Anthroposophical Life Gifts
GA 181
14 May 1918, Berlin
VI. Spiritual Science, the Practice of Life and the Destinies of Souls
Spiritual Science should above all things be conceived of, by those who have already noted for a long time, in the sense that the question should come before the soul as to how Spiritual Science can be most intensely effective for human life. This has certainly often been emphasized, but we cannot often enough to bring forward the side of the reality of Spiritual Science and its significance for our age. Spiritual Science is certainly in a sense a Science, and as such it is, we may say, still in a “fragmentary” stage at the present day, only partly established; what it may eventually become can really only be present in the first beginnings at the present time.
What I mean by this is the content of Spiritual Science, through which we can learn something of man in so far as this has its life on the other side of the gates of physical life: which are birth, or conception, and death. Through spiritual Science we can also learn something about the evolution of the Earth and the Cosmos, and as to how this evolution of Earth and the Cosmos is connected with man, and so on. Thus, through Spiritual Science the human desire for knowledge can be satisfied in a more comprehensive and complete manner than is possible through external sensible science. We can answer the questions which weigh on man's soul and so on.
Besides this significance of Spiritual Science from the view of ‘content’ there is another very essential one. This can be observed if we keep in view what we can become, what can be made of our soul-life, our soul-disposition, our soul-constitution, when we busy ourselves with the thoughts and ideas which come to us from Spiritual Science. It might even be—in what science has this not been the case in the course of the development of mankind!—that much of what can and must be proclaimed today quite conscientiously from the sources of Spiritual Science might have to be corrected; that much may appear in another form in the future through the further progress of Spiritual Science. Then perhaps there may be a different content in one or another department of this Spiritual Science. But what it may become for the disposition and constitution of our soul through its ideas and its thoughts, would not be affected thereby, and this is fundamentally connected with certain basic qualities of our present day. We will today review certain basic characteristics of our time, particularly as regards the constitution of the soul of man. We will dwell on the four most important soul-activities which we know well from our observation: the perception of man with respects to outer sense-processes; imagination (the forming of ideas) through which we then work upon these outer sense-impressions; our feeling; and our willing. Our soul-life runs its course from waking till going to sleep in perception, imagination, feeling and willing.
First we will consider perception. When the soul's eye is sharpened by Spiritual Science we can observe what has of necessity developed as the basic cultural characteristic of the human soul in the course of the last three or four centuries, in those countries which come into our consideration. (What I say is not setting criticism: it is only a characterization.) It may be asked what this is. It only needs a superficial observer of life to discover that men, in regard to their faculty of perception (in respects to the immediate relation of the soul to the outer world through the senses), have come to a point when they constantly need livelier, more violent, more fascinating impressions, to satisfy the faculty of perception of their senses. Those of you who are somewhat older may think back to your youth; just compare many of the phenomena of life in your youth, which you could perceive around you, with similar phenomena of life now—the further you go back the more striking this is—and ask yourselves to what a high degree that which is known as the impulse, the tendency to the ‘sensational,’ has not gained the upper hand! What is really this sensational element? It rests on the fact that man needs today forceful, exaggeratedly quick-changing and purely sensuous impressions, so that he may be thrilled and carried away from the outer world; he wants to be taken hold of and fascinated. The sensational has gained the upper hand to an uncommon extent. But something significant is connected with this. Through the domination of the sensational, the strength and energy of the human Ego is modified. Spiritual Science alone can lead to an understanding of what comes under consideration here; for he shows what perception of the outer world really is.
If we search through philosophical literature we find nothing more spoken of in the nature of external perception, or ‘sensing’ as it is called. All sorts of theories have been set up as to what sensing, perceiving really is, within the human physical soul life. I need not enlighten you as to that. But the point of view of Spiritual Science in this respect shall be indicated.
I have already mentioned here in Berlin, in a public lecture, that the development of natural science in the 19th century and into our own times has accomplished great things, great things in regard to the understanding of certain sensible connections of the external world of realities. But it sees the evolution of man in particular as far too direct and simple. It simply imagines that at one time there were only the lower animals, then higher animals, then still higher ones, and out of these men finally developed as, in a sense, the highest animal all. The evolution of man, however, is not so simple as this. We have often pointed out that man, who must appear to us in his external bodily form has an image of the divine reality of the Cosmos, can be thought of as represented in the most varied manner. He can even be thought of, in regard to certain natural-scientific points of view, as being divided into three parts: first the head- or senses-man (this is not exact but as the most important senses lie in the head, we may say ‘head-man’). Secondly, the trunk-man; and thirdly, the extremities-man. Of these three members of the human organization, the trunk-man, the heart- and lung-man, alone is really formed as natural science imagines him today. The head-man is really not in the process of progressive development but of a retrogressive one. The head of man arrests the progressive development at a certain stage and turns it back again. It has been repeatedly said that such an idea is difficult, and it has been asked how one can simplify it for oneself. I have pointed out in several places even the external rightly understood facts of natural science confirms my statements—only one must be a real natural scientist and not merely follow the pattern of certain scholars of the present day. Observe the human eye, and compare it with the eye of animals which have reached a certain stage of evolution. We cannot say that the human eye is more complicated in its outer form than the eyes of these animals, for that would not be true. There are animals which have, for example, in the inside of their eye—where we, from an outer physical point of view, have nothing at all—the ‘cell-apophysis’ and the ‘sword-apophysis.’ These are certain organs in the inside of the eye which are continuations of the blood vessels into the inside of the eye. Through these an intimate connection between the whole life of feeling of the animal and his perceptive life is established in the eye. The animal feels much more intensely in the eye than man does. In man there is no ‘cell-apophysis’ or ‘sword-apophysis.’ The human eye is simplified. In its form is not merely progressive, it is retrogressive. One could prove in the smallest details of the human head-organism that man is really retrograding in respect to his head, especially compared with the rest of the human make-up, which is progressive.
Someone who thought that this backward development of the head was difficult to imagine asked me whether I could point to a significant fact or clue by which one could understand this better. I told him to think of the following: In the process of development of the different animals ending with man, it comes about a certain period of the embryonic stage that the human being turns back to the hairy state. Man himself is not hairy, but the head belongs to the hairy portions, in general; the fact that man, as regards the formation of his head, reverts to the rank of the animal, likewise shows the retrograde development of the head. This is a superficial, external indication. The inner signs speak much more distinctly. I beg you to keep in mind the vast importance of these facts.
For the very reason that the head is retrogressive, that evolution does not progress in a straight line but is retrogressive in the head, is dammed up and turned back, room is thereby created for the psycho-spiritual development of man. Those natural scientists who are of the opinion that the psycho-spiritual life of man is only a result of his physical organism, do not understand their own natural science aright. They do not understand that in order to bring his soul and spirit nature into being it is necessary that the physical organization of man should not shoot and sprout, but that it should withdraw. It flags and is turned back and makes room for the psycho-spiritual development. Where man most develops his soul and spirit nature, there the physical development draws back.
One becomes inwardly aware, when one has gone through a psycho-spiritual development, that, simply through inner observation, one can get an answer to the question: What really is ordinary imagination and perception? What is the ordinary waking life, in which imagination and perception are mingled?
As regards the head of man, perception and imagination and the waking life in general is a state of ‘hungering.’ Man is so peculiarly organized that, in his inner equipoise, from waking till sleeping, the head, that is his inner organization, is continually ‘hungry’ as compared with the rest of the body. Certain ascetics who seek an increase of psycho-spiritual life have made use of this; they allow the whole body to be hungry, because the hunger-process, extended to the whole body, is said to bring about certain inner illumination. This is false. The normal state is that our head in the waking state is nourished less through the inner processes than the rest of the organism, and we can only be awake and perceive because the head is less nourished than the rest of the body.
Now the question arises: if our head hungers whilst we are undergoing this backward development of the head—in sleep there is an attempt to arrest this process—what then do we perceive? Through Spiritual Science we learn to distinguish between two things which in practice are always linked together, but which are two quite different things. There is first the mere waking life, and then the outer perceptions and the ordinary concept of memory. What then goes on when in waking consciousness we are hungering in our head?
First of all we are aware on the one hand of our Ego from the last incarnation. When we are merely awake we are aware of what we brought with us from the spiritual world, and with which we entered into existence through birth or conception. That enters and fills the space made for it in our organism; but when we perceive outer sensible objects, these external objects step into the space of the Ego, which otherwise we perceive when we have no external impression but are merely awake. In ordinary life these two things are intermingled: we are continually perceiving external objects, and are very seldom in such a state of soul that we are merely awake. The state of soul directed to external things is however always interwoven with an inclination to perceive our former Ego and to replace it by something, by external colors and sounds; then again, to perceive the former Ego and then again the external things. As soon as we perceive externally, as soon as an outer object works upon us, it suppresses our tendency, our power, to perceive the Ego of our last incarnation. It remains unconscious, we know nothing of it; but in this sense-perceiving there is really a conflict between the object which now stands before us and the Ego from our last incarnation.
Now you can imagine what it means when we are developing a striving after the sensational, when we wish to give ourselves up to the outer world. That never makes us stronger in life, but always weaker; for in so doing we weaken our Ego from the past incarnation, which in a certain sense constitutes our strength. Thus you can clearly see that with the inclination of man towards the sensational, a certain weakening of the human nature appears, and the Ego becomes weaker.
Now when we do not perceive, but think, imagine, what process takes place? Either our thoughts are silent or—which is not so frequent in present-day man—they link onto some external perception. When they are silent in waking-life, all we have gone through between the last incarnation and the present one works in us, in that which is able to work where room has been made for it by the body. Thus the last incarnation works in the place where perception arises; and in the place where conceptions arises, works the life which we have spent between death and the present birth. If we develop powerful thoughts within ourselves, it means that we are trying to develop these out of what we brought with us from the last birth, upon which we must take our stand. If only we have all thoughts which are called up within us from an external stimulus, which only revolve in our soul because we receive them from outside, we continually weaken what we have brought over from the time he dreamed death and birth, that is to say, our Ego. The search for sensation weakens our present life. The desire to animate our Club evenings with the dusky pints of beer so that we need to make as little demand as possible on ourselves, or the excitement of playing games, in short all this seeking for excitement from without, is not a strengthening but a weakening of the Ego, and it rests fundamentally on the fact that we do not feel strong enough to occupy ourselves with something pertaining to our soul-life. Through Spiritual Science we can clearly see the underlying reason why people are so desirous of sensation and in need of stimulus at the present time. What enters from this side into our present-day culture can be designated by a common name. Do not be offended by this name; it betokens a fundamental feature of many of the currents in the life of the present day: a limitation and narrowness of outlook. No one can deny, even taking present-day science and other activities into consideration, that one of the chief characteristics of the present-day man is his limited outlook, that limitation which prevents him from seeking the rich material in his own soul which comes from his past life and from his prenatal life. He does not believe, and he would have first to believe it, that one could be incited to do this through Spiritual Science.
Let us observe from this point of view what thoughts and ideas of Spiritual Science can be for the mood and disposition of the soul. They are certainly not external stimuli, nor anything sensational, and they decidedly did not aim at this. They do not take possession of the senses through external sensations. Many people miss this. In matters of Spiritual Science people must themselves reflect, and if they do not bring forth anything from the fund of their own soul, they are likely to fall asleep over Spiritual Science.
Spiritual Science gives us just this animation and shaking up of the soul-life, so that we gain the possibility of developing thoughts from our own inner self. It works against the sensational. It does this specially by giving us the possibility of thinking much about a few impressions of the senses. We need not hasten from sensation to sensation. We can give much thought to all possible sorts of sense-impressions. All the simple things which approach us personally become a riddle. Every detail makes us think a great deal; and thoughts about Saturn, Sun, Moon, the different Earth and so on, which many find so complicated, make the mind active and mobile and do not allow narrow-mindedness to any extent. Thus does our Spiritual Science work against a certain attribute of culture; it fights against a narrow outlook in the realm of perception and imagination. That is different again from the content which one can get from Spiritual Science; it is something that it can make up our soul, and we should take note of that.
Now in regard to the life of feeling. What is the most noticeable thing about a person who approaches Spiritual Science in any way? And what is the most noticeable thing about most people who do not wish to know anything about it, and who turn aside from it altogether? In the latter it is lack of interest in the great circumstances of the world. We must first of all enlarge our interests beyond what lies nearest, if we are to become interested in Spiritual Science. For what do most people in our time care about what the Earth was before it became “Earth”? What do most people of the present day care what civilization was before our own time? To do so one must develop more comprehensive interests. It is a question of extending one's interests beyond the thing lying nearest. Our age has the tendency to narrow the sphere of our interests as much as possible. What is really the tendency of our age? Allow me to use the following expression: it is not at all flattering, but I do not wish to criticize, only to characterize. Our time is striving in all ways towards narrow-mindedness, towards Philistinism, and if this takes hold of the majority of people, the consequence will be that the Philistinism will gradually be introduced into the most public departments. In this respect we have a remarkable example, which in respect to the things of the present day, must have a most depressing effect on those who can see through things.
In the East we have a nation which today is certainly in its infancy as regards the basic forces of its soul, but which possesses basic forces which in the future—in the sixth Post-Atlantean epoch of culture—are to develop to a remarkable height; basic soul forces which will work spiritually and have a spiritual character, and which we ought to recognize and cultivate as such. But what has established itself as public life in a remarkable manner today over a great part of this national force? Leninism! One cannot imagine anything more grotesque than the coupling together—I do not now refer to the man but to the thing—of this “aping of the civilization of the West” with the prophetic civilization of the East. There are no two things more opposite, and yet they are coupled together here. It is the most grotesque expression of materialistic striving; for out of the Folk-Spirit of the East something absolutely anti-philistine will be formed; but Leninism is the most absolute basic force of philistinism, the negation of all cultural interests of a far-reaching nature and the limitation of the interests of civilization to the narrowest realm of philistinism. We must clearly understand that. Nothing can better help us to penetrate these things, then the knowledge of Spiritual Science. Spiritual Science also works against philistinism, by appealing to the wide comprehensive interests of man. For one cannot possibly become a Spiritual Scientist without taking an interest in what binds man to the Cosmos, in what passes beyond all that is narrow and pulses into all that is great. So, in the realm of the life of feeling, spiritual knowledge is also the opponent of philistinism and of narrow-mindedness, which must inevitably result from materialism; as in the realm of the perceptive and conceptual life is also the opponent of narrow-mindedness and limitation.
