The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Fifteenth Lecture

[ 1 ] What I have to say today will essentially concern the physical development and physical education of the child. It is, of course, in the nature of things that today’s reflections will take the form of aphorisms for various reasons. The main reason is that, in the field of human physical development, what currently predominates most is precisely that which is asserted solely on the basis of one’s own personality. When it comes to physical development, every person has their own likes and dislikes, and based on these likes and dislikes, they then develop their theories; and precisely what is asserted on the basis of likes and dislikes—and what most takes on the character of fanaticism—is ultimately also what must be furthest removed, at least initially, from the work of the anthroposophical movement. This movement must be of such a nature that it is far removed from all fanaticism, that it by no means aims to agitate for any particular cause, but simply draws attention to how one thing or another works in life, and then leaves it up to the individual to attach his or her own sympathies and antipathies to the matter.

[ 2 ] What a tremendous amount of fanaticism is displayed today by vegetarians in favor of vegetarianism, or by those who are not vegetarians against it. People invoke all manner of scientific authorities, both for and against, in this field. But it must also be said: in fact, dilettantism has never flourished quite as much as it does in today’s defense of such matters. It is certainly true that anthroposophy does not possess the slightest tendency to become fanatical in one direction or another. It cannot, therefore, take sides with people who, for example, because they have become vegetarians, advocate for vegetarianism with such fanaticism that they seek to impose it on everyone else, persuade others to adopt it, and, in effect, no longer consider anyone who is not a vegetarian to be part of humanity in the full sense of the word. Even if such fanaticism occasionally flourishes within the anthroposophical movement, it is by no means inherent in the nature of anthroposophy.

[ 3 ] Now, particularly in connection with these lectures, there is also another aspect to consider. You will have noticed that, in the educational principles presented here, the main emphasis has always been on ensuring that all psychological and spiritual measures are taken in such a way that the physical aspect of the human being can unfold and develop in accordance with its nature. So one can say: Here we have an educational system under whose influence the human being—provided everything is properly taken into account—will develop in the very best way possible, even in terms of health. — Therefore, the most important foundations for physical education have certainly already been laid by what has been said so far. Of course, one must still present physical education—even if, due to time constraints, it can only be done aphoristically (otherwise one would have to devote an entire lecture series to the topic)—at least in summary form, once more before the human soul.

[ 4 ] When it comes to a person’s physical education, the most important factors to consider are diet, the way we expose the child to the warm and cold conditions of the environment, and the way we introduce physical activity to the child. Essentially, these three categories encompass everything that is of particular importance for physical education.

[ 5 ] Now, it is not possible, using precisely today’s mode of knowledge—which follows an intellectualist line—to grasp the diversity of life in such a way that one could truly capture the immense differentiation of the human organism from within these intellectualist lines. It is indeed necessary that human beings, despite their current scientific mindset—of which they are so proud—develop a certain instinct for what is healthy and what is pathological, as well as for everything that lies in between. This instinctive engagement with the world, particularly regarding these matters, is of extraordinary importance. And one must also say: through today’s accepted science, we are gradually leading this science toward an ever-increasing materialistic bias. How much do we already know today about those mysteries of the world that can be explored under the microscope, that can be explored when we dissect certain lower animals and then observe how the parts function? What conclusions haven’t we drawn about human behavior based on the behavior of the animal kingdom, without realizing that, precisely with regard to the most important aspect, human organization is radically different from that of animals? At the very least, this is not always taken into account, and the essential point is that modern science is, in essence, dependent on viewing every single thing in isolation. After all, with any given thing, we have only a snapshot of life.

