Gaspari 1

Aimee Gaspari
Professor Paul Ott
PHIL 130-016
23 April 2014
The Origin of Philosophy
As John Dewey elaborates on, there is an origin of philosophy in which philosophical
knowledge derives from traditional beliefs and religious knowledge. In order to become
philosophy out of religion, it must go through two specific stages. First, one must consolidate the
stories, legends, or myths. Then, one must have a motive for logical system and intellectual
proof. In this stage, philosophers purify the traditional knowledge and delete what cannot be
proven. Once this stage is fully completed, true philosophy can be found, according to Dewey.
Overall, Deweys main point is that philosophy arises to defend traditional belief because it
serves as a better ground to fight threats or prove religious stories or Greek myths. Through the
dialogue between Euthyphro and Socrates in the Platonic dialogues, Deweys explanation for the
origin of philosophy out of traditional belief is brought to light; in addition to the two
philosophers different methods for uncovering the definition of piety, Socrates also
demonstrates Deweys assertion that traditional knowledge must be purified in order to create
true philosophy.
In defining piety, Euthyphro and Socrates establish their extremely diverse philosophical
views in accordance with the origin of philosophy that Dewey highlights. Starting with
Euthyphro, he takes the traditional, religious approach to the matter. In justifying his actions for
persecuting his father, he turns to the story of the Greek god Zeus who condemned his father for
his wrongdoing. As Euthyphro states in his first definition of piety, I say that the pious is to do
what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or temple robbery or
anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or anyone else; not to
prosecute is impious (Plato 6). Not only does this show how Euthyphro judges based on

Gaspari 2

scripture or myths, it also displays how his point of view may be jaded because his beliefs are so
ancient. He believes that the wrongdoer is his father because of his belief in the Zeus story.
Socrates, however, explains how the wrongdoer may be someone else, but they simply have no
other knowledge to incriminate another person. Euthyphros way of thinking directly correlates
to what Dewey calls Traditional Knowledge, or the imaginative body of beliefs, which is key in
the origin of philosophy. As stated by Dewey, To treat the early beliefs and traditions of
mankind as if they were attempts at scientific explanation of the worldis thus to be guilty of a
great mistake (Dewey 4). Philosophy did not arise out of scientific truth or rationality of facts,
but from imaginations and suggestions apart from science. This is the type of knowledge that
Euthyphro displays in his definition of piety. He believes that the gods and the Greek myths hold
all of the answers, and therefore, he has trouble agreeing with Socrates on a universal definition
for piety. Overall, both Dewey and Euthyphro highlight the importance of Traditional
Knowledge in that it places importance on beliefs, emotions, and religious values.
Conversely, Socrates takes the philosophical, logical approach, which Dewey highlights
when he discusses the process of purifying Traditional Knowledge into philosophy. With his
approach, Socrates wishes to find the universal definition of piety. Socrates believes that there is
a piece of knowledge to find through philosophy and that is the way he wishes to find his
definition. By attempting to find the definition with the help of Euthyphros knowledge,
Socrates method emphasizes Deweys two stages for turning myth into philosophy. While
explaining to Euthyphro his plan, Socrates proclaims, Bear in mind then that I did not bid you
tell me one or two of the many pious actions but that form itself that makes all pious actions
pious (Plato 8). He wants to get the form of piety and then use it as a model to establish which
actions are pious or impious. By doing so, Socrates reiterates the importance of the consolidation
of stories and legends into developing a certain amount of proof for philosophical knowledge. At

Gaspari 3

one point, Socrates even says to Euthyphro, If you can give me adequate proof of this, I shall
never cease to extol your wisdom (Plato 11). When he refers to proof, Socrates means that he
wants evidence of what makes an action pious, whether that mean prosecuting the wrongdoer,
being loved or cared for by the gods or being just. Similar to Socrates, Dewey believes in
deleting what cannot be proven so that people are not simply relying on false or perhaps
inaccurate religious beliefs. With this method, Dewey proclaims how purifying tradition should
preserve its moral and social values unimpaired and add to their power and authority (Dewey
10). Overall, Socrates does not accept Euthyphros answers because of the fact that he puts all his
faith in Greek myths and religious values, which Socrates deems not strong enough evidence.
Because of this, he constantly calls for the need to purify this type of knowledge and make it
stronger, just as Dewey suggests. Quoting Socrates, Dewey mentions how man must search out
the reason of things, and not accept them from custom and political authority (Dewey 10). This
clearly highlights how both Dewey and Socrates understand that facts and intellectual proof must
be added to the purely emotional, religion-based Traditional Knowledge.
In looking at Dewey, Euthyphro and Socrates seem to have a missing element in their
dispute over piety; this element is the presence of Matter of Fact Knowledge in the history of
philosophy. In order to add intellectual proof to knowledge, Dewey describes, This we may
suppose to be furnished by the need of reconciling the moral rules and ideals embodied in the
traditional code with the matter of fact positivistic knowledge which gradually grows up
(Dewey 6). In his summary of this type knowledge, Dewey mentions how man cannot solely rely
on belief and fancy; instead, man needs actual scientific facts. This type of knowledge, according
to Dewey, also differs from Traditional Knowledge through its connection with industries, arts
and crafts, and the common people. Because the scientific facts of this knowledge were
constantly and rapidly growing, Dewey highlights how Matter of Fact Knowledge began to