In the domain of the will-life also, he who observes life even but to a small extent, can make a noteworthy observations. In respect to the expressions of the will, not materialism itself but what it brings in its train leads to the development of something remarkable in collective human life. The will must indeed always express itself with the help of the bodily nature, if it is to have an effect on the outer world. In regard to the will, present-day materialism makes man awkward. By reason of man's directing his bodily forces only in to quite distinct channels in his earliest youth and wielding them only in some particular directions, he becomes awkward in wider spheres. There are men today who, when they first find themselves in need of it, cannot even sew on a trouser-button for themselves, let alone anything else, strange as this may sound. If a man does not regard Spiritual Science as theory or doctrine but as something that works warmly within him and is taken into his whole personality, he will find that this passes over into the muscles and the pulsation of the blood and makes him dexterous. If we imparted a spiritually-scientific way of picturing things to our children, we should see the result; we should see that they would become adroit, that they would be able to do things more easily, their fingers would become more flexible. The possibility of making the ideas more mobile, occasions the will also do become more active in its methods of expression. Thus in the sphere of the will-life, Spiritual Science fights against that which threatens mankind: awkwardness. This is a characteristic of our time to a far greater extent than we realize. Just observe how little fitted men are today to do anything at all outside the narrow concerns of their professions; they are no longer able to do anything else besides; and they only do more or less work in their professions for the reason that their soul's course has been laid out for them. Confront a man who is thoroughly routine in his profession with something different, and you will see how very one-sided our present-day culture is. That cannot be obviated by external means; for the whole political economy tends towards specializing everything. To try to fight against this would be absurd. It is possible, however, so to fortify men's inner nature that they would receive the impulse of dexterity from the center of there being. For that it is necessary however to be quite permeated, thoroughly permeated, with the knowledge of the super-sensible world, and chiefly of the super-sensible nature of man. We cannot understand perception and conception, even from a spiritually-scientific point of view, if we do not know what I have said before, that the human organism makes room, through the backward activity of the head-organism, for the past life and also the life between death and rebirth to flow in. The life after death also close into our organism.
The opinions of natural science about the human organization are, as I have already said, far too one-sided. The trunk-man alone might be thus one-sidedly observed, but not so the extremities-man. If we observe the extremities: arms, hands, feet, legs (which organism is continued inwardly), this extremity-organism is seen to be the reverse of the head-organism: and over-development exists there which forces the development beyond the normal. If we accurately study man's development in regard to these relations we shall see that it shoots beyond the needs between birth and death. Let us consider only what is external: the armed organism in connection with the breasts; the secondary organs which serve propagation; the legs in connection with the primary sexual organs—the extremities in connection physically with that whereby man even physically looks out beyond himself. The extremities organism at its center serves not nearly what is poured out over the individual human life, but that by means of which his vision extends beyond himself: the psycho-spiritual. What lies—as soul and spirit—beyond the extremities extends beyond what serves human life between birth and death. Thus, just as man physically out of his own organism functions into that of the child through the center of his extremities, so that is present in him spiritually as imagination which he carries through the portal of death by virtue of his being an arm- and leg-man. Through imaginative cognition it can be very clearly seen that man bears quite distinctly—and even anatomically—his future state after death, spiritually in his extremities-organism. If we study natural science properly, we shall gradually cease to say that Spiritual Science is something that we cannot understand. If we really observe the human organism not as rectilinear, for that it is not, but as it really is, then natural science itself will make it necessary to turn to Spiritual Science. Mankind will of course have to overcome something—the belief in the similarity of all other sense-impressions. The similarity of all external sense-impressions is believed today, not only by the unlearned, but also by the scientific investigator who has a man before him in the clinic and examines him anatomically. To him the heart is a similar organism to the head, but this is not correct; the head as compared with the heart stands at the retrogressive stage in its whole organization. Only we do not know how to observe; that is the trouble. If we want to learn to observe correctly, we can gain from natural science itself fundamental conviction of the spiritual in man, which passes through births and deaths. When however we arrive at this, we shall also take into account this soul and spirit nature in the whole movement and growth of culture and we shall then understand the importance of the struggle against having a narrow outlook, against philistinism, and gaucherie, and we shall copperhead much else as well. Above all we shall learn to reckon with the spirit in practical life. The physicist is allowed to speak freely today of positive and negative electricity, of positive and negative magnetism; and yet it is taken amiss when the spiritual scientist in his domain speaks of two currents of force in the human soul, the Luciferic and Ahrimanic. But these two currents of force are just as much a polarity for the human soul as positive and negative magnetism or electricity in the physical. If we wish to understand humanity in its development we must take the trouble to observe what is at work in regard to the Luciferic and Ahrimanic element in life. An example:
Our social structure was for a long period of time influenced in a one-sided manner by Luciferic beings. Yet we could not simply eradicate the Luciferic element from life! A person who is always saying, “I will protect myself from the Luciferic element” is the very one to fall into it. There can only be a question of conceding it the right place in life and of knowing what is Luciferic and what is Ahrimanic: then we shall not exaggerate their effects and not put them in a false light. For centuries our social structure in Europe and also in other parts of the world has been ruled by strong one-sided Luciferic impulses. These strong Luciferic impulses lay hold of the instincts and habits of man, of that which works from within. All this is not criticism, only a characterization of these times. How did the Luciferic element work? Now great consideration has been given to determining social culture, the position of a man in life by laying great value on his vanity, on his ambition. These are Luciferic impulses. The vanity and ambition of a man had been stimulated. I would remind you how much weight is attached to pride and ambition in schools, even up to our times; and pride and ambition has led a man in many respects to acquire this or that, in order to gain an important place in life.
We have now reached an important point in life. It can scarcely escape the notice of a close observer that these Luciferic impulses are on the decline. To use a superficial expression, they no longer draw. But now something else is to be brought in, something essentially Ahrimanic; and one Ahrimanic feature is creeping into the customs of our present day. Our beloved populist so free from authority, which never wants to believe in authority, and which therefore, as a matter of course, falls a victim to all authorities, will again unsuspectingly allow to pass unobserved what is now about to take root as a one-sided Ahrimanic power in regard to the form the social structure. Something quite remarkable is now making itself felt, so-called “Intelligence tests.” Experimental psychology, which at the universities is doubtless to a certain extent justifiable, can discover many things as regards the working of the human body and as to how it expresses various things. But this psychology desires to have a certain occupation, and testing is easier than any other examination of the soul. The experimenter has a certain instrument which makes records on an electrical course; it places students at certain points and notes how long it takes for an impression to be received and to be brought to their consciousness. He thus works, from he an external clinical point of view, in a business-like way. That is easier than to investigate inwardly. For certain things the value of this experimental psychology is undeniable, but it wants to have a wider field. It now wants to take in hand “Intelligence tests.” For that, a number of children are taken from various grades of school classes and are tested as regards their “talents,” their memory, their power of observation, and so on; but the way in which the test is carried out by the methods of experimental psychology is very remarkable. Memory, for instance, is tested in the following way: On the blackboard two rows of words are written which have no connection with one another; for example, “head” and “crystal,” then two other disconnected words, and so on. After they have all been rubbed out again, the first word only is written down and the child has quickly to add the second one from memory. Those children who have best observed which word came next are considered to have the best memories, and the others who can recollect nothing at all or need a longer time are supposed to have a worse one. That is how the memory or the intelligence is tested. I will read a prize example of this (from the newspaper “German Politics,” 1918: “The discovery of the psycho-technique in Germany during the War” by Dr. Curt Piorkowski):
“For instance, in getting the concepts of ‘mirror,’ ‘murderer,’ ‘escape,’ a whole row of different connections between the mirror and the escape assert themselves, for the discovery of which no sort of special knowledge is necessary, only a distinct combination. The obvious connection (which will be made by the less intelligent persons) is of course that the person threatened sees in the mirror the murderer creeping along. Yet quite other suggestions are also possible! A stealthy murderer can for instance knock up against a mirror and waken the threatened sleeper by the clatter, so that he can escape; or the designing murderer may be blinded by a reflecting mirror.”
Imagine how intelligent a boy or girl must be if they are to hit upon such an idea!
“But motives of feeling may also be related. So for instance the murderer may be so terrified at his own image, indistinctly seen in the mirror in the semi-darkness, that he desists from the carrying-out of the deed, be it that horror or prickings of conscious seize him at the sight of himself in the mirror, or that in the dim light he takes his own reflected image for that of another.”
It is considered quite especially intelligent if the person under examination thinks that the murderer might see himself in the mirror, and take his own face for that of another.
“Another idea is the discovery of the stealthy murderer reflected in the water of the calm peaceful forest lake near threatened man, and so on.”
Just according to whether the examinee interpolates the obvious thing or not is he considered more or less intelligent, and as a child who is shown to be the more intelligent in this respect will be supported by scholarships or in some other way; while the one who could think of nothing further then that one might see a murderer in the mirror receives no scholarships. In such a way is the intelligence to be tested today and with regard to these tests there is enthusiasm. By this means social order is to be influenced even if not arranged. The dear public however will welcome such things with all their hearts as the issue of the true and sincere science of the present day, for these things create a great stir today. In this way sought to find ways and means of methodically “putting the right man in the right place,” and essays are written beginning as follows: “More than almost any other science has applied psychology blossomed during the war. It is not a chance appearance, for war with its waste of men and its various requirements has proved the importance of not using human forces extravagantly and aimlessly; but using them to the best advantage. Up till now pedagogy alone dealt practically with exact psychology; now three new questions are added: for what vocation as the man best suited? (Problem of the suitability of a profession) How is a substitute be found for the many intelligences that have been destroyed? (Selection of talent); What possibilities of healing are there for those wounded in the head or those with otherwise damaged nerves? (Practice of psychical therapy).”—And so it goes on in the style. An error of the times is coupled with a significant phrase and the matter will be less noticed, because there are, of course, vocations which must be conducted according to this method. It is quite obvious that airmen for instance have to be examined in a similar way, with a certain justification. But this should not be applied to all. For in such a one-sided development something Ahrimanic will thereby be brought into our social structure. All that comes from the soul-nature, from the elemental, impulsive soul-nature, would thus be eliminated from human aspirations and endeavor. To put the matter roughly: Do we believe that if such intelligence tests could really be determinative, a phrase like “Joy and Love are the wings of great deeds” could still have significance? If people would only think of their own great men! We can be quite sure that if such an examiner had to examine Helmholtz he would have represented him quite certainly as a fellow without talent. Read the biography of Helmholtz!
That is an Ahrimanic feature. Things appear disguised as well. If people are not able to observe things through Spiritual Science, they cannot see where the harm is. It does not suffice that in our time people like to wallow in all kinds of sensual feelings, it is necessary they should wake up in regard to their judgment of life. A great deal would be gained in regard to this nonsense of intelligence tests if there were at least a few people who formed an objective opinion about it. For it will blossom and flourish, you may be quite sure of that! It will become what the “prejudice-free soul-test” has at last made it, and it will be glorified as one of the finest outcomes of that philosophical tendency which has at last stripped off the old idealistic prejudices and methods and now goes in for “the real.” Spiritual Science must work practically in this sense.
Now much is connected with these things, and above all this, that breadth of interest and reality must at last become fundamental attributes of the human soul. I should like to give you two pretty examples of the way in which reality works in our day, and how a certain interest is not present. If I choose personal examples I take it for granted that you will not take it amiss, for you indeed know that I do not do so from any personal foolishness. Recently I held a lecture in Munich on the experiences which the seer makes in art. I have never supposed that any newspaper reporter would be able to understand the subject of Spiritual Science or to write anything in praise of it. If a newspaper reporter should begin to write about Spiritual Science in a flattering manner I should think that something was not in order; but we may study some examples of their work. In the lecture mentioned I also spoke of the art of music and of how musical experience affects the whole man in a remarkable way, that really whenever there is a musical experience a rhythm is set up in the inner man. I then spoke on the one hand in reference to the physiological side, explaining the flowing to and fro of the brain-fluid through the arachnoidal space and further demonstrated how the spinal-marrow canal is elastic to a greater or less degree and how a wonderful inner rhythm is in fact brought about thereby. Musical experiences create a glorious rhythm in life; I mentioned these rhythmical movements of the brain-fluid as being connected with inspiration and expiration; and as I also spoke in this lecture of symbolic ideas, a newspaper reporter wrote that I myself used symbolic ideas which were untenable: the idea of ‘brain-fluid’! We need only recollect that without the ‘brain-fluid’ the brain, which according to the principle of Archimedes becomes lighter than the brain-fluid, would compress and crush to pieces the blood vessels lying beneath it. Thus the ‘brain-fluid’ is a very real thing. But thus do matters stand with respect to the interests which men have, and such is the nonsense written in consequence.