[ 6 ] Let’s say—to illustrate this with an example—I run into two people at nine o’clock in the morning; they’re sitting on a bench, and I talk to them for a while, forming a mental image of their general disposition. I walk away. At three o’clock in the afternoon, I encounter the same two people on the bench again. Now, various things may have happened: the two people may have been sitting there and conversing because of me, or—depending on their racial differences—one thing or another may have occurred; they may have sat silently side by side. But it may also be that one person remained seated, while the other—without my noticing—had walked away and had just returned, that is, had just sat down again before I encountered the two people on the bench once more, and so on. Then I will describe the situation at nine o’clock and the situation at three o’clock in the afternoon; outwardly, they are the same, but the two people are entirely different from one another in their overall disposition.

[ 7 ] Life cannot reveal its mysteries anywhere if one focuses solely on observing what is immediately present. And as you can see for yourself, this is more often the case with today’s scientific methods than one might generally suppose. And so they can sometimes lead one to experience the horrifying thing that I once witnessed with a friend. I knew him in my youth—indeed, I would say he was a person in tune with nature. Then I didn’t see him for quite some time, but eventually met him again and visited him. He sat down to lunch, and not only was the usual fare served—what one typically eats in such a situation—but also a scale; and on that scale he measured out his meat and his vegetables, for he had begun to live according to science, which, after all, knows exactly how much of each food one must consume if one wants to be a proper human being. It hardly needs to be mentioned that all of this may well be entirely correct and ingenious, but that the natural instincts of life are thoroughly undermined by such practices. And the educator and teacher, above all, needs natural instincts for what is healthy and what is harmful. Then he will be able to carry forward everything that has already been illuminated in the course of these lectures—including with regard to physical education—and develop it specifically for physical education.

[ 8 ] We have seen, for example, how the child—especially before losing its baby teeth—lives entirely within its physical organism. This life within the physical organism is most pronounced in the infant, and is most evident in relation to its nutrition. As you know, the infant initially enjoys an extraordinarily monotonous diet when he enters the world. And if an adult were forced to live such a monotonous life—surviving almost entirely on a single food for breakfast, lunch, and every other meal—he would certainly find it not exactly beneficial for his mental and physical well-being. Adults want to mix everything together; they want variety. Infants do not get this variety. And yet very few people have a mental image of just how great an infant’s happiness is due to its diet, because very few people know with what intense sweetness the infant’s entire physical organism is permeated by breast milk.

[ 9 ] Adults, after all, can only experience taste sensations on their palate and its adjacent organs. They already face the misfortune that all taste sensations have become concentrated in the unfortunate head, and this is what distinguishes them from the child, who in infancy is a being of taste through and through—who tastes through and through. And with the end of infancy, this experience of tasting through and through comes to an end. It is also forgotten later on by people who make use only of their ordinary awareness of life. They have no idea how different tasting during infancy was from their later state of being. For some people, this is made extraordinarily difficult by their later life experiences. For example, I once took part in a conversation between a teetotaler and someone who was the opposite of a teetotaler, and the teetotaler—who was, of course, also a fanatic (such people are always fanatics)—was trying to persuade the other; and then the other said—I don’t want to recount the story in full detail, as it’s taken out of context: “But I was completely abstinent for a full two years of my life!” — Then the other asked him, “When?” — “Yes, the first two years of my life!” — Well, that was an outward expression of an understanding of what had taken place. Very few people actually know this from within.

[ 10 ] The child is thus so deeply embedded in its physical organism while it is an infant that it essentially eats only through its physical organism, but also derives a great deal from it. And this is precisely what growing out of infancy consists of: first, the process begins whereby something gradually draws upward toward the head with such force that the change of teeth becomes possible—that this powerful force can develop in the head, which pushes out the first teeth and brings forth the second set. This, of course, occurs in this way throughout the entire period from birth until the change of teeth; and it manifests itself in the most diverse areas. Thus, after infancy, the sense of taste first shifts toward the head, and the child then begins not merely to eat with the body, but to eat with the soul—learning at least to distinguish with the soul, and then also to differentiate between individual foods.

[ 11 ] And we must be able to adapt to the child. We must be able to develop an understanding of the child. We must develop an understanding of what the child likes and dislikes, for therein lies a very good indicator of what is healthy and what is harmful to the child. However, to this end, one must acquire a proper understanding of human nutrition in general.