Gaspari 4

threaten and, at times, come into conflict with Traditional Knowledge. In contrast to Traditional
Knowledge, Matter of Fact Knowledge stems from a strong intellectual place and pays special
attention to the actual facts of the world versus the ancient myths, beliefs, or religious values
of others (Dewey 6). According to Dewey, Socrates most definitely sought for a compromise
between the two types of knowledge, but he also appeared to approach his debate with more
Matter of Fact Knowledge. This apparently led to Socrates condemnation of death for not
believing in the gods of the city and corrupting the youth with his scandalous philosophy.
Clearly, Dewey displays how Matter of Fact Knowledge and Traditional Knowledge create the
classic dualism in the history of philosophy, causing much conflict.
On another note, Deweys assertion that philosophy arose merely as a means of defending
traditional belief can be seen as his misunderstanding of the true nature of philosophy. Dewey is
not being fair to philosophy. He says that philosophy derives from religion versus being its own
separate type of teaching of the world. In his mind, philosophy is merely a purification of
traditional belief, which makes it seem as though he is insulting the esteem of philosophys
origins. Still, other philosophers like Descartes and Aquinas prove that Dewey is not convincing
to everybody. From Descartes meditations on the mind and body to Aquinas views on nature
and creation, other philosophers have defended some sort of knowledge through philosophy of
the traditional form. Indeed, Dewey believes in two stages of philosophy, consolidation and
purification, but he also believes in a third stage: the dualisms of philosophy. This dualistic
knowledge is protected by isolating it in a pure realm of being so that it cannot be touched by the
changes in the world. The conflict over Traditional versus Matter of Fact Knowledge, known as
the classical model of philosophy, displays how the two are held separately because of
differences in social classes. Although the two kinds of knowledge were closely connected once,
Dewey claims, At other points, their inconsistencies forbid their interweaving, and they are

Gaspari 5

kept apart as if in different compartments (Dewey 7). Dewey goes on to explain how
philosophy arouse to defend or purify Traditional Knowledge, but Dewey is not in any way
approving this function. In fact, he thinks that this is the wrong way to do philosophythis is
where his experimental means of philosophy comes in. He justifies his experimental method by
criticizing the classical model for presenting philosophy simply out of religion. In the end, he
truly believes that philosophy is apologetic and insincere. Socrates may have thought he was
trying to access truth or a universal definition of piety, but in reality, Dewey sees him as simply a
defender of Traditional Knowledge. Indeed, Dewey wants to move past this classical model, but
he also understands that man must first understand the dualistic structure of philosophy.
Overall, Dewey, Socrates, and Euthyphro all highlight the origin of philosophy in a
unique way. Although these great philosophers come into conflict on several occasions, it can
definitely be said that the intention of philosophers to find true philosophy is always at their core.
As stated in Dewey, When it is acknowledged that under disguise of dealing with ultimate
reality, philosophy has been occupied with the precious values embedded in social traditions, that
it has sprung from a clash of social ends and from a conflict of inherited institutions with
incompatible contemporary tendencies, it will be seen that the task of future philosophy is to
clarify mens ideas as to the social and moral strifes of their own day (Dewey 16). Philosophy is
constantly changing, as are the opinions and beliefs held by philosophers of today. As a means
for uncovering more about the search for true philosophy, one may want to do even more
research on how other philosophers look at the origin of philosophy and the conflict of the two
different types of knowledge. After all, the goal of philosophy does stem from the idea that
people are well-educated and well-ordered to live a logical, more intelligent life.

Gaspari 6

Bibliography
Dewey, John. Reconstruction in Philosophy. Boston: Beacon, 1948. Print.
Plato. Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo. Second Edition.
Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hacket Publishing Company, 2002. Print.