Then an example, only a small illustration, of truth and untruth. I have often mentioned that the remarkable scholar Max Dessoir has also written a chapter about Anthroposophy in his book “The Other Side of the Soul.” I tried to point out to him the many different misrepresentations. Even from an external point of view his method of relating is really very comical by reason of its absolute superficiality. Thus for instance he mentioned my “Philosophy of Spiritual Activity” and said of it that it was my first literary production. I could not do otherwise than reply, although it was out of place to do so, that for 10 years before it appeared I had already written and had my books published. But “The Other Side of the Soul” by Max Dessoir aroused attention; it was discussed everywhere by the journalists (who consider the brain-fluid as a symbolical idea). It caught on, and now a second edition has appeared. In the preface to this, Max Dessoir tries to justify himself, and again in the same fashion. He cannot get out of it and says the context proved quite clearly that I did not grasp what he meant; he meant that the “Philosophy of Spiritual Activity” was my first “theosophical” book. Thus apart from the fact that everyone must smile at his statement that he did not mean my first literary work, everyone must again laugh when the “Philosophy of Spiritual Activity” is called my first “theosophical” book. For a far-reaching discussion exists as to whether I abandoned philosophical authorship in my theosophical works. That is how far veracity is regarded, and it is necessary to attract people's notice to it. But without veracity we cannot progress, and we dare not let such things simply pass in this manner. To anyone who has knowledge of the things concerned, the whole book of Max Dessoir is compiled like the chapter on Anthroposophy . And yet, what happened? A newspaper, the “Kant Studien,” which regards itself as extremely serious (I mention this because in this paper no attack is made on Anthroposophy)—the “Kant Studien”—which prides itself tremendously on its purely scholarly scientific bent, speaks of this product of Dessoir as a serious scientific book in many ways. One of the saddest experiences one can have is to find a book which evinces the greatest superficiality considered by a philosophical magazine as a “serious scientific book,” as it is called there. Now I ask: What then is the public, the public which has no belief in authority, to do today? It takes such works as the “Kant Studien” (Studies of Kant) and so on, as a matter of course out of the libraries. And yet such things are to be found in it.
We must go back to what lies at the base of human nature through the spirit if the will be present. And this foundation is only touched by the strivings of Spiritual Science today. In this one cannot do otherwise than work towards reality, breadth of interest, towards anti-philistinism and activity as regards life. I wished to speak to you again of these things so that our consciousness may not grow faint; in Spiritual Science it is not merely the content that matters, but also the special nature of the concept, ideas and thought in our soul, so that it may be raised out of limitations, philistinism and awkwardness. That is something which the observer of the special impulses which lie in Spiritual Science must consider more and more. We must grasp the practical value of Spiritual Science. In the next lecture we shall speak further of these things.
Dreizehnter Vortrag
Geisteswissenschaft sollte vor allen Dingen von denjenigen, die sie schon länger kennen, in dem Sinne aufgefaßt werden, daß auch das vor die Seele trete, wie die Geisteswissenschaft im intensivsten Sinne für das menschliche Leben tatkräftig sein kann. Das wurde zwar öfter betont, aber man kann gerade diese Seite der Wesenheit der Geisteswissenschaft und ihre Bedeutung für unsere Zeit nicht oft genug hervorheben. Geisteswissenschaft ist ja gewissermaßen eine Wissenschaft, und als solche ist sie, man kann sagen, in der Gegenwart noch fragmentarisch, nur zum Teil begründet. Was sie einmal werden kann, kann ja in der Gegenwart nur.in den allerersten Anfängen eigentlich da sein.
Was ich damit meine, ist die Geisteswissenschaft ihrem Inhalte nach. Man kann durch sie etwas erfahren über das Wesen des Menschen, über die übersinnliche Persönlichkeit des Menschen, insofern diese ihr Leben hat auch jenseits der Tore des physischen Lebens, welche da sind: Geburt oder Empfängnis und Tod. Man kann auch durch diese Geisteswissenschaft etwas erfahren über die Entwickelung der Erde und der Welt, über die Zusammenhänge dieser Entwickelung von Erde und Welt wiederum mit dem Menschen und so weiter. Man kann also durch die Geisteswissenschaft in einer umfassenderen und allseitigeren Weise, als dies durch die äußere sinnliche Wissenschaft möglich ist, wenn man so sagen darf, die menschliche WiBbegierde befriedigen. Man kann sich Fragen beantworten, welche dem Menschen auf der Seele liegen und so weiter.
Aber außer dieser inhaltlichen Bedeutung der Geisteswissenschaft gibt es eine wesentlich andere. Die ist dann zu beobachten, wenn man ins Auge faßt, was aus uns selber, aus unserem Seelenleben, unserer Seelenstimmung und Seelenverfassung werden kann, wenn wir uns mit den Gedanken, den Ideen beschäftigen, die uns aus der Geisteswissenschaft kommen. Es könnte ja sogar sein — bei welcher Wissenschaft war das im Laufe der Menschheit nicht der Fall! -, daß manches von dem, was heute mit voller Gewissenhaftigkeit aus den Quellen des geistigen Lebens heraus als Geisteswissenschaft verkündet werden kann und muß, später durch den weiteren Fortschritt der Geisteswissenschaft selbst korrigiert werden müßte, daß manches in anderer Form auftreten würde. Dann würde vielleicht in der einen oder andern Partie dieser Geisteswissenschaft ein anderer Inhalt sein. Was sie aber für die Stimmung, für die Verfassung unserer Seele durch ihre Ideen, durch ihre Gedanken werden kann, das wird dadurch nicht beeinträchtigt, und das hängt doch ganz wesentlich zusammen mit gewissen Grundeigenschaften gerade unserer gegenwärtigen Zeit. Gewisse Grundeigenschaften unserer Zeit, namentlich mit Bezug auf die Seelenverfassung der Menschen, wollen wir heute einmal ins Auge fassen. Wir wollen uns dabei an die vier wichtigsten Seelenbetätigungen halten, die wir aus unseren Betrachtungen gut kennen: an das Wahrnehmen des Menschen mit Bezug auf äußere sinnliche Vorgänge, an das Vorstellen, durch das wir diese äußeren Sinneseindrücke dann verarbeiten, an das Fühlen und an das Wollen. In Wahrnehmen, Vorstellen, Fühlen und Wollen verläuft ja unser Seelenleben vom Aufwachen bis zum Einschlafen.
Zunächst das Wahrnehmen. Wir können gerade mit dem durch die Geisteswissenschaft geschärften Seelenauge betrachten, was notwendigerweise — was ich sage, ist keine Kritik, sondern nur eine Charakteristik —- im Laufe der letzten drei bis vier Jahrhunderte als Grundkultureigenschaft der Menschenseele in Ländern, die für uns in Betracht kommen, sich ausgebildet hat. Wir fragen uns, was das ist. Man braucht nur ein oberflächlicher Betrachter des Lebens zu sein und wird finden, daß die Menschen in bezug auf ihr Wahrnehmungsvermögen, also mit Bezug auf das unmittelbare Verhältnis der Seele zur Außenwelt durch die Sinne, auf den Standpunkt gekommen sind, daß sie immer lebhaftere, heftigere, immer faszinierendere Eindrücke brauchen, um in bezug auf das Wahrnehmungsvermögen der Sinne befriedigt zu werden. Es mögen nur einmal diejenigen unter Ihnen, die etwas älter geworden sind, in ihre Jugend zurückdenken. Vergleichen Sie manche Lebenserscheinungen in Ihrer Jugend nur — wenn man weiter zurückgeht, ist das viel auffälliger -, die Sie um sich herum wahrnehmen konnten, mit einer ähnlichen Lebenserscheinung jetzt, und fragen Sie sich, in wie hohem Grade das überhandgenommen hat, was man den Trieb, den Hang zum Sensationellen nennt. Was ist eigentlich dieses Sensationelle? Es beruht darauf, daß der Mensch heute stark wirkende und übertrieben abwechselnde, rein sinnliche Eindrücke braucht, damit er gepackt werde, hingenommen werde von der Außenwelt. Er will hingenommen werden von der Außenwelt, er will gefaßt, fasziniert werden. Das Sensationelle hat in ungemeinem Umfang überhand genommen. Aber damit ist etwas Bedeutsames verbunden. Durch das Überhandnehmen des Sensationellen wird auch die Kraft und Energie des menschlichen Ich modifiziert. Dies zu verstehen, was da in Betracht kommt, dazu kann im Grunde genommen nur die Geisteswissenschaft führen; denn sie zeigt, was eigentlich Wahrnehmen der Außenwelt ist.
Wenn man die philosophische Literatur durchgeht, wird man über nichts mehr geredet finden als über das Wesen der äußeren Wahrnehmung oder Empfindung, wie man es auch nennt. Man hat alle möglichen Theorien aufgestellt, was eigentlich Empfindung, Wahrnehmung innerhalb des menschlichen leiblich-seelischen Lebens ist. Damit brauche ich Sie nicht zu behelligen. Aber auf das Geisteswissenschaftliche in dieser Beziehung soll hingewiesen werden.
Ich habe schon - sogar auch hier in Berlin in einem öffentlichen Vortrage — angedeutet, daß die naturwissenschaftliche Entwickelung im 19. Jahrhundert und bis in unsere Zeiten herein ja Großes geleistet hat, Großes in bezug auf das Verstehen gewisser sinnlicher Zusammenhänge der äußeren Tatsachenwelt. Aber sie stellt sich namentlich die Entwickelung des Menschen viel zu geradlinig, viel zu einfach vor. Sie stellt sich einfach vor: Es gab einmal nur niedere Tiere, dann gab es höhere Tiere, dann wieder höhere, und aus diesen entwickelte sich zuletzt gewissermaßen als höchstes Tier der Mensch heraus. So einfach ist jedoch die Entwickelung des Menschen nicht. Dieser Mensch - wir haben schon öfter darauf hingewiesen -, der uns in seiner äußeren Leibesgestalt als ein Abbild göttlicher Wesenhaftigkeit des Kosmos erscheinen muß, dieser Mensch kann in der verschiedensten Weise geschildert, gedacht werden. Er kann auch so geschildert, gedacht werden, jetzt mit Bezug auf gewisse naturwissenschafliche Anschauungen, daß wir ihn in drei Teile gliedern: in den Kopf- oder in den Sinnesmenschen - es ist nicht genau, aber da die hauptsächlichsten Sinne im Kopfe liegen, kann man sagen: Kopfmensch -, dann in den Rumpfmenschen und drittens in den Extremitätenmenschen. Von diesen drei Gliedern der menschlichen Natur ist eigentlich nur der Rumpfmensch, der Herzens- und Lungenmensch, so ausgebildet, wie ihn die Naturwissenschaft heute denkt. Der Kopfmensch ist eigentlich nicht in einer fortschreitenden Entwickelung begriffen, sondern er ist rückgebildet. Das Haupt des Menschen hält die fortschreitende Entwickelung auf einer gewissen Stufe auf und bildet sie wieder zurück. - Man hat mir wiederholt gesagt, daß eine solche Vorstellung schwierig ist und gefragt, wie man sie sich erleichtern kann. Ich habe an verschiedenen Orten darauf hingewiesen, wie auch die äußeren richtig verstandenen naturwissenschaftlichen Tatsachen - man muß dann nur wirklich Naturwissenschafter sein, nicht bloß nach dem Muster gewisser Gelehrter der Gegenwart - das belegen, was ich sage. Betrachten Sie das menschliche Auge und vergleichen Sie es mit dem . Auge von Tieren auf einer gewissen Entwickelungsstufe. Sie können nicht sagen, die menschlichen Augen sind ihrer äußeren Gestalt nach komplizierter als die Augen der Tiere auf einer gewissen Entwickelungsstufe. Denn das ist nicht wahr. Es gibt Tiere, die haben im Inneren ihres Auges da, wo wir äußerlich sinnlich gar nichts haben, den Fächerfortsatz zum Beispiel und den Schwertfortsatz. Das sind gewisse Organe im Inneren des Auges, die Fortsetzungen sind der Blutgefäße ins Innere des Auges hinein. Durch diese Fortsätze der Blutgefäße ist ein intimes Zusammenleben im ganzen Gefühlsleben des Tieres mit seinem Wahrnehmungsleben im Auge gegeben. Das Tier fühlt im Auge viel intensiver, als der Mensch im Auge fühlt. Beim Menschen sind Schwertfortsatz und Fächer fort. Das menschliche Auge ist vereinfacht. Es ist nicht bloß vorwärtsgebildet, es ist auch rückgebildet. Und so könnte man bis in die kleinsten Glieder der menschlichen Kopforganisation nachweisen, daß der Mensch eigentlich rückgebildet ist in bezug auf sein Haupt, namentlich in Hinsicht auf seine übrige menschliche Natur, die vorwärtsgebildet ist.
Jemand, der auch meinte, daß diese Rückbildung des Hauptes eine schwierige Vorstellung sei, fragte mich, ob es denn nicht Anhaltspunkte gäbe, um das besser einzusehen. Ich sagte, man brauche nur an das Folgende zu denken: Im Entwickelungsprozeß der Tierreihe, die mit dem Menschen abschließt, bringt es der Mensch dahin, daß er zu einer gewissen Zeit seiner Behaarung, während der Embryonalzeit, wieder zurückgeht. Der Mensch ist unbehaart, aber das Haupt gehört zu den behaarten Teilen, im allgemeinen. Daß der Mensch in bezug auf seine Hauptesbildung wieder zur Tierreihe zurückkehrt, zeigt ebenfalls die Rückbildung des Hauptes. Das ist eine oberflächliche, äußere Kennzeichnung. Viel deutlicher sprechen die inneren Zeichen. Die ganze Tragweite dieser Tatsachen bitte ich ins Auge zu fassen.
Dadurch, daß das Haupt rückgebildet ist, daß die Entwickelung nicht geradlinig fortschreitet, sondern sich zurücknimmt im Haupt, sich zurückstaut, dadurch ist Platz geschaffen für die seelisch-geistige Entwickelung des Menschen. Diejenigen Naturforscher, welche die Ansicht vertreten, des Menschen seelisch-geistiges Leben sei nur ein Ergebnis seiner physischen Organisation, die verstehen ihre eigene Naturwissenschaft nämlich nicht richtig. Sie verstehen nicht, daß es für den Menschen notwendig ist, damit er sein Geistig-Seelisches zum Dasein bringen kann, daß die physische Organisation nicht sproßt und sprießt, sondern daß sie sich zurückzieht. Sie flaut ab, staut sich ab, macht Platz der geistig-seelischen Entwickelung. Wo der Mensch am meisten Geistig-Seelisches entwickelt, da zieht sich die physische Entwickelung zurück.