[ 12 ] Today, when it comes to nutrition, people mainly focus on the weight of external foods. But weight is not the essential factor; rather, the essential factor is that a food a person consumes contains a specific sum of forces from the external world. Every food contains a very specific sum of forces through which it is adapted to the external world. And within the human organism, everything is different. This human organism must completely transform the food. It must convert the processes of the food into the processes that are to take place within its own organism. And what takes place within the human organism is, in fact, a constant struggle in which we transform the dynamics of the food, turning it into something entirely different. The reaction within us to food is actually what we then perceive as the force that stimulates us and sustains our life. Therefore, we must not always simply ask: “Do we need to consume this or that substance in such-and-such an amount?”—but above all: “What does the organism often do with even the smallest amounts of any substance? How does it react to it?” — The organism necessarily possesses these very forces that develop resistance against external natural processes. The human organism is such that, initially, in a specific region—which, roughly speaking, extends from the mouth to the stomach—it does indeed have processes that are somewhat modified in relation to the outside world, but these are still processes that can be compared to those of the outside world. Then, in all the processes that follow the stomach processes, it has processes that are already very different from those taking place in the external world. And in the organization of the head, it has processes that represent the exact opposite of the natural processes in the external world. The human organism as a whole must therefore be stimulated in the proper way, above all through nutrition.

[ 13 ] Now, since I must be aphoristic here, I cannot delve into terminology that might be drawn from a deeper understanding of the subject itself; I must rely on what is commonly known as “popular terminology”; but that is certainly sufficient for our purposes this time. - As you know, there are foods that are commonly referred to as nutritious, and there are those that are called non-nutritious. People grow up on both non-nutritious and nutritious foods. You need only consider how many people, for example, grow up on bread and potatoes, which are decidedly non-nutritious foods. On the other hand, you need to remember how important it is—especially when one’s health is fragile—to ensure that the digestive system is not overburdened by non-nutritious foods, that is, not to place undue strain on it. A diet consisting of bread and potatoes places an enormous burden on the digestive system, leaving little energy for other bodily functions. Consequently, growth cannot be easily promoted, especially with a diet consisting primarily of bread and potatoes. Care is therefore taken to select foods that do not overload the digestive system. In this way, the digestive system has relatively little work to do. However, if one takes this to the extreme, the brain is forced into excessive activity. This then gives rise to processes that are extraordinarily dissimilar to natural processes in the external world, and in turn, this has a negative effect on the rest of the human organism; the digestive system becomes sluggish, and so on.

[ 14 ] Everything that comes into consideration here is extraordinarily complicated, and it is extraordinarily difficult for a person to penetrate all the ramifications of what is at stake. One of the most difficult tasks of serious scientific research—not the kind commonly practiced today, but genuine, serious scientific research—is, for example, to understand everything that happens when a person swallows a potato or a piece of roast beef through their mouth. These two processes are infinitely diverse in themselves, yet fundamentally different, and one must be familiar with a great deal of detail if one wishes to address these matters properly.

[ 15 ] For our purposes, for example, a hint of what is actually happening here will suffice if I tell you the following. Suppose a child eats a potato. The child first tastes this potato in the mouth—that is, with the taste buds—and this taste then takes effect. Although it no longer permeates the entire organism, it nevertheless affects the entire organism. Now, a potato is not particularly, nor excessively, tasty. It therefore allows the organism to remain, in a certain sense, at ease. The organism does not play an exceptionally strong role in what happens to the potato in the person’s mouth. Then the potato is transported to the stomach via the pathways you are familiar with. The stomach does not, for this reason, take it in with excessive interest, because it has not been prepared for it by a stimulating taste. The stimulating taste is always what prompts the stomach to accept a food with greater or lesser enthusiasm; so the stomach is already unwilling to exert itself greatly to supply this potato to the organism through its dynamic system. Yet this must still happen. The potato cannot remain in the stomach. If the stomach then has the necessary strength, it takes in the potato’s dynamic energy, processes it reluctantly, allows it to roll through its system, develops no strong reaction, and receives no strong stimulation. The whole process then passes into the rest of the digestive system and is processed there with reluctance. And what actually reaches the brain from the potato is extremely little. So even from these few hints—which, of course, would now need to be explored in depth—you can see just how complicated the processes actually are that take place within the human organism.

