the Toga! connections between his brand of pragmatism and the separate thought of several Beopsanphlotophens” Although may comparative studies hae dlacouapd the parca mispsonlng of instrumentals, Sirter work needs tobe done. Ne accoet of experimertai’s Euopest resemblances canbe complete witout th cog of simaites with the thought of Friedrich Ntsc. The purpose ofthis paper isto demon irate likeness of thought in the specie mes of alethilgy. Such com ative demonsteation wil erage the conceptual Eve-Arneian back ‘pound agus which instrunentaism must be understood. John Dewey's attack on inexpugnable objective tut ook the form of etc wo wdely held theories on wht constitutes rath. One of thee theories ser that hee i ie dtinton between tlh ad ely. Ia ‘ther wots, tl Phonic concep lis that rth already exists (a os ‘eaity) whether one comes upon tox not. Ateadant to this bel the ‘otlon that thai ut ane rth for everyone at any gen ine, Dewey esers this by pointing out the obvious empl efuttion that aos ole do not atin to the atm truths. Another icly with this omer hoary argnsat i at finds the subject mater of trth tobe realy at le, “a metaphyseal heen to be mimeograpted at any removes upon a badly censtructed mental carbon copy which yes at ‘est only frapmentary, Bure, sad ereous piss. The only proper ‘objet oft rand must be that relationship of orgasm and enon: ‘ment in which fnetioning it most amply and effete attaned? rath ‘ant be mani ee Patni ewer. “The seoind attack on “objec” very 6 alas anotber major eens: the cotespondence theory of uth This he ea tha ath 62 Seplieate or copy of an independent realty. Dewey slats the irate uly ofthis acount Boao ft des dstingwih between trth and reality. Since suck a dstinetion is made, the erespondence tory does sIncite statements men mike shout the work. As suc, ivoes mes ‘egleeacoure and refer fo Meas and their vality. However, Dewey ‘eBuplins th clan tat veracity equalsa one-to-one elton with oie fe stents opens up the 01 and ill une) Cartesian problen of ‘doin? ‘The correspondence theory can not explain bow snd, wor ed ody ntret to pouoe knowledge and rh." e farther eves ‘ac toe ft they sould expan he onlogealabys between fats a dona me wou st ot knw wh the mid dul make a copy of ‘Be word aral? Hence, Dewey finds so venerable oppo For objective {uth to be uncomvneng. Not content to merely analyz, he as syete- eda pose, rbjetve approach to tat ‘uct an approach be cal te astruental or consguence they ‘bewey vats that tutho anes ita property of Hes. This property ‘uel ne of preditions of what consequences wi foo if any given See ton” sommaniated by an Hea, carried out. Aliens are Fppottaes continua beng verted or died inthe ht of ped Te rents The particular consequences or rests ae thos in tem of ‘Which poblem has ren? Pretend for example, that you hew a noie In'be set. ‘The meaning sisted fo you thts tectcat ha eased the sound, To ts the den you walle 0 the winkow and trough obser ‘Ghion gaz into unity elements of existence and meaning which Tous wore connected ths way your Me ondered se; that inch was 2 proposal or hypothesis ao Ioger a mere educated spc “ion Apart fom your forming az consiering some rerpretation, the ‘pony of tuth fas nether teanng aor exsence. Your Mea, in other serra to beset upon to bosome a truth? At Dewey coneudes rout his “aonctjeetie” theory, “rth nana oan epeorteaton among thief expt Toth 22a nb net eeepc wee tom he SESE Seamer whey are One te ons a Saree tomet, Teen expr ery epi ea Se oe eS elope aga wo ee Fe eae Tah per md oof ch ecm a ‘Spotlenced eatin ly sadony le th conclosion, truth Selongs to humans ately engaged in» changing world Veitys ne Dewey ses i, Isa satisfy response toa robe gating inthe worl, Because tuts are sot monolithic or Sed in § te ae tornet they can be ransomed by the sje intrest’ ‘Rinker who must cnsloudy and cominsusly sive to cope with Ms ‘eavsonment, Since thee ino Balan absolute trath, there canbe fortber test of veracity other then Ht ity co work ar to organize facis** Onjectne truth, moreowee, mast be recozed as yet aot Symptom of man’s qunctlsm and ques fr seaty abject rth mat ‘ veconind assists and dynam “interpretations” propre tents ely by ape and creative nda. ‘Nictche would appear to age fully with the above conchson of Dewey Tl, too, devastated pretensions fo objective rth by revealing the pevehoiogy om wich they ae based andthe hin esoning whic sis them, He to reavid trth wo a context of person, wort and probe ‘And be too, thovgh lee catflly and systema, ponte abject ‘and of tah to elas mpousle, sata sbjectnty. Ntseke per tape mos elective in analyzing the payehololeal bss of sgton and tat Tan the greatest pllosophecs, we are tol think hat they cn achieve the Tran through corte reasoning. But the theories of men Uke