Innerlich nimmt man das wahr, wenn man eine geistig-seelische Entwickelung durchgemacht hat, daß man, einfach durch innere Beobachtung, eine Antwort bekommt auf die Frage: Was ist eigentlich das gewöhnliche Vorstellen und Wahrnehmen? Was ist das gewöhnliche Wachleben, in das sich Vorstellen und Wahrnehmen hineinmischen?
In bezug auf das Haupt des Menschen ist Wahrnehmen und Vorstellen, überhaupt das wache Leben, ein Hungern. So eigentümlich ist der Mensch organisiert, daß in seinem inneren Gleichgewicht vom Aufwachen bis zum Einschlafen das Haupt, das heißt seine innere Organisation, fortwährend gegenüber dem übrigen Leibe hungert. Gewisse Asketen, die eine Steigerung des geistig-seelischen Lebens suchen, haben sich das zunutze gemacht: sie lassen den ganzen Körper hungern, weil der Hungerprozeß, ausgedehnt auf den ganzen Körper, gewisse innere Erleuchtungen schaffen soll. Das ist falsch. Das Normale ist, daß unser Haupt im Wachprozeß schwächer genährt wird durch die inneren Vorgänge als der übrige Organismus, und nur dadurch können wir wach sein und vorstellen, daß das Haupt schwächer genährt wird als der übrige Organismus.
Nun entsteht die Frage: Wenn wir so im Kopfe hungern, während wir uns diesem Rückbildungsprozeß des Hauptes hingeben - im Schlafe wird ja versucht, die Stauung aufzuheben -, was nehmen wir überhaupt dann wahr? — Da lernen wir durch die Geisteswissenschaft zwischen zwei Dingen unterscheiden, die in der Praxis immer verknüpft sind, die aber zwei ganz verschiedene Dinge sind: erstens das bloße Wachleben und sodann die äußeren Wahrnehmungen und die gewöhnlichen Erinnerungsvorstellungen. Was geht nun vor, wenn wir im wachenden Bewußtsein im Kopfe hungern?
Zunächst nehmen wir auf der einen Seite wahr unser Ich aus der vorigen Inkarnation. Was wir aus der geistigen Welt mitgebracht haben, womit wir durch Geburt oder Empfängnis ins Dasein getreten sind, das nehmen wir wahr, wenn wir bloß wachen, Das erfüllt dasjenige, wo unser Organismus Platz macht. Und wenn wir äußere sinnliche Gegenstände wahrnehmen, treten diese äußeren Gegenstände an die Stelle des Ich, das wir sonst wahrnehmen, wenn wit keine äußeren Eindrücke haben, sondern bloß wachen. Im gewöhnlichen Leben sind diese zwei Dinge durcheinandergemischt, wir nehmen fortwährend äußere Gegenstände wahr und sind sehr selten in einer solchen Seelenverfassung, daß wir bloß wachen. Aber in unsere Seelenverfassung, die auf äußere Dinge gerichtet ist, mischt sich immer die Hinneigung, unser voriges Ich wahrzunehmen, und es durch etwas zu verdrängen, durch äußere Farben oder Töne, dann wieder das vorige Ich wahrzunehmen, und dann wieder das andere. Sobald wir äußerlich wahrnehmen, sobald ein äußerer Gegenstand auf uns wirkt, verdrängt er unsere "Tendenz, unsere Kraft, das Ich aus unserer vorigen Inkarnation wahrzunehmen. Es bleibt unbewußt, wir wissen von ihm nicht. Aber in dieser Sinneswahrnehmung ist eigentlich ein Kampf des gegenwärtigen Gegenstandes, der vor uns steht, und des Ich aus unserer vorigen Inkarnation.
Nun können Sie sich denken, was es zu bedeuten hat, wenn man das Streben nach dem Sensationellen entwickelt, wenn man an die Außenwelt hingegeben sein will. Das macht einen niemals stärker im Leben, immer nur schwächer; denn da tut man das, was unser Ich aus der vorigen Inkarnation, das in gewissem Sinne doch unsere Stärke ausmacht, abschwächt. Daher können Sie ganz deutlich wahrnehmen, daß mit der Hinneigung des Menschen zum Sensationellen eine gewisse Schwäche der menschlichen Natur auftritt, daß das Ich schwächer wird.
Und wenn wir nun nicht wahrnehmen, sondern denken, vorstellen, was geht dann vor? Unsere Gedanken schweigen entweder — aber seltener beim gegenwärtigen Menschen - oder aber sie knüpfen an irgendwelche äußeren Wahrnehmungen an. Wenn sie schweigen im Wachleben, dann wirkt in uns - in dem, was da wirken kann, wo Platz geschaffen ist durch unseren Organismus - alles das, was wir durchgemacht haben zwischen der vorigen Inkarnation und der gegenwärtigen. Also an der Stelle, wo Wahrnehmungen auftreten, wirkt die vorige Inkarnation, und an der Stelle, wo Vorstellungen auftreten, da wirkt das Leben, das wir zwischen dem Tode und der jetzigen Geburt durchgemacht haben. Entwickeln wir aus uns selbst machtvolle Gedanken, so bedeutet das: Wir versuchen aus dem, was wir mitgebracht haben aus der Zeit vor unserer letzten Geburt, worauf wir uns selbst stellen müssen, machtvolle Gedanken zu entwickeln. Entwickeln wir nur Gedanken, zu denen wir uns von außen anregen lassen, die sich nur dadurch in unsere Seele wälzen wollen, daß wir sie von außen aufnehmen, so schwächen wir immer das, was wir aus der Zeit zwischen Tod und Geburt mitgebracht haben, das heißt aber das, was unser Ich ausmacht. Sensationssucht schwächt unser gegenwärtiges Leben. Die Sucht, recht viele Klubabende mit Dämmerschoppen anzuregen, um möglichst wenig aus uns selbst zu holen, oder die Aufregungen, die das Skatklopfen verursacht, kurz, alles dieses Anregungsuchen von außen ist nicht ein Stärken, sondern ein Schwächen unseres Ich, und es beruht im Grunde genommen auch darauf, daß man sich nicht stark genug fühlt, um sich aus dem seelischen Leben heraus mit etwas zu beschäftigen. Durch Geisteswissenschaft können wir uns klarmachen, worauf es in der gegenwärtigen Zeit beruht, daß die Menschen sensationssüchtig und anregungsbedürftig sind.
Was von dieser Seite her in unsere gegenwärtige Kultur eintritt, kann man mit einem allgemeinen Namen bezeichnen. Stoßen Sie sich nicht an diesem Namen, er bezeichnet einen Grundzug vieler Strömungen im gegenwärtigen Leben: Beschränktheit, Borniertheit. Und niemand wird leugnen - auch dann nicht, wenn man die gegenwärtige Wissenschaft oder sonstige Betriebe ins Auge faßt -, daß ein Hauptkennzeichen des gegenwärtigen Menschen die Beschränktheit ist, jene Beschränktheit, die den gegenwärtigen Menschen nicht dazu kommen läßt, das reiche Material in der eigenen Seele zu suchen, das aus dem vorigen Leben und aus der Zeit vor der Geburt kommt. Er glaubt ja nicht, und vor allem müßte man zuerst daran glauben, daß man sich darüber durch die Geisteswissenschaft anregen lassen kann.
Betrachten wir von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus einmal, was die geisteswissenschaftlichen Gedanken und Ideen für die Seelenstimmung und Seelenverfassung sein können. Anregungen von außen, Sensationelles sind sie ja gewiß nicht, und das streben sie auch bestimmt nicht an. Sie nehmen nicht durch äußere Sensationen die Sinne gefangen. Das vermissen viele. Die Menschen müssen bei den geisteswissenschaftlichen Dingen selbst nachdenken, und wenn sie nichts aus dem eigenen Fonds ihrer Seele herausbringen, schlafen sie bei der Geisteswissenschaft auch wohl ein. Gerade Beweglichmachung, Aufrütteln des seelischen Lebens, so daß man die Möglichkeit gewinnt, aus seinem eigenen Inneren Gedanken zu entwickeln, das ist es, was uns die Geisteswissenschaft gibt. Sie wirkt dem Sensationellen entgegen. Das tut sie besonders dadurch, weil sie uns die Möglichkeit gibt, über wenige Sinneseindrücke viel zu denken. Wir brauchen nicht von Sensation zu Sensation zu eilen. Viel können wir bei allen möglichen Sinneseindrücken denken. Alles Einfache, was uns persönlich entgegentritt, wird uns zum Rätsel. Jede Einzelheit läßt uns viel denken. Und die Gedanken, die viele so kompliziert finden, die Gedanken über Saturn, Sonne, Mond, über die verschiedenen Erdenperioden und so weiter, sie machen den Geist beweglich, lassen Beschränktheit gewissermaßen nicht aufkommen. So arbeitet unsere Geisteswissenschaft gegen eine gewisse Kultureigenschaft, sie ist eine Kämpferin gegen Beschränktheit und Borniertheit auf dem Gebiete des Wahrnehmens und des Vorstellens. Das ist noch etwas anderes als der Inhalt, den man von dieser Geisteswissenschaft haben kann; das ist etwas, was sie aus unserer Seele machen kann, und darauf sollte man auch achten.
Nun, in bezug auf das Gefühlsleben: Was ist das Hervorstechende bei einem Menschen, der überhaupt an die Geisteswissenschaft herankommt? Und was ist das Hervorstechende bei den meisten Menschen, die nichts von ihr wissen wollen und sie von vornherein ablehnen? Interesselosigkeit gegenüber den großen Angelegenheiten der Welt ist es bei den letzteren. Seine Interessen über das Allernächstliegende erweitern, das muß man ja zunächst, wenn man sich für Geisteswissenschaft interessieren soll. Denn was kümmert es die meisten Menschen in unserer Zeit, was die Erde war, bevor sie Erde geworden ist? Was kümmert es die meisten Menschen der Gegenwart, was unsere Kultur war, bevor sie in unsere Zeit eingetreten ist? Dazu muß man weitergehende Interessen entwickeln. Es handelt sich darum, daß man seine Interessen über das Nächstliegende erweitere. Unsere Zeit tendiert ja gerade darauf hin, unser Interessengebiet möglichst einzuschränken.
Wohin tendiert unsere Zeit eigentlich? Gestatten Sie, den folgenden Ausdruck zu gebrauchen, er ist ja nicht anerkennend, aber ich will keine Kritik, sondern eine Charakteristik geben: ‚Unsere Zeit strebt mit allen Mitteln zur Engherzigkeit, zur Philistrosität, und wenn diese die Mehrzahl der Menschen ergreifen wird, so wird die Folge sein, daß die Philistrosität allmählich auch in die öffentlichsten Gebiete eingeführt wird. Ein merkwürdiges Beispiel haben wir in dieser Beziehung, das für den, der die Dinge durchschaut, geradezu herz-, alpdrückend wirken kann in bezug auf die Dinge der Gegenwart.
Wir haben im.Östen ein Volkstum, das mit Bezug auf die Grundkräfte seiner Seele heute allerdings noch in der Kindheit ist, das aber solche Grundkräfte hat, die sich in der Zukunft, im sechsten nachatlantischen Kulturzeitraum, zu besonderer Höhe entwickeln sollen, Grundkräfte des Volkes, die spirituell wirken, spirituellen Charakter haben und die man als solche erkennen und pflegen sollte. Was aber hat sich merkwürdigerweise heute als öffentliches Leben über einen großen Teil dieser Volkskraft ausgebreitet? Leninismus! Man kann nichts Groteskeres denken als das Zusammenkoppeln dieses — ich meine jetzt nicht den Mann, sondern die Sache — Kulturaffen des Westens und dieser Kulturprophetie des Ostens. Es kann nicht zwei Dinge geben, die mehr auseinanderliegen und die hier zusammengekoppelt sind. Es ist der groteskeste Ausdruck des materialistischen Strebens; denn aus der Volkskraft des Ostens will sich etwas durchaus Antiphiliströses herausbilden, der Leninismus aber ist die absoluteste Grundkraft der Philistrosität, die Ablehnung aller ins Weite gehenden Kulturinteressen und die Erörterung der Kulturinteressen im allerengsten Philisterium. Das muß man sich klarmachen. Und es ist nichts besser dazu geeignet, diese Dinge zu durchschauen, als allein die Erkenntnisse der Geisteswissenschaft. Geisteswissenschaft arbeitet auch der Philistrosität entgegen, indem sie an die weiten, großzügigen Interessen des Menschen appelliert. Denn ohne Interesse für das, was den Menschen an den Kosmos bindet, was über das Engste hinausgeht und ins Große hineinpulsiert, ohne solches Interesse kann man ja nicht Geisteswissenschafter werden. — So ist Geisteswissenschaft auf dem Gebiete des Gefühlslebens auch die Kämpferin gegen Philistrosität und Engherzigkeit, die unweigerlich aus dem Materialismus hervorgehen müssen, wie sie auf dem Gebiete des Wahrnehmungs- und Vorstellungslebens die Kämpferin ist gegen Borniertheit und Beschränktheit.