[ 16 ] Nevertheless, the educator and teacher must have a practical understanding of these matters. I believe that, in order to develop a practical understanding in this field with a certain degree of seriousness, it is necessary to gain at least some insight into the “whys” and “howcomes” specifically in this area. I can have a mental image of listeners saying: Just tell us once and for all what we should and shouldn’t feed the child, and that will be enough for us. — But in reality, that is simply not enough. It is precisely in the physical realm that one develops the proper approach to child-rearing by looking deeply into these matters; for things are so diverse that, above all, one needs to be guided onto the right path and to recognize the correct principles in this area. And for this, it is necessary to focus specifically on what can demonstrate to us, in a simplified way, how the child should actually be nourished.

[ 17 ] Perhaps in no other area is it as evident as in physical education just how far educational principles have strayed from general social life. Unless one has boarding schools, which make it easy to follow what I am suggesting today, one will always be compelled to cooperate closely with the parents or the child’s other surroundings, particularly in physical education—and as you know, this presents great difficulties in a wide variety of ways. Consequently, what is considered correct may perhaps only be achievable after overcoming major obstacles. I’d like to start with an example.

[ 18 ] Suppose I have a child in my class who exhibits an exaggerated tendency toward the melancholic temperament. When such a tendency is so pronounced, one can always be certain that the child has an abnormal physical constitution in some way. Psychological abnormalities always have their basis in physical abnormalities of some kind, for the physical is indeed a genuine expression of the psychological and spiritual. So let’s assume that I have such a child in a school that is not exactly a boarding school—otherwise, of course, I would take the appropriate measures within the school—. What must I do? I must try to get in touch with the child’s parents, and, once I have a clear understanding of what the situation actually is in this case, ask the parents to sweeten the food the child eats at least one and a half times, and sometimes twice as much, as might be necessary for a child who otherwise appears normal. So, I must advise the parents not to skimp on sugar as a food additive for this child—perhaps introducing it in the form of candies.

[ 19 ] What do I actually want here? Well, it might become even clearer to you what I’m getting at if I give another example: Let’s suppose I have a pathologically sanguine child. I mean, the condition must, of course, be extreme—pathological—if what I’m about to say is to be true. I have a child who is excessively sanguine. Again, there will be an abnormality in the child’s physical constitution, and in such a case I will ask the parents to reduce the amount of sweets in the child’s diet—and to go easy on sugar in general when it comes to the child.

[ 20 ] Why do I do this? One only realizes the extent and degree to which one must do such a thing once one truly understands the following. You see, breast milk in particular—and milk and dairy products in general—affect the human body in such a way that their effects extend evenly throughout the entire body. All organs, so to speak, are brought into a certain harmony through milk and dairy products. In contrast, other foods have the characteristic that each one exerts a predominant influence on a specific organ system. Please note, I am not saying an exclusive influence, but a predominant one. The point is this: the way a child relates to a food or even a luxury item based on their taste, or how that taste is accommodated, depends on the nature of a specific organ system in the child or in humans in general; luxury items are sometimes just as important to nutrition as food itself.