Spinoza, Wolf, Descartes td Pit ae ely tuows forts oj the belies they hoi om itinctie or eeseiecie grou. Behind even the furs opt ae wbjetve prejudices ad physiological demands"? Fa fom bsing tinted and object, Netsche tthe intelct a& ‘the intrsmont of something onitllect “he ci digo psa euements nde ck ov ssa te el he pl pt ain of a aang ‘Seether hugh eed wher on he wl SO" Miene ns artery een eels oe neptton oh a, haemo of bos) ‘The concept of transe aden nd final truth mst shea, bean ison In addon, Ntsche wee a cplstemelogeal argument to attack any clea tha “objective” tut can be supported by a ssclyempital tuto, is argument tat we hav te Kids of satons and peep tone we do bean of thelr uty.” The product of ou sees ist four voles, an he ene are pragmatic ost four conoptl bites ae He dene, farther, that ot sensations and perceptions ate vans heed by the conerpis and prsudgments which we all hod; our Coney tual mandates, lage part, out sensory Wfe!* Hence, fa contre postion fo empl sch as Locke, the senses cannot asoutely and Ubectielyveuly the conepte we may hold asthe senses are pre- Inuensed by bets nd values Neteche tellus tht “th the primal oping even in eer sense pression" * Consent, the ques for the Maton tai serdon of tbh 8 stale and independent of umans »ay not sest on ovr conceptual or ere bites. No “ruth” about {he “would of appeacanes” or pheaomens can be ay more than a per sect intepetation Final, Netrche shares Dewey's odium forthe Kantian noumenon or ‘igolte “thingie (1 “Trathnstse” which o many takers for entuies had parsed, Nitsce in is wetigs mot only denies tha our Knowiedge sould tantownd the ittions of the senses, but asp wates thar the very cnsept of noumenon which me seek (0 Tow is a ds Jas, Fis, be offers the now faa pyehologelexplnation (end eduction) ofthe ona ofthe soto the rem of abso resty Wat ‘oncocted by weak inlets who do aot dare t He and adj in 2 hunging world The gues fo the tional wansceadent an inseceible foumenon serves 2 at escape mecharsm for such wea pris'© See ‘nly, be finds the Kaatin Sle in noumenon uses ad supers hl Weefre refed.” Although many reson are pen for de conte tory chuacter of an abjectve rain of th, Nitsche’s greatest omluat is that rakes no alfeence for our quotdan engaged ie ‘Wit Dewey, be belive that eothing posses constition in Hell yt fom ative interpretation and sabjectivaty. As Nish understands ery x of ee hat plat feo te wl of th ene of wont te type tite tn, sods oon {mode of erince Te wer of speatina” bu eb spe {ind actor onthe wot poss om won to in oon oh wt ote colnet ey te ntne ety oni pent a ‘Steen nein of ery be ac at he wo ‘Consul. there canbe Ho tut apie ron the subjeciely engaged sebjetely thinker ‘Althoph denying the posdiity of iacesble weit, Nise o> posed thet 4 abjectine truth could yet be very instrumental to the man ‘tho has the courage tole with popes. Interpretative rhs, the ‘nly ones we ae relly capable of, can stil ve ws pasta uldance in ite, Subjective trth or an be useful too. Tan observe how ele ‘nent in the word affects, noting ther actual benevolence oc male Tene, and can drew fom hi ery prsooa ange of vision ape OF fehete of the world, With th sd of teas We can make our way though Iie’s maces with more confieace because we ean nde the empirical ‘word more easy? Thom ideas which have fesesereing consequences Thould be Lbeed a “ua” whe eas which decrease our chances of | hpg withthe enviroment should be abandoned ap “is.” Truth i | Jnuman end only indidals who posset it give & importance, With Dowey, Nietsche conlodes tht thi portance sn ou confontaton ith problematic word Forboth men ther fe 0 she ia Tact hat ‘eo not hae ear into te tive manson of static and transcendent vest. Alethiology belongs only and uly to mankind 2 eign tn ti Nh eo hei 2: Ie to of Maton Php nt geno Sr (hw eine Bs 9098. hsp Grn Aas Wala FM a a, ot Set Saris 193-1337 40a Dovey, ant eye Pony 0 Jn Do ‘amit Yor ey Ht Coe 8 6. Jt Boy “te Coegontnce Tea of Th ste 7he Pon op toy Dey dia oh Rae eno oy Ht Sea 9t0,9 82 1G een Dewey Pree Ce Yok xen ety 1958), p72. res sithts 5 Jt Boy Fe ingen They of Tt Te Phy of oh ‘eno tl ops Raa New Yn Henk ant Cg, 0 pp. 199-200. : 10 Tate Dery. Tbe Exes of Keown Te Pip of lt De Se iy aout oro Paani. 1 Nin ie Te on of Deer niente Nor Ys: Ose 12 NEA Mie ers Lie ond ann Tee a, Uh ne 1, Ft Meta, te oy Wd tented by Toma Como oe Ye Ramelst Rew ne 980, pr 14 ha on, Pom Fee Nr Sy fs Moti nt seme tain ir To soy ocean 8. 1s Ritts Nota i Wi Pome hon A Le ‘hw eri Rowan eh Ic 190 p98 4th hh “the ts” The Fre Nth, ind by Wake Naan Se Ye Tn Pow 1980p 506577 17 Wt, “Teh of he Cae he rele ithe el by vate una Gow You ie Vn Pe 95 p48, 18 Ttih Ne Pel fo Pete by Anny Mars (Sow or Rowen Rut fe 8p 19 Sit ita he Tat Say en Yo Pi Uren igo 6 2 stl by is New exe Mai ae