Nun, das Gebiet des Willenslebens. Auch da kann der, welcher nur ein wenig Lebensbeobachter ist, bemerkenswerte Beobachtungen in unserem Leben machen. In bezug auf die Willensäußerungen bringt uns nicht der Materialismus selbst, wohl aber was er im Gefolge hat, zur Ausbildung von etwas Merkwürdigem im menschlichen Gesamtleben. Der Wille muß sich ja immer mit Hilfe der Leiblichkeit äußern, wenn er in bezug auf die Außenwelt wirken soll. Mit Bezug auf den Willen bringt die heutige materialistische Zeit den Menschen in die Ungeschicklichkeit hinein. Dadurch, daß der Mensch in der allerfrühesten Jugend nur dazukommt, seine Leibeskräfte in ganz bestimmte Bahnen hinzulenken, nur nach einigen Richtungen hinzuarbeiten und hinzuhantieren, wird er in weitesten Kreisen ungeschickt. Es gibt heute schon Männer, die, wenn sie in eine solche Lage kommen, sich nicht einmal selbst einen Hosenknopf annähen können, geschweige etwas anderes, so sonderbar es klingt. Wer Geisteswissenschaft nicht als Theorie oder Lehre betrachtet, sondern das, was in ihr mit Wärme wirkt, in seine ganze Persönlichkeit aufnimmt, bei dem geht es über in die Muskeln, in die Blutpulsation, und es macht ihn geschickt. Und würden wir gar geisteswissenschaftliche Art des Vorstellens schon in unsere Kinder hineinbringen können, wir würden den Erfolg sehen, würden sehen, daß die Kinder anstellig werden, daß sie dieses oder jenes leichter können; die Finger würden beweglicher. Die Möglichkeit, die Vorstellungen beweglicher zu machen, bewirkt auch, daß der Wille in seinen Ausdrucksmitteln beweglicher wird. So ist auf dem Gebiete des Willenslebens die Geisteswissenschaft eine Kämpferin gegen das, was der Menschheit droht: die Ungeschicklichkeit. Diese Ungeschicklichkeit ist, mehr als man eigentlich glaubt, ein Charakteristikon unserer Zeit. Sehen Sie sich einmal an, wie wenig heute die Menschen imstande sind, außerhalb der engsten Hantierungen ihres Berufes überhaupt noch etwas zu tun. Sie können es gar nicht mehr; und in ihren Berufen wirken sie auch mehr oder weniger deshalb, weil ihre Seelenbahnen eingefahren sind. Stellen Sie einen Menschen, der so recht in seinen Beruf einmechanisiert ist, vor etwas anderes hin, dann werden Sie sehen, wie stark einseitig unsere heutige Kultur ist. Das kann aber nicht durch äußere Mittel behoben werden; denn die Volkswirtschaft tendiert dahin, alles zu spezialisieren. Dagegen ankämpfen zu wollen, wäre ein Unsinn. Aber die Seelen so zu durchkraften, daß der Mensch vom Zentrum seines Wesens heraus die Impulse der Geschicklichkeit bekommt, das kann gemacht werden. Dazu aber ist notwendig, daß man sich ganz durchdringt, recht durchdringt mit dem Wissen von der übersinnlichen Welt, hauptsächlich von der übersinnlichen Natur des Menschen. Man kann Wahrnehmen und Vorstellen nicht verstehen, auch naturwissenschaftlich nicht, wenn man nicht weiß, was ich vorhin gesagt habe: daß die menschliche Organisation Platz macht in dem Zurückstauen der Organisation des Hauptes, damit das vorige Leben und auch das Leben zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt hereinflutet. Aber auch das Leben nach dem Tode flutet in unsere Organisation herein.
Die naturwissenschaftlichen Anschauungen über die menschliche Organisation sind, wie ich schon sagte, gar zu einseitig. Nur der Rumpfmensch könnte so einseitig betrachtet werden, wie es die Naturwissenschaft macht, der Extremitätenmensch schon nicht mehr. Wenn man die Extremitäten betrachtet, Arme, Hände, Füße, Beine — die Organisation setzt sich nach innen hin fort -, so ist diese Extremitätenorganisation umgekehrt als die Kopforganisation: es ist eine Überentwickelung vorhanden. Es schießt die Entwickelung über das Normalmaß hinaus. Wird man einmal die Entwickelung genau studieren in bezug auf diese Verhältnisse, so wird man sehen, daß sie über dasjenige hinausschießt, was der Mensch zwischen Geburt und Tod braucht. Nehmen wir nur das Äußere: die Armorganisation in Verbindung mit den Brüsten, mit den sekundären Organen, die der Fortpflanzung dienen, die Beine in Verbindung mit den primären Sexualorganen, die Extremitäten physisch in Verbindung mit demjenigen, wodurch der Mensch schon physisch über sich hinausschaut. In ihrem Zentrum dient die Extremitätenorganisation nicht bloß dem, was über das menschliche individuelle Leben ausgegossen ist, sondern dem, wo er über sich hinausschaut, also dem Geistig-Seelischen. Was den Extremitäten geistig-seelisch zugrunde liegt, geht hinaus über das, was dem menschlichen Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod dient. Es ‚ liegt darin schon das, was über den Tod hinaus wirkt. So wie der Mensch physisch aus seiner eigenen Organisation in die des Kindes hinüberspielt durch das Zentrum seiner Extremitätenorganisation, so ist in ihm geistig als Imagination das vorhanden, was er dadurch, daß er Arm- und Beinmensch ist, durch die Pforte des Todes trägt. Mit der imaginativen Wahrnehmung nimmt man das ganz deutlich wahr: Der Mensch trägt seine nach dem Tode eintretende Zukunft ganz deutlich, auch anatomisch, geistig-seelisch in seiner Extremitätenorganisation. Man wird, wenn man nur ordentlich die Naturwissenschaft studieren wird, nach und nach aufhören zu sagen: Geisteswissenschaft ist etwas, was man nicht erreichen kann. Wenn man nur wirklich nicht so geradlinig, wie sie nicht ist, sondern so, wie sie tatsächlich ist, die menschliche Organisation betrachten wird, dann wird sich einem durch die Naturwissenschaft selbst die Notwendigkeit ergeben, zur Geisteswissenschaft hinzukommen. Etwas allerdings wird die Menschheit überwinden müssen: den Glauben an das Gleichgeartete aller äußeren Sinneseindrücke. Das Gleichgeartetsein aller äußeren Sinneseindrücke glaubt heute nicht nur der Laie, sondern auch der Naturforscher, der den Menschen in der Klinik vor sich hat und ihn anatomisch untersucht. Ihm ist das Herz eine gleichgeartete Organisation wie der Kopf. Aber wahr ist das nicht. Der Kopf steht gegenüber dem Herzen auf einer zurückgearteten Stufe in all seiner Organisation. Man kann nur nicht beobachten; daran liegt es. Wenn man richtig beobachten lernen wird, dann wird man aus der Naturwissenschaft selbst die grundlegende Überzeugung des Geistigen im Menschen gewinnen, dessen, was durch Geburten und Tode geht. Kommt man aber dazu, dann wird man diesem Geistig-Seelischen auch in der ganzen Kulturbewegung Rechnung tragen, und dann wird man die Wichtigkeit des Kampfes gegen Borniertheit, Philistrosität und Ungeschicklichkeit einsehen. Und manches andere wird man noch einsehen. Man wird vor allen Dingen im praktischen Leben lernen, mit dem Geiste zu rechnen. Dem Physiker gestattet man heute ungehindert, daß er von positiver und negativer Elektrizität, von positivem und negativem Magnetismus spricht. Dem Geisteswissenschafter nimmt man es auf seinem Gebiete übel, wenn er von zwei Kraftströmungen in der menschlichen Seele, dem Luziferischen und dem Ahrimanischen spricht. Aber diese zwei Kraftströmungen sind für die Menschenseele genauso eine Polarität wie positiver und negativer Magnetismus beziehungsweise positive und negative Elektrizität im Physischen. Und will man die Menschheit in ihrer Entwickelung verstehen, so muß man sich darauf einlassen, das Wirksame in bezug auf das Luziferische und Ahrimanische im Leben zu beobachten. Ein Beispiel: Unsere soziale Struktur war durch lange Zeit hindurch in einseitiger Weise von luziferischem Wesen beeinflußt. Nicht daß man das Luziferische einfach aus dem Leben tilgen könnte. Wer immer nur sagt: Ich will mich vor dem Luziferischen hüten -, der verfällt ihm erst recht. Es kann sich nur darum handeln, daß man ihm im Leben die richtige Stelle einräumt und weiß: Da ist Luziferisches, und da ist Ahrimanisches — dann wird man sie in ihren Wirkungen nicht übertreiben und nicht in ein falsches Licht bringen. Durch Jahrhunderte ist unsere soziale Struktur in Europa und auch in andern Gebieten der Welt beherrscht gewesen von starken einseitig luziferischen Impulsen. Diese starken luziferischen Impulse ergreifen die Triebe, die Instinkte des Menschen, das von innen heraus Wirksame der Instinkte und Triebe. Das ist alles keine Kritik, nur eine Charakteristik dieser Zeiten. Wie wirkte dieses Luziferische? Bisher wurde viel Rücksicht darauf genommen, die gesellschaftliche Kultur, den Platz eines Menschen, auf den er im Leben gestellt wurde, dadurch zu bestimmen, daß man auf seine Eitelkeit, auf seinen Ehrgeiz großen Wert legte. Das sind luziferische Impulse. Eitelkeit und Ehrgeiz des Menschen wurden angestachelt. Ich erinnere nur, wie in der Schule auf Eitelkeit und Ehrgeiz bis in unsere Tage gerechnet wurde. Und Eitelkeit und Ehrgeiz waren es in vieler Beziehung, was den Menschen dazu brachte, sich dieses oder jenes anzueignen, um einen wichtigen Platz im Leben zu bekommen.
Jetzt sind wir an einem wichtigen Punkt im Leben. Es kann ja kaum einem richtigen Beobachter entgehen, daß diese luziferischen Impulse im Abnehmen sind. Wenn man sich trivial ausdrücken will: Sie ziehen nicht mehr. Aber anderes soll jetzt heraufgeholt werden, im wesentlichen Ahrimanisches. Und ein ahrimanischer Zug schleicht sich ins Getriebe der Gegenwart ein. Unsere liebe Bevölkerung, diese autoritätsfreie Bevölkerung, die ja niemals an Autoritäten glauben will, daher auf alle Autorität selbstverständlich hereinfällt, sie wird wieder ahnungslos über sich ergehen lassen, was nun als einseitig ahrimanische Macht mit Bezug auf die Gestaltung der gesellschaftlichen Struktur Platz greifen soll. Etwas ganz Merkwürdiges macht sich geltend: die sogenannten Begabtenprüfungen. Die experimentelle Psychologie, die an den Universitäten zweifellos eine gewisse eingeschränkte Berechtigung hat, kann in bezug auf die Art, wie der Menschenleib wirkt, wie er manches zum Ausdruck bringt, mancherlei erfahren. Aber sie möchte eine gewisse Beschäftigung haben; sie ist nämlich leichter als jede andere Seelenprüfung. Man hat nun einen gewissen Apparat, der auf elektrischem Wege Aufzeichnungen macht. Man setzt Studenten an gewisse Stellen und notiert, wie lange es dauert, bis ein Eindruck aufgenommen, zum Bewußtsein gebracht wird. Kurz, man arbeitet dabei äußerlich, klinisch-kabinettmäßig. Das ist leichter, als innerlich zu forschen. Für gewisse Dinge soll gewiß der Wert dieser experimentellen Psychologie nicht bezweifelt werden, aber sie möchte ein weiteres Feld haben. Nun will sie die Begabtenprüfungen in die Hand nehmen. Dazu werden aus einer Reihe von Schulklassen eine Anzahl Kinder genommen, und die prüft man in bezug auf ihre Begabung hin, auf Gedächtnis, Aufmerksamkeit und so weiter, aber die Art, wie dabei mit der Methode der experimentellen Psychologie geprüft wird, ist sehr merkwürdig. Das Gedächtnis wird zum Beispiel auf folgende Weise geprüft. Man schreibt zwei Reihen Wörter auf die Tafel, die unter sich keinen Zusammenhang haben; zum Beispiel «Kopf» und «Kristall», dann zwei andere nicht zusammengehörige Wörter und so weiter. Und nachdem man das Ganze wieder weggelöscht hat, schreibt man immer nur das erste Wort auf; das Kind hat dann rasch aus dem Gedächtnis das zweite hinzuzufügen. Die, welche sich besser gemerkt haben, welches unzusammenhängende Wort bei einem andern gestanden hat, haben dann ein besseres Gedächtnis, und die andern, die entweder gar nichts finden oder längere Zeit brauchen, haben ein schlechteres. So prüft man das Gedächtnis. — Oder man will die Intelligenz prüfen. Dafür will ich Ihnen ein Musterbeispiel vorlesen:
«Wenn man z.B. die Begriffe: «Spiegel -, Mörder -, Rettung» gibt, so lassen sich zwischen dem Spiegel und der Rettung eine ganze Reihe verschiedenartiger Zusammenhänge herstellen, zu deren Auffinden keinerlei spezielle Kenntnisse, sondern nur scharfes Kombinieren gehört. Die nächstliegende Verbindung» — diese wird also der weniger Intelligente machen - «ist selbstverständlich die, daß der Bedrohte im Spiegel den heranschleichenden Mörder erblickt. Doch sind auch noch ganz andere Motive möglich: Ein heranschleichender Mörder kann beispielsweise an einen Spiegel stoßen und dieser durch sein Klirren den bedrohten Schläfer wecken, so daß jener sich retten kann. Oder der zielende Mörder wird durch einen reflektierenden Spiegel geblendet.» — Denken Sie, wie intelligent ein Knabe oder ein Mädchen sein muß, wenn sie darauf kommen sollen!