[ 21 ] With milk, the whole person is taken into account; with any other food, a single organ system. With sugar, in the context I am now considering here, the human liver is of particular concern. So, what am I actually aiming for when I have a child exhibiting abnormally melancholic behavior treated with a lot of sugar? In doing so, I cause the liver’s activity to be somewhat reduced, because the sugar is supplied to the organism in such a way that it, in a certain sense, takes over the liver’s function—so that the liver’s activity becomes, I might say, more directed toward an external factor that I am supplying, and recedes into the background as an independent function. This is a way in which I can, through purely dietary means, somewhat counteract the child’s melancholic tendency—which may also manifest as an anemic tendency—and which, under certain circumstances, may indeed be rooted in the child’s liver function. — What do I do when I recommend limiting sugar intake for an excessively sanguine child? In that case, I attempt to limit the external activity of sugar in this excessively sanguine child and thereby prompt the liver to develop more vigorous activity from within itself; in doing so, I encourage the child to stimulate the “I” more strongly, thus overcoming what arises as a physical consequence of the sanguine temperament.

[ 22 ] So you see, measures are taken based on an understanding of the human being’s overall organization. That is why, in physical education, what really matters in these matters is the “why” and “because”—that one understands the “why” and “because”; and, of course, there are, in turn, an immense number of details involved. But it is certainly possible to trace these details back to more general principles, and these general principles consist of something polar in nature. Of course, someone who is a truly good educator and teacher—as good as one could possibly be—will, in a certain sense, through their empathy with the child, already know prophetically how to intervene here or there. But it is, after all, of extraordinary importance to be able to direct one’s attention to instances where the child deviates in any way from the norm in one direction or another, so as to intervene at that point.

[ 23 ] If one does this over a longer period of time, one eventually develops such insight that one can even begin to take preventive measures. But this usually only becomes possible for the truly active teacher and educator once they have been able to notice the subtle deviations for some time—of course, one must not wait until things reach an extreme. This does, however, require that the teacher continually have the inclination to delve deeper in this direction and that he or she overcome certain human tendencies that stand in the way; otherwise, I fear that teachers and educators will not possess the necessary thoroughness until the moment they retire.

[ 24 ] What requires particular attention lies, on the one hand, in the interest that the whole child—that is, not merely the spiritual-soul aspect, but the child as body, soul, and spirit—shows toward both itself and its environment; one must develop an instinctive awareness of this interest or this lack of interest. That is one pole. The other pole is the child’s susceptibility to fatigue. Where does this particular expression of interest come from? This particular expression of interest arises from the metabolic-limb system, primarily from the metabolic system. When I see that a child is losing interest in some area—let’s say, first of all, what is most noticeable: losing interest in intellectual matters, or losing interest in external activities—such as no longer wanting to participate in games and the like—when I see what, under certain circumstances, may even be the very worst thing for the child: that it is losing interest in the deliciousness of food — above all, the child should take an interest in how things taste, and should, in its own way, distinguish between the flavors of individual foods — if the child even begins to lose its appetite—and a loss of appetite is, after all, a lack of interest in the physical realm—then I know: the diet is wrong; it places too great a strain on the digestive system. I must investigate to what extent this particular child, given its constitution, is being fed too many of these non-nutritious foods that place too great a strain on the digestive system. Just as I gauge the weather by the barometer, so I gauge from the child’s lack of interest that the diet is wrong. I must therefore be clear that I have to regard the child’s existing interest—or lack thereof—as something of extraordinary importance for the measures I need to take regarding their diet.

[ 25 ] If I notice that a child tires easily—which is, after all, the exact opposite—whether the child becomes abnormally tired from mental activity or physical exertion, then, once again, the physical aspect comes into play particularly strongly in the child, which manifests itself in such a way that, although the child can eat, eating puts the child into a sort of dreamlike state—so that after every meal the child has an abnormal need to rest, to behave like a snake and lie down, and is unable to cope with digestion in this way, that is, becomes fatigued by the digestive process—if I notice this, then I know that the child is being given too much of the kind of food that places too little demand on the digestive system, which is therefore processed primarily by the mental system, and which in this way causes the child to become fatigued.

[ 26 ] If the child shows too much disinterest, I must try to introduce foods that are considered nutritious. And there’s no need to be a fanatic about it. Vegetarian fanatics will say: “Ah, look, this child has lost interest; you fed it meat, so now you have to get it used to eating only raw fruits, and then it will regain its interest!” — That may well be true. On the other hand, of course, meat-eaters will say, when a child becomes easily fatigued: “Yes, you just have to stimulate it with meat.” — The fact is, as far as this area is concerned, things aren’t really such that they demand such an intensely strong interest, for the simple reason that it is indeed possible to combine other foods in such a way that they can, for example, replace meat. On the other hand, it’s not all that important to turn people into complete vegetarians or anything like that. But the point is to be aware of this principle: that one can eliminate this kind of apathy by improving one’s diet with nutritious foods, and that one must counteract this tendency to tire by taking a different approach. These are the things that bring general knowledge—I would say—down from the intellectual, the multifaceted, and the vast into the realm of the simple. If, for example, I know that I have a child who tires easily, then I must realize that his or her digestive system is simply not being utilized enough or is being utilized incorrectly. I must adjust the diet accordingly.

[ 27 ] So you see that what matters is developing a kind of symptomatology of the human being, and this symptomatology already sets you on the path along which you can then make progress. It is not necessary to spell out every single detail: “This is what you must do.” — That is precisely the point: when you gain an overview of life in this way, by approaching it through a symptomatology, you can take with you the guiding principles regarding nutrition that will then lead you in exactly the right direction.

[ 28 ] Closely related, yet in a certain sense opposite, is the nurturing of the child. Here, the world provides humanity with a kind of guiding principle in an even clearer way; but this guiding principle must simply be understood correctly. Even today, we still have what became a buzzword in the 19th century. — On the one hand, buzzwords are always all too justified in their content, if one understands them. But they become buzzwords precisely because the matter is exaggerated. On the other hand, it is precisely because the matter is exaggerated that harm is caused. - There is still a catchphrase in use today—one that gained more and more traction in the 19th century: hardening. Certainly, it can be very beneficial, and an extraordinary amount has been done in this regard. But you see, anyone who can draw on a genuine understanding of human nature it is always, in a certain sense, a cause for anxiety and apprehension when they see people who, as children, were raised very much in the spirit of hardening, and who are then—precisely because they are so hardened—unable to walk across a sun-drenched, hot square, because they begin to enter a state of mind and body such that they simply cannot walk across the square at that moment. Hardening can only be proper if it makes a person resilient in the most diverse areas of life.

[ 29 ] However, one must take two types into account. The first is this: the world has, in a sense, provided humans with a certain guideline, namely that they are truly comfortable only when they do not notice the temperature conditions of their environment, and that they are, in fact, always in a situation that is detrimental to their health under any circumstances when they are forced to perceive the temperature conditions of their environment in an abnormal way. Of course, he must perceive them as sensory impressions under certain circumstances, but he should not perceive them through his entire organism.

[ 30 ] To this end, it is therefore necessary that we, above all else, design clothing in such a way that a person can experience neutral conditions with regard to temperature, and every single detail must indeed be taken into account. As human beings, we are inherently predisposed such that, if we are exposed to cold conditions too intensely, we simply cannot carry out certain internal functions properly; and that, if we are exposed to heat conditions too intensely, the internal functioning of certain organs, in turn, becomes excessive. Thus we can say: When a person is abnormally and excessively exposed to cold conditions, their organs gradually become prone to internal mucus buildup, and this gives rise to all those diseases that I would like to describe, using a popular term, as “internal mucus buildup.” The organs become internally clogged with metabolic waste products. This mucus accumulation occurs. — If I expose a person to excessive heat, the organs wither, they ossify, they encrust, and they then become, in the truest sense of the word, anemic organs.