«Aber auch gefühlsmäßige Motive können verwandt werden. So kann beispielsweise der Mörder vor seinem eigenen, im Halbdunkel im Spiegel nur undeutlich sichtbaren Bilde derart erschrecken, daß er von der Ausübung der Tat absteht, sei es, daß ihn Schauder oder Gewissensbisse bei seinem eigenen Anblick im Spiegel packen, sei es, daß er im Dämmerlichte sein eigenes Spiegelbild für das eines andern hält.» -— Da ist man also ganz besonders intelligent, wenn man daran denkt, daß sich der Mörder in dem Spiegel sehen könnte, und das eigene Antlitz für das eines anderen hält. - «Auch an die Entdeckung des heranschleichenden Mörders im klaren Wasserspiegel des ruhig daliegenden Waldsees durch den Bedrohten kann man denken usw.»
Je nachdem man nun das eine Nächstliegende oder das andere einschaltet, ist man mehr oder weniger intelligent, und wer sich auf diese Weise als intelligenter herausstellt, soll durch Stipendien unterstützt werden, oder indem man ihn sonstwie hochbringt; und dem, der auf nichts anderes kommt, als daß man einen Mörder auch im Spiegel sehen könnte, dem gibt man keine Stipendien. Auf solche Weise soll also heute die Intelligenz geprüft werden, und man ist in dieser Beziehung voll Enthusiasmus für die Begabtenprüfungen. Dadurch soll die soziale Ordnung, wenn auch nicht eingerichtet, so doch beeinflußt werden. Das liebe Publikum aber wird solche Dinge als Ausfluß echter, wahrer Wissenschaft der Gegenwart mit vollem Herzen hinnehmen, denn diese Sachen bilden heute den Gegenstand einer großen Agitation. Auf diese Weise versucht man es, die Mittel und Wege zu finden, um methodisch «den rechten Mann auf den rechten Platz zu stellen», und man schreibt Aufsätze, die folgendermaßen beginnen: «Wie kaum eine andere Wissenschaft ist die angewandte Psychologie während des Krieges aufgeblüht. Das ist nicht Zufalls-Erscheinung: Hat doch der Krieg mit seinem Menschenverbrauch und seinen differenzierten Anforderungen erst die Wichtigkeit dargetan, mit Menschenkräften nicht verschwenderisch und planlos umzugehen, sondern sie möglichst zweckmäßig auszunutzen. Bisher befaßte sich nur die Pädagogik praktisch mit der exakten Psychologie; jetzt kommen drei neue Fragen hinzu: für welchen Beruf eignet sich ein Mensch am besten? (Berufs-Eignungsproblem); wie ist für die viele vernichtete Intelligenz Ersatz zu finden? (Begabtenauswahl); welche Heilungsmöglichkeit gibt es für Kopfverletzte und sonstige Nervenbeschädigte? (Psychische Übungs-Therapie).»
In diesem Stile geht es weiter. Mit einem bedeutsamen Satz wird eine Zeitverirrung zusammengekoppelt, und die Sache wird um so weniger bemerkt werden, als es selbstverständlich Berufe gibt, wo nach dieser Methode vorgegangen werden muß. Es ist ganz selbstverständlich, daß man nach einer ähnlichen Methode mit einem gewissen Recht zum Beispiel Flieger prüfen wird. Aber es darf nicht generalisiert werden. Denn es würde dadurch in der allereinseitigsten Ausbildung ein Ahrimanisches in unsere soziale Struktur hineingebracht werden. Es würde damit aus den menschlichen Aspirationen, aus dem menschlichen Streben alles ausgeschaltet werden, was aus dem Seelischen, aus dem elementarischen, impulsiven Seelischen herauskommt. Man kann sich sogar die Sache grob denken: Glauben Sie, wenn solche Begabtenprüfungen wirklich ausschlaggebend sein könnten, daß dann noch ein Wort Bedeutung haben könnte wie das: «Lust und Liebe sind die Fittiche zu großen Taten»? Und wenn die Leute einmal über die eigenen großen Menschen nachdenken würden — Sie können ganz sicher sein: Wenn ein solcher Prüfer den Helmholtz zu prüfen gehabt hätte, er hätte ihn ganz sicher als einen unbegabten Buben hingestellt. Lesen Sie die Biographie von Helmholtz! _
Das ist ein ahrimanischer Zug. Die Sachen treten noch dazu maskiert auf. Man merkt nicht, wenn man nicht die Dinge durch die Geisteswissenschaft zu beobachten vermag, wo die Schädlichkeiten liegen. Es genügt nicht, daß man sich in unserer Zeit in allerlei wollüstige Gefühle hineinschwelgen will, sondern es ist notwendig, daß man aufwacht in bezug auf die Beurteilung des Lebens. Und es wäre schon viel, wenn es mit Bezug auf diesen BegabtenprüfungUnfug wenigstens einige Menschen geben würde, die sich ein objektives Urteil demgegenüber aneigneten. Denn er wird blühen und gedeihen — dessen können Sie ganz sicher sein! Er wird das sein, wozu es die «vorurteilslose Seelenprüfung endlich gebracht hat», und er wird glorifiziert werden als einer der schönsten Ausflüsse jener philosophischen Richtung, die endlich die alten idealistischen Vorurteile und Methoden abgestreift hat und auf das «Wirkliche» losgeht. Die Geisteswissenschaft muß in diesem Sinne praktisch wirken.
Nun hängt mit diesen Dingen manches zusammen, vor allem das, daß Weite des Interesses und Wahrhaftigkeit endlich Grundeigenschaften der menschlichen Seele werden müssen. Ich möchte Ihnen für die Art, wie in unserer Zeit Wahrhaftigkeit wirkt und wie ein gewisses Interesse nicht vorhanden ist, zwei niedliche Beispiele anführen. Wenn ich persönliche Beispiele wähle, so nehme ich als das Nächstliegende an, daß Sie es mir hier nicht übelnehmen werden, weil Sie ja wissen, daß ich es nicht aus einer persönlichen Albernheit heraus tue. — Ich habe neulich in München einen Vortrag gehalten über die Erfahrungen, die der Seher mit der Kunst macht. Ich habe nie vorausgesetzt, daß irgendein Zeitungsreporter imstande wäre, die Sache der Geisteswissenschaft zu verstehen oder etwas Löbliches darüber zu schreiben. Im Gegenteil, wo ein Zeitungsreporter anfangen würde, über Geisteswissenschaft in einer löblichen Weise zu schreiben, da würde ich glauben, daß etwas daran nicht in Ordnung sei. Aber Exempel kann man doch daran studieren. In dem erwähnten Vortrage sprach ich auch über die musikalische Kunst und davon, daß das musikalische Erleben in einer bedeutsamen Weise den ganzen Menschen in Anspruch nimmt, daß, wo eigentlich musikalisches Erleben ist, überall ein Rhythmus im Inneren des Menschen sich abspielt. Ich sprach dann auf der einen Seite mit Bezug auf das Geistig-Seelische, aber auch auf der andern Seite mit Bezug auf das Physiologische, indem ich ein Auf- und Abwogen des Gehirnwassers durch den Arachnoidealraum auseinandersetzte und des weiteren darstellte, wie die Rückenmarkröhre verschieden dehnbar, mehr und weniger dehnbar ist, und wie dadurch in der Tat eine wunderbare innere Rhythmik bewirkt wird. Es geht durch das musikalische Erleben etwas großartig Rhythmisches im Leben vor. Ich erwähnte diese rhythmischen Bewegungen des Gehirnwassers, die mit dem Ein- und Ausatmen verknüpft sind. Und da ich in diesem Vortrage auch von symbolischen Vorstellungen sprach, so schrieb der Zeitungsreporter, ich gebrauchte selbst symbolische Vorstellungen, die unstatthaft wären: die Vorstellung des Gehirnwassers! - Man braucht sich dazu nur vorzustellen: Ohne das Gehirnwasser würde das Gehirn, da es nach dem archimedischen Prinzip leichter wird durch das Gehirnwasser, auf die unter ihm liegenden Blutgefäße drücken und sie zerdrücken. Also das Gehirnwasser ist etwas recht Reales. Aber so steht es mit den Interessen, welche die Menschen haben, und aus solchem Unsinn heraus wird geschrieben.
Dann ein Beispiel, eigentlich nur ein Beispielchen von Wahrhaftigkeit und Unwahrhaftigkeit. Ich habe schon öfter erwähnt, daß der merkwürdige Gelehrte Max Dessoir in seinem Buche «Vom Jenseits der Seele» auch über « Anthroposophie» ein Kapitel geschrieben hat. Ich versuchte schon, ihm die verschiedensten Entstellungen und so weiter nachzuweisen. Auch im Äußerlichen ist seine Erzählungsmethode etwas im Grunde genommen Urkomisches durch seine absoluteste Oberflächlichkeit. So hat er zum Beispiel meine «Philosophie der Freiheit» angeführt und von ihr gesagt, das sei mein literarischer Erstling. Ich konnte nicht anders, obwohl es eine entstellte Sache ist, als erwidern, daß ich ja zehn Jahre vorher schon geschrieben habe und Bücher habe erscheinen lassen. Aber dieses « Jenseits der Seele» von Max Dessoir hat Aufsehen erregt; es wurde überall von den Journalisten — die das Gehirnwasser für eine symbolische Vorstellung halten — besprochen. Es hat gewirkt, und jetzt ist eine zweite Auflage dieses Buches erschienen. In der Vorrede dazu sucht sich Max Dessoir nun zu rechtfertigen, und das wieder ganz nach demselben Schnitt. Er kann nicht aus noch ein und meint, der Zusammenhang ergebe doch ganz klar, daß ich nicht erkenne, was er will; er habe doch gemeint, daß die «Philosophie der Freiheit» mein erstes «theosophisches» Buch sei. Also abgesehen davon, daß jeder lachen muß, wenn er meint, daß mit seiner Äußerung nicht mein überhaupt erstes literarisches Werk gemeint sei, wird nun wieder jeder lachen müssen, wenn man die «Philosophie der Freiheit» als mein erstes «theosophisches» Buch bezeichnen wird. Denn es besteht ja eine weitgehende Diskussion, daß ich mit meinen theosophischen Werken die philosophische Schriftstellerei verlassen habe. — So steht es mit der Wahrhaftigkeit, und es ist schon notwendig, die Leute daran zu fassen. Ohne Wahrhaftigkeit kommen wir aber nicht weiter, und man darf solche Dinge nicht einfach so hingehen lassen. Für jemanden, der die einschlägigen Dinge kennt, ist das ganze Buch Max Dessoirs so abgefaßt, wie das Kapitel über Anthroposophie. Und dennoch, was könnte geschehen? Eine Zeitschrift, die sich sonst als etwas ungemein Ernstes gibt — ich erwähne es, weil in dieser Zeitschrift nun nicht auf die Anthroposophie losgeschlagen wird -, die «Kantstudien», die sich so furchtbar viel auf ihre rein gelehrte wissenschaftliche Richtung einbilden, sie besprechen dieses Produkt Dessoirs als ein ernsthaftes wissenschaftliches Buch nach verschiedenen Seiten hin. Es ist eine der traurigsten Erfahrungen, die man machen muß, daß ein Buch, welches von der größten Oberflächlichkeit zeugt, heute für eine philosophische Zeitschrift als ein «ernsthaftes wissenschaftliches Buch» gilt, wie es da besprochen wird. — Nun frage ich: Was soll denn heute das Publikum, das nicht autoritätsgläubige Publikum, machen? Es nimmt aus den Bibliotheken selbstverständlich diese Werke, wie die «Kantstudien» und so weiter - aber dem liegen solche Dinge zugrunde!
Da ist es nur möglich, vom Geist - wenn der Wille vorhanden ist — auf das Grundlegende in der menschlichen Natur einmal zurückzugehen. Und dieses Grundlegende wird heute nur von den geisteswissenschaftlichen Bestrebungen berührt. Da kann man nicht anders, als auf Wahrhaftigkeit, Weite des Interesses, auf Unphilistrosität und Beweglichkeit dem Leben gegenüber hinzuarbeiten.
Davon wollte ich Ihnen wieder einmal sprechen, damit uns ja das Bewußtsein nicht schwindet: In der Geisteswissenschaft kommt es nicht bloß auf den Inhalt an, sondern auf das, was die besondere Art der geisteswissenschaftlichen Vorstellungen, Ideen und Gedanken in unserer Seele bewirkt, daß unsere Seele aus der Borniertheit, aus der Philistrosität und Ungeschicklichkeit herausgehoben wird. Das ist etwas, was der, der die besonderen Impulse beachtet, die in der Geisteswissenschaft liegen, immer mehr und mehr sehen muß. Den praktischen Wert der Geisteswissenschaft müssen wir ins Auge fassen. Von solchen Dingen wollen wir das nächste Mal weitersprechen.
Thirteenth Lecture
Spiritual science should be understood above all by those who have known it for some time, in the sense that they should also realize how spiritual science can be active in the most intensive sense for human life. This has often been emphasized, but one cannot emphasize this aspect of the nature of spiritual science and its significance for our time often enough. Spiritual science is, in a sense, a science, and as such it is, one might say, still fragmentary in the present, only partially founded. What it can become can only be present in the present in its very beginnings.
What I mean by this is spiritual science in terms of its content. Through it, we can learn something about the nature of the human being, about the supersensible personality of the human being, insofar as it has a life beyond the gates of physical life, which are birth or conception and death. Through these spiritual sciences, one can also learn something about the development of the earth and the world, about the connections between this development of the earth and the world and human beings, and so on. Through the spiritual sciences, one can therefore satisfy human curiosity in a more comprehensive and all-round way than is possible through the external sensory sciences, if one may say so. One can answer questions that are close to the human heart, and so on.