[ 31 ] This is precisely what, through a certain insight into the organism, paves the way for us to proceed in the right educational manner in this area. Human beings must learn from everything through a symptomatic approach. We humans, for example, are predisposed to be able to expose our faces to cold; and because of the role the human face plays in the overall organization of the human being, it is already predisposed to be exposed to colder conditions than the rest of the organism. Because it is exposed to greater cold, it continually prevents the other organs from withering, stimulates the organs, and there is an interplay between the face—which is more readily exposed to the cold—and the other parts of the human organism. But one must not confuse this with another part of the human body—forgive the harsh expression—one must not confuse a person’s calves with their face. This is the nonsense being perpetrated today, in which a person’s calves are confused with their face. Children are allowed to walk around with their legs bare up to the knees, sometimes even far above the knees. This is a confusion of one end of the human being with the other. If people could see the connection that exists here, they would realize just how many cases of appendicitis in later life are simply linked to this confusion of one end of the human being with the other.

[ 32 ] It must be said, however, that people must also be made resilient so that they do not lose their composure at every ‘change in temperature.’ This, in turn, is achieved, for example, by recognizing that if a person shows themselves to be overly sensitive to such temperature changes even in childhood, then they must be supported through appropriate nutrition. These are precisely the kinds of things that show us how warmth and nutrition must work together. Food and warmth, nutrition and warming are definitely interrelated. For people who are overly sensitive to temperature changes, care must be taken to ensure that they become internally stronger against these changes through a diet that is more or less warming.

[ 33 ] So you can see how a genuine understanding of human nature also helps us find our way in this regard, and how, fundamentally, everything in the human organism must not only work together, but—above all—must be conceived of as working together, especially in the case of educators and teachers.

[ 34 ] The third aspect that requires careful attention with regard to physical education is the physical activity we introduce to the child. The point here is that human beings are not only meant to carry out their inner activities, but are organized in such a way that their very nature involves active participation in the external world; that they must feel themselves to be a part of this external world. We can say that no organ in the human body is organized in such a way that we can understand it in a state of rest. We can only understand the rest of a human organ if we can relate it to the movement performed by the organ—whether it is an external organ, where the external form of movement is already implied in its state of rest, or an internal one, where the organ’s very form expresses precisely how it is engaged in inner activity and thereby participates in the overall process of the human organs. This is taken into account by introducing movement activities to the child in the proper way. But in doing so, we must keep the human being’s totality in mind and ensure that the physical, the psychological, and the spiritual are all given their due in equal measure. For the child, this is initially the case only when we allow the child’s physical activity to take place in the right style—a style in which the child derives satisfaction from bringing forth the appropriate forms of movement from their own intentions and accompanying them with their own sense of fulfillment.

[ 35 ] In an education based on an understanding of human nature, we must therefore ensure that we learn to understand the ways in which the child wants to engage freely in play. Everything we present to the child in the form of stereotypical, contrived forms of play constrains the child into something that is foreign to him or her; it suppresses what should be active within the child. The child gradually becomes sluggish with regard to its own inner activity, and since external activity is then imposed upon it, it feels uninterested within this external activity.

[ 36 ] One can gain a particularly good insight into these matters by observing how a child’s play—in which one usually takes into account what the child’s intentions might be—is allowed to become too deeply intertwined with gymnastic activities. As I said, I certainly do not wish to condemn gymnastics outright; but in general, it must be said that gymnastic exercises are structured in such a way that they approach the child in a certain external manner. Therefore, anyone with a genuine understanding of human nature would prefer to see children engaging freely in their own way on the parallel bars, the high bar, the rope ladders, and so on, rather than having the gymnastics teacher stand there and command the movements—movements into which the child then adapts more as something external that it observes, rather than movements that arise from within the child itself. It would not be as good if the teacher commanded “one! two! three!”—and prescribed how the child should step onto the first rung of the rope ladder, then the second, and so on, or how it should perform exercises on the high bar or parallel bars in a corresponding manner, forcing its body into stereotypical forms.

[ 37 ] I know that this does go a little beyond what is generally accepted today, since everyone today is somewhat fanatical about one or another trend in gymnastics, and one encounters particular resistance when one places the purely gymnastic elements—which are taught to the child externally—in the proper light in contrast to what arises from within the child itself through the unfolding of free play.

[ 38 ] This free play is what one must study! One must get to know the child; then one will also find a way to encourage the child to engage in this free play. Both boys and girls should be able to participate in these free games. This will create the opportunity for all inner functions to be activated in a harmonious way through the inner activity that accompanies the child’s outward liveliness. And above all, one will then be able to properly address issues such as, let’s say, the onset of anemia in young girls—which in most cases simply stems from the fact that young girls are kept separate from boys, and it is considered improper for them to romp about or participate in free play with the boys. Only, perhaps with a slight nuance, should they engage in the same activities that the boys do during free play.

[ 39 ] But precisely that—please, this is by no means meant to be the slightest allusion to anything that might exist in real life; it should be understood solely as a matter of terminology— it is indeed true that the conventional ideal, which is often held regarding little girls, is in many respects precisely the health-related cause of the later onset of anemic conditions—conditions we can remedy precisely by encouraging the girl to engage in free play in an appropriate manner. In this regard, we protect her from her internal functions gradually becoming sluggish and from failing to properly produce blood through the digestive process.

[ 40 ] With matters such as these, it is particularly difficult to elicit full understanding in the present day, for the simple reason that the kind of knowledge recognized today does not probe the actual inner essence of the human being, but rather gathers individual facts and, as they say, concocts general knowledge from these individual facts by inductive means. This certainly leads to correct conclusions; but what matters in life is that one always arrives at the things that are vital to life. So it can happen that a person who is particularly fanatical about today’s kind of knowledge comes along and says: “Yes, you’re telling us now that anemia in young girls can be caused by a lack of physical activity; but I had a case—he might as well have observed five, for all I care—where out in the village the girls were not prevented at all from running around and playing, and yet I found cases of anemia there.” — Yes, the point is that we must then investigate where the anemia comes from in this specific case. Perhaps the young girl simply nibbled a little on, say, a colchicum autumnale as a child, and this instilled in her a predisposition that later manifested as anemia.

[ 41 ] Another factor that is particularly important here is that we can also impair a child’s overall health by overburdening them mentally. If we do not introduce the child to active play in the right way, then we are not properly supporting their metabolic processes. If we overload the child, particularly with mental matters relating to the external world, we induce an excessive metabolism in the child’s head itself. Although the human being is a threefold being, all individual activities that predominate in one organ system are, in a certain sense, also present in the other organ systems. And if we overload a person not with spiritual matters but with what the external world offers in terms of physical content, then we divert, in a certain sense, the normal digestive activity from the metabolic system to the head system, and thereby we in turn induce a kind of abnormal activity in the entire digestive system.

[ 42 ] This can lead to very similar symptoms—again, cases of anemia—during puberty. And here, too, people may once again point to the village, where cases of anemia may also occur under certain circumstances, and one cannot claim that such children have been, so to speak, “overfed” intellectually. One will have to investigate further and will discover that anemia in this case may have been caused by the fact that there is a house in this village overgrown with so-called wild grapevines; the berries of the wild grapevine may once have piqued the child’s curiosity—as can be understood later—and the child may have nibbled on one, two, or three of these berries when they were overripe, turning completely black, thereby laying the groundwork for anemia due to the child’s overall constitution.

[ 43 ] These are the things that must certainly be taken into account: that it may well be correct to gather individual facts of this kind and concoct a general body of knowledge from them, but when it comes to practical knowledge of life, what matters is to focus precisely on what is actually practical in life—that which one can address and intervene in within and in relation to life. And only such knowledge provides the teacher and the educator with a genuine understanding of human nature from within—an understanding that conveys to them what they can primarily control: that we guide the child into movement games in the right way, and that we do not overburden the child intellectually. Not only is this within our control, but it is our primary task.

[ 44 ] Of course, we cannot prevent a child from nibbling on Colchicum autumnale or wild grapevine in every single case. But we can, at the right time, equip the child with the kind of intuition that enables him or her to develop his or her physical constitution in every respect and to achieve a higher level of vitality.