But apart from this content-related significance of spiritual science, there is another, essentially different one. This can be observed when we consider what can become of ourselves, of our soul life, our soul mood, and our soul state when we occupy ourselves with the thoughts and ideas that come to us from spiritual science. It could even be the case—and what science has not been like this in the course of human history! — that some of what can and must be proclaimed today with complete conviction from the sources of spiritual life as spiritual science will later have to be corrected by the further progress of spiritual science itself, that some things will appear in a different form. Then perhaps one or other part of this spiritual science would have a different content. But what it can become for the mood, for the constitution of our soul through its ideas, through its thoughts, will not be impaired by this, and this is essentially connected with certain fundamental characteristics of our present time. Let us consider today certain fundamental characteristics of our time, particularly with regard to the constitution of the human soul. Let us stick to the four most important activities of the soul that we know well from our observations: human perception in relation to external sensory processes, imagination, through which we then process these external sensory impressions, feeling, and willing. Our soul life proceeds from waking to falling asleep through perception, imagination, feeling, and willing.
First, perception. With the soul's eye sharpened by spiritual science, we can observe what has necessarily — and I say this not as a criticism, but only as a characteristic — developed over the last three to four centuries as a fundamental cultural trait of the human soul in countries that are relevant to us. We ask ourselves what this is. One need only be a superficial observer of life to find that human beings, in terms of their powers of perception, that is, in terms of the immediate relationship of the soul to the external world through the senses, have reached the point where they need ever more vivid, intense, and fascinating impressions in order to be satisfied in terms of their sensory perception. Those of you who are a little older may think back to your youth. Compare some of the phenomena of life in your youth—going further back, this is much more noticeable—that you were able to perceive around you with similar phenomena of life now, and ask yourselves to what extent what is called the urge, the tendency toward the sensational, has gained the upper hand. What exactly is this sensationalism? It is based on the fact that people today need powerful and exaggeratedly varied, purely sensual impressions in order to be gripped and accepted by the outside world. They want to be accepted by the outside world; they want to be captivated and fascinated. The sensational has gained the upper hand to an extraordinary degree. But there is something significant connected with this. The upper hand gained by the sensational also modifies the power and energy of the human ego. Only spiritual science can lead us to an understanding of what is at stake here, for it shows us what the perception of the external world actually is.
If you go through philosophical literature, you will find nothing more talked about than the nature of external perception or sensation, whatever you want to call it. All kinds of theories have been put forward about what sensation and perception actually are within human physical and spiritual life. I don't need to bother you with that. But I would like to point out the spiritual science aspect of this relationship.
I have already indicated — even here in Berlin in a public lecture — that scientific development in the 19th century and up to our own time has achieved great things, great things in terms of understanding certain sensory connections in the external world of facts. But it imagines the development of the human being in particular to be far too straightforward, far too simple. It simply imagines that there were once only lower animals, then there were higher animals, then higher ones again, and from these, the human being finally developed, as it were, as the highest animal. However, the development of the human being is not that simple. This human being—we have already pointed this out several times—who must appear to us in his external physical form as an image of the divine essence of the cosmos, this human being can be described and conceived in many different ways. He can also be described and conceived, now with reference to certain scientific views, in such a way that we divide him into three parts: the head or sense man — it is not precise, but since the main senses are located in the head, one can say: head man — then the trunk man, and thirdly, the extremity man. Of these three parts of human nature, only the torso, the heart and lung man, is actually developed in the way that natural science conceives it today. The head man is not actually in a state of progressive development, but is regressing. The human head holds progressive development at a certain stage and causes it to regress. I have been told repeatedly that such a conception is difficult and asked how it can be made easier to understand. I have pointed out in various places how even the external facts of natural science, when correctly understood—one must then be a true natural scientist, not merely follow the pattern of certain contemporary scholars—prove what I am saying. Consider the human eye and compare it with the eye of animals at a certain stage of development. eye of animals at a certain stage of development. You cannot say that human eyes are more complicated in their external form than the eyes of animals at a certain stage of development. For that is not true. There are animals that have, inside their eyes, where we have nothing that can be perceived by the senses, the fan-shaped process, for example, and the sword-shaped process. These are certain organs inside the eye, which are extensions of the blood vessels into the interior of the eye. These extensions of the blood vessels enable the animal's entire sensory life to be intimately connected with its perception in the eye. Animals feel much more intensely in their eyes than humans do in theirs. In humans, the sword process and fan are gone. The human eye is simplified. It is not only forward-facing, it is also backward-facing. And so one could prove, down to the smallest parts of the human head, that humans are actually backward in relation to their head, especially in relation to the rest of their human nature, which is forward-facing.
Someone who also thought that this regression of the head was a difficult concept asked me if there were any clues to help understand it better. I said that one need only think of the following: in the process of development of the animal kingdom, which ends with man, man reaches a point where, at a certain time, his hair, during the embryonic period, recedes again. Humans are hairless, but the head is one of the hairy parts, in general. The fact that humans return to the animal kingdom in terms of the formation of their heads is also shown by the regression of the head. This is a superficial, external characteristic. The internal signs speak much more clearly. I ask you to consider the full significance of these facts.
The fact that the head is reduced, that development does not proceed in a straight line but recedes in the head, accumulates there, creates space for the spiritual development of the human being. Those natural scientists who hold the view that the spiritual life of the human being is only a result of his physical organization do not understand their own natural science correctly. They do not understand that it is necessary for human beings to be able to bring their spiritual and soul life into existence, that the physical organization does not sprout and grow, but rather withdraws. It subsides, accumulates, and makes room for spiritual and soul development. Where human beings develop the most spiritual and soul life, physical development recedes.
Innerly, when one has undergone spiritual-soul development, one perceives that, simply through inner observation, one receives an answer to the question: What actually is ordinary imagination and perception? What is ordinary waking life, into which imagination and perception are mixed?
In relation to the human head, perception and imagination, indeed the whole waking life, is a state of hunger. Human beings are so peculiarly organized that in their inner equilibrium, from the moment they wake up to the moment they fall asleep, the head, that is, their inner organization, is constantly starving in relation to the rest of the body. Certain ascetics who seek an enhancement of their spiritual and mental life have made use of this: they starve the entire body because the process of starvation, extended to the whole body, is supposed to bring about certain inner illuminations. This is wrong. The normal state is that during the waking process, our head is less nourished by the inner processes than the rest of the organism, and only in this way can we be awake and imagine that the head is less nourished than the rest of the organism.
Now the question arises: If we are starving in our heads while we surrender to this process of regression of the head—in sleep, an attempt is made to remove the congestion—what do we perceive at all? — Through spiritual science, we learn to distinguish between two things that are always linked in practice but are two completely different things: first, mere waking life, and second, external perceptions and ordinary memories. What happens when we starve in our waking consciousness in the head?
First, on the one hand, we perceive our I from the previous incarnation. What we have brought with us from the spiritual world, with which we entered into existence through birth or conception, we perceive when we are merely awake. This fills the space where our organism makes room. And when we perceive external sensory objects, these external objects take the place of the I that we otherwise perceive when we have no external impressions but are merely awake. In ordinary life, these two things are mixed together; we constantly perceive external objects and are very rarely in such a state of mind that we are merely awake. But in our state of mind, which is directed toward external things, there is always a tendency to perceive our previous ego and to suppress it with something, with external colors or sounds, then to perceive the previous ego again, and then the other again. As soon as we perceive something externally, as soon as an external object acts upon us, it displaces our “tendency, our power to perceive the I from our previous incarnation. It remains unconscious; we are not aware of it. But in this sensory perception there is actually a struggle between the present object that stands before us and the I from our previous incarnation.
Now you can imagine what it means when one develops a craving for the sensational, when one wants to be devoted to the outside world. That never makes one stronger in life, only weaker; for then one does what weakens our ego from the previous incarnation, which in a certain sense is our strength. Therefore, you can clearly see that with the human inclination toward the sensational, a certain weakness of human nature arises, that the ego becomes weaker.
And if we do not perceive, but think, imagine, what happens then? Our thoughts either remain silent — but this is rare in modern humans — or they connect to some external perceptions. When they are silent in waking life, then everything we have gone through between our previous incarnation and our present one works within us — in that part of us where space has been created by our organism. So where perceptions arise, the previous incarnation is at work, and where ideas arise, the life we went through between death and our present birth is at work. If we develop powerful thoughts from within ourselves, this means that we are trying to develop powerful thoughts from what we brought with us from the time before our last birth, on which we must base ourselves. If we only develop thoughts that we are inspired to by external influences, thoughts that only want to churn around in our soul because we take them in from outside, then we always weaken what we brought with us from the time between death and birth, which is what constitutes our ego. Sensation-seeking weakens our present life. The addiction to spending many evenings in clubs drinking, in order to get as little out of ourselves as possible, or the excitement caused by playing cards—in short, all this seeking of stimulation from outside is not a strengthening but a weakening of our ego, and it is basically based on the fact that we do not feel strong enough to occupy ourselves with something from our soul life. Through spiritual science, we can understand why people today are sensation-seeking and in need of stimulation.
What enters our present culture from this side can be described with a general name. Don't be put off by this name; it describes a fundamental feature of many currents in contemporary life: narrowness, narrow-mindedness. And no one will deny—even when considering contemporary science or other enterprises—that a main characteristic of contemporary human beings is narrowness, that narrowness which prevents them from seeking the rich material in their own souls that comes from their previous lives and from the time before birth. He does not believe, and above all one would first have to believe that one can be inspired by spiritual science.
Let us consider from this point of view what spiritual scientific thoughts and ideas can be for the soul's mood and state of mind. They are certainly not external stimuli or sensational experiences, nor do they aim to be. They do not capture the senses through external sensations. Many people miss this. People have to think for themselves when it comes to spiritual science, and if they cannot draw on their own soul resources, they will probably fall asleep when studying spiritual science. It is precisely the stirring up of the soul life, so that one gains the ability to develop thoughts from within oneself, that spiritual science gives us. It counteracts the sensational. It does this especially by giving us the opportunity to think a lot about a few sensory impressions. We do not need to rush from one sensation to another. We can think a great deal about all kinds of sensory impressions. Everything simple that we encounter personally becomes a mystery to us. Every detail gives us much to think about. And the thoughts that many find so complicated, the thoughts about Saturn, the sun, the moon, the different earth periods, and so on, make the mind agile and, in a sense, prevent narrow-mindedness from arising. In this way, our spiritual science works against a certain cultural trait; it is a fighter against narrow-mindedness and bigotry in the realm of perception and imagination. This is something different from the content that one can gain from this spiritual science; it is something that it can make of our soul, and this is what we should also pay attention to.
Now, with regard to the life of feeling: What is the most striking thing about a person who is drawn to spiritual science? And what is the most striking thing about most people who want nothing to do with it and reject it out of hand? The latter are characterized by a lack of interest in the great issues of the world. If you want to be interested in spiritual science, you first have to expand your interests beyond the immediate. For what does it matter to most people today what the earth was before it became earth? What does it matter to most people today what our culture was before it entered our time? To do this, one must develop broader interests. It is a matter of expanding one's interests beyond the immediate. Our time tends precisely toward limiting our field of interest as much as possible.
Where is our time actually heading? Allow me to use the following expression, which is not meant to be complimentary, but I do not wish to criticize, only to characterize: “Our age strives by all means toward narrow-mindedness, toward philistinism, and if this takes hold of the majority of people, the result will be that philistinism will gradually be introduced into the most public areas as well. We have a remarkable example of this, which, for those who see through things, can have a heart-rending, nightmarish effect in relation to the things of the present day.
In the East, we have a people who, in terms of the fundamental forces of their soul, are still in their infancy, but who possess fundamental forces that are destined to develop to a particular height in the future, in the sixth post-Atlantean cultural epoch. These are fundamental forces of the people that have a spiritual effect, a spiritual character, and which should be recognized and nurtured as such. But what, strangely enough, has spread over a large part of this national strength as public life today? Leninism! One cannot think of anything more grotesque than the coupling of this—I do not mean the man, but the thing—cultural monkey of the West and this cultural prophecy of the East. There cannot be two things that are more different and yet are coupled together here. It is the most grotesque expression of materialistic striving; for something thoroughly anti-philistine wants to emerge from the popular power of the East, but Leninism is the most absolute fundamental force of philistinism, the rejection of all far-reaching cultural interests and the discussion of cultural interests in the narrowest philistinism. One must be clear about this. And there is nothing better suited to seeing through these things than the insights of the humanities. The humanities also work against philistinism by appealing to the broad, generous interests of human beings. For without an interest in what binds human beings to the cosmos, what goes beyond the narrowest confines and pulsates into the great, without such an interest, one cannot become a humanist. — Thus, in the realm of emotional life, spiritual science is also the fighter against philistinism and narrow-mindedness, which inevitably arise from materialism, just as it is the fighter against narrow-mindedness and limitedness in the realm of perception and imagination.
Now, the realm of the life of the will. Here, too, anyone who observes life even a little can make remarkable observations in our lives. With regard to expressions of the will, it is not materialism itself, but rather what follows in its wake that leads us to the development of something remarkable in human life as a whole. The will must always express itself with the help of physicality if it is to have an effect on the external world. With regard to the will, today's materialistic age leads people into clumsiness. Because in their earliest youth people only learn to direct their physical powers in very specific ways, to work and fiddle around in only a few directions, they become clumsy in the broadest sense. There are already men today who, when they find themselves in such a situation, cannot even sew on a button, let alone anything else, strange as it may sound. Those who do not regard spiritual science as a theory or doctrine, but take in what works warmly in it into their whole personality, find that it passes into their muscles, into their blood pulsation, and makes them dexterous. And if we could instill this spiritual scientific way of thinking in our children, we would see success, we would see that the children would become more industrious, that they would be able to do this or that more easily; their fingers would become more agile. The possibility of making ideas more agile also causes the will to become more agile in its means of expression. Thus, in the realm of the will, spiritual science is a fighter against what threatens humanity: clumsiness. This clumsiness is, more than one actually believes, a characteristic of our time. Just look at how little people today are capable of doing anything outside the narrow confines of their profession. They are no longer capable of doing so, and in their professions they are more or less effective because their soul paths are well-trodden. Place a person who is thoroughly mechanized in their profession in front of something else, and you will see how one-sided our culture is today. However, this cannot be remedied by external means, because the economy tends to specialize everything. It would be nonsense to try to fight against this. But it is possible to strengthen the soul so that people receive the impulses of skill from the center of their being. To do this, however, it is necessary to thoroughly imbue oneself with knowledge of the supersensible world, mainly of the supersensible nature of the human being. One cannot understand perception and imagination, not even scientifically, if one does not know what I said earlier: that the human organization makes room by holding back the organization of the head so that the previous life and also the life between death and new birth can flow in. But life after death also flows into our organization.
As I have already said, scientific views of human organization are far too one-sided. Only the torso human being could be viewed as one-sidedly as science does; the extremity human being certainly cannot. If we look at the extremities, arms, hands, feet, legs — the organization continues inward — this organization of the extremities is the reverse of the organization of the head: there is an overdevelopment. Development shoots beyond the normal measure. If we study this development closely in relation to these conditions, we will see that it goes beyond what humans need between birth and death. Let us take only the external: the organization of the arms in connection with the breasts, with the secondary organs that serve reproduction, the legs in connection with the primary sexual organs, the extremities physically connected with that through which the human being already looks beyond himself physically. At its center, the organization of the extremities serves not only that which is poured out over human individual life, but also that which looks beyond itself, that is, the spiritual-soul life. What underlies the extremities spiritually and soulfully goes beyond what serves human life between birth and death. What lies beyond death is already present in this. Just as the human being physically passes from his own organization into that of the child through the center of his extremity organization, so what he carries through the gate of death by virtue of being a human being with arms and legs is present in him spiritually as imagination. With imaginative perception, one perceives this very clearly: human beings carry their future after death very clearly, even anatomically, spiritually and emotionally, in the organization of their extremities. If one studies natural science properly, one will gradually cease to say that spiritual science is something that cannot be attained. If one only looks at the human organization not in a way that is not as straightforward as it is, but as it actually is, then natural science itself will reveal the necessity of turning to spiritual science. However, humanity will have to overcome one thing: the belief that all external sensory impressions are of the same kind. Today, it is not only the layman who believes in the similarity of all external sensory impressions, but also the natural scientist who has the human being in front of him in the clinic and examines him anatomically. To him, the heart is an organization similar to the head. But that is not true. The head stands at a retrogressive stage in all its organization compared to the heart. It is just that we cannot observe this; that is the reason. When we learn to observe correctly, we will gain from natural science itself the fundamental conviction of the spiritual in human beings, of that which passes through birth and death. But when we come to this point, we will also take this spiritual-soul aspect into account in the entire cultural movement, and then we will understand the importance of the struggle against narrow-mindedness, philistinism, and clumsiness. And you will understand many other things as well. Above all, you will learn in practical life to reckon with the spirit. Today, physicists are allowed to speak freely about positive and negative electricity, about positive and negative magnetism. The spiritual scientist is resented in his field when he speaks of two currents of force in the human soul, the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic. But these two currents of force are just as much a polarity for the human soul as positive and negative magnetism or positive and negative electricity are in the physical world. And if we want to understand humanity in its development, we must be willing to observe what is effective in relation to the Luciferic and Ahrimanic in life. An example: For a long time, our social structure was influenced in a one-sided way by the Luciferic being. It is not that the Luciferic can simply be eradicated from life. Anyone who merely says, “I want to guard myself against the Luciferic,” will fall prey to it all the more. It is only a matter of giving it its proper place in life and knowing that there is the Luciferic and there is the Ahrimanic — then one will not exaggerate their effects or cast them in a false light. For centuries, our social structure in Europe and also in other parts of the world has been dominated by strong, one-sided Luciferic impulses. These strong Luciferic impulses seize the drives, the instincts of human beings, the inner workings of instincts and drives. This is not a criticism, only a characteristic of these times. How did this Luciferic influence work? Until now, great consideration has been given to determining a person's place in society and in life by placing great value on their vanity and ambition. These are Luciferic impulses. People's vanity and ambition have been stirred up. I only need to recall how, even in our own day, vanity and ambition were valued in schools. And in many respects it was vanity and ambition that led people to acquire this or that in order to gain an important place in life.
We are now at an important point in life. It can hardly escape the attention of any keen observer that these Luciferic impulses are waning. To put it bluntly, they no longer have any pull. But now something else is to be brought to the fore, something essentially Ahrimanic. And an Ahrimanic trait is creeping into the workings of the present. Our dear population, this authority-free population, which never wants to believe in authority and therefore naturally falls for all authority, will once again unknowingly allow itself to be subjected to what is now supposed to take hold as a one-sided Ahrimanic power with regard to the shaping of the social structure. Something very strange is coming to the fore: the so-called giftedness tests. Experimental psychology, which undoubtedly has a certain limited justification in universities, can learn a great deal about the way the human body works and how it expresses itself. But it wants to have something to do; it is easier than any other test of the soul. Now there is a certain apparatus that makes recordings by electrical means. Students are placed in certain positions and notes are made of how long it takes for an impression to be registered and brought to consciousness. In short, the work is external, clinical, and laboratory-like. This is easier than conducting internal research. The value of this experimental psychology should certainly not be doubted for certain things, but it wants to have a wider field. Now it wants to take charge of aptitude tests. To this end, a number of children are taken from a number of school classes and tested for aptitude, memory, attention, and so on, but the way in which the method of experimental psychology is used in these tests is very strange. Memory, for example, is tested in the following way. Two rows of words that have no connection with each other are written on the board; for example, “head” and “crystal,” then two other unrelated words, and so on. After the whole list has been erased, only the first word is written down; the child then has to quickly add the second word from memory. Those who have better remembered which unrelated word was next to another have a better memory, and those who either cannot find anything or need more time have a poorer memory. This is how memory is tested. — Or you want to test intelligence. I will read you a prime example of this:
"If, for example, you give the terms ‘mirror’, ‘murderer’ and ‘rescue’, a whole series of different connections can be made between the mirror and the rescue, which require no special knowledge, only sharp reasoning. The most obvious connection” — which is what someone less intelligent would come up with — ”is, of course, that the person in danger sees the murderer sneaking up on them in the mirror. But there are also other possible motives: a murderer sneaking up on someone could bump into a mirror, and the sound of it breaking could wake the person sleeping in danger, allowing them to escape. Or the murderer taking aim is blinded by a reflective mirror.“ — Think how intelligent a boy or girl must be to come up with that!
”But emotional motives can also be used. For example, the murderer may be so frightened by his own image, which is only vaguely visible in the semi-darkness of the mirror, that he refrains from committing the crime, either because he is seized by a shudder or remorse at the sight of himself in the mirror, or because he mistakes his own reflection in the dim light for that of another person.” -— So you are particularly intelligent if you think that the murderer could see himself in the mirror and mistake his own face for that of another. - “One can also think of the discovery of the murderer sneaking up on the victim in the clear water of a calm forest lake, etc.”
Depending on whether one chooses the one or the other, one is more or less intelligent, and those who prove to be more intelligent in this way are to be supported by scholarships or by being promoted in some other way; and those who can think of nothing else but that one could also see a murderer in the mirror are not given scholarships. This is how intelligence is to be tested today, and in this regard, people are full of enthusiasm for aptitude tests. This is supposed to influence social order, if not establish it. But the dear public will wholeheartedly accept such things as the product of genuine, true contemporary science, because these things are the subject of great agitation today. In this way, attempts are being made to find ways and means of methodically “putting the right man in the right place,” and essays are being written that begin as follows: “Like hardly any other science, applied psychology has flourished during the war. This is no coincidence: with its human consumption and differentiated requirements, war has demonstrated the importance of not wasting human resources haphazardly, but of utilizing them as effectively as possible. Until now, only pedagogy has dealt with exact psychology in practice; now three new questions have been added: What profession is a person best suited for? (the problem of vocational aptitude); how can the many destroyed minds be replaced? (selection of gifted individuals); what possibilities are there for healing head injuries and other nerve damage? (psychological exercise therapy).”
It continues in this vein. A significant sentence links a temporal aberration, and the matter will be all the less noticed because there are, of course, professions where this method must be used. It is quite natural that a similar method will be used, with a certain degree of justification, to test pilots, for example. But this must not be generalized. For this would introduce an Ahrimanic element into our social structure in the most comprehensive education. It would eliminate from human aspirations, from human striving, everything that comes from the soul, from the elementary, impulsive soul. One can even imagine the matter in broad terms: Do you believe that if such talent tests were really decisive, a phrase such as “lust and love are the wings of great deeds” could still have any meaning? And if people were to think about their own great figures — you can be quite sure: if such an examiner had had to examine Helmholtz, he would certainly have dismissed him as an untalented boy. Read Helmholtz's biography!
This is an Ahrimanic trait. Things appear in disguise. Unless one is able to observe things through spiritual science, one does not notice where the harm lies. It is not enough in our time to indulge in all kinds of sensual feelings; it is necessary to wake up with regard to the assessment of life. And it would be a great deal if, with regard to this nonsense about testing talent, there were at least a few people who would form an objective judgment about it. For it will flourish and prosper — of that you can be quite sure! It will be what the “unprejudiced examination of the soul has finally brought about,” and it will be glorified as one of the most beautiful manifestations of that philosophical direction which has finally cast off the old idealistic prejudices and methods and set out for the “real.” Spiritual science must work practically in this sense.
Now, many things are connected with these matters, above all the fact that breadth of interest and truthfulness must finally become fundamental characteristics of the human soul. I would like to give you two charming examples of the way truthfulness works in our time and of the absence of a certain interest. When I choose personal examples, I take the ones that are closest at hand, assuming that you will not hold it against me, since you know that I am not doing this out of personal foolishness. Recently, I gave a lecture in Munich on the experiences that the seer has with art. I never assumed that any newspaper reporter would be capable of understanding spiritual science or writing anything praiseworthy about it. On the contrary, if a newspaper reporter were to start writing about spiritual science in a praiseworthy manner, I would think that something was wrong. But one can study examples of this. In the lecture I mentioned, I also spoke about musical art and how musical experience engages the whole human being in a significant way, that wherever there is musical experience, a rhythm is at work within the human being. I then spoke on the one hand with reference to the spiritual-soul aspect, but also on the other hand with reference to the physiological aspect, by explaining the rising and falling of the cerebral fluid through the arachnoid space and further describing how the spinal canal is more or less elastic and how this actually creates a wonderful inner rhythm. Through musical experience, something wonderfully rhythmic takes place in life. I mentioned these rhythmic movements of the cerebral fluid, which are linked to inhalation and exhalation. And since I also spoke of symbolic ideas in this lecture, the newspaper reporter wrote that I myself used symbolic ideas that were inadmissible: the idea of cerebral fluid! All you have to do is imagine: without the cerebral fluid, the brain, which becomes lighter due to the Archimedes' principle, would press down on the blood vessels below it and crush them. So the cerebral fluid is something quite real. But that's how it is with the interests that people have, and such nonsense is written.
Then an example, actually just a small example of truthfulness and untruthfulness. I have often mentioned that the strange scholar Max Dessoir also wrote a chapter on “Anthroposophy” in his book “Vom Jenseits der Seele” (Beyond the Soul). I have already tried to prove to him the various distortions and so on. Even in outward appearance, his narrative method is fundamentally comical due to its absolute superficiality. For example, he cited my Philosophy of Freedom and said that it was my literary debut. Although this is a distortion, I could not help replying that I had already written and published books ten years earlier. But Max Dessoir's “Jenseits der Seele” caused a sensation; it was discussed everywhere by journalists who consider brain water to be a symbolic concept. It had an effect, and now a second edition of this book has been published. In the preface to it, Max Dessoir now seeks to justify himself, and again in exactly the same vein. He cannot get out of it and thinks that the context makes it quite clear that I do not recognize what he wants; he meant, after all, that The Philosophy of Freedom was my first “theosophical” book. Apart from the fact that anyone would have to laugh at the suggestion that his statement did not refer to my first literary work at all, everyone will now have to laugh again when Philosophy of Freedom is described as my first “theosophical” book. For there is a widespread discussion that I abandoned philosophical writing with my theosophical works. — Such is the state of truthfulness, and it is necessary to make people aware of this. Without truthfulness, however, we cannot move forward, and such things must not be allowed to pass unchallenged. For someone familiar with the relevant facts, Max Dessoir's entire book is written in the same vein as the chapter on anthroposophy. And yet, what could happen? A magazine that otherwise presents itself as something extremely serious—I mention this because this magazine does not attack anthroposophy—the Kantstudien, which prides itself so terribly on its purely scholarly scientific orientation, discusses this product of Dessoir as a serious scientific book from various angles. It is one of the saddest experiences one can have that a book which testifies to the greatest superficiality is today regarded by a philosophical magazine as a “serious scientific book,” as it is discussed there. Now I ask: What is the public, the public that does not believe in authority, supposed to do today? It naturally takes these works, such as the “Kantstudien” and so on, from the libraries — but such things are at the root of it!
There it is only possible, if the will is there, to return to the fundamentals of human nature through the spirit. And these fundamentals are touched upon today only by the spiritual-scientific endeavors. One cannot help but work toward truthfulness, breadth of interest, unphilistriness, and flexibility toward life.
I wanted to talk to you about this again so that we do not lose sight of it: In spiritual science, it is not merely the content that matters, but what the special nature of spiritual scientific concepts, ideas, and thoughts does in our soul, lifting our soul out of narrow-mindedness, philistinism, and clumsiness. This is something that those who pay attention to the special impulses inherent in spiritual science must see more and more. We must consider the practical value of spiritual science. We will continue to talk about such things next time.