Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Goethean Science
GA 1

7. The Arrangement of Goethe's Natural-Scientific Writings

[ 1 ] In the editing of Goethe's natural-scientific writings, for which I was responsible, I was guided by the thought of enlivening the study of the particulars in these writings by presenting the magnificent world of ideas that underlies them. It is my conviction that every single assertion of Goethe's acquires an entirely new sense—its rightful sense, in fact—if one approaches it with a full understanding for his profound and comprehensive world view. There is no denying the fact that many of Goethe's statements on natural-scientific matters seem entirely insignificant when one considers them from the standpoint of modern science, which has progressed so far in the meantime. But this is not a matter for any further consideration at all. The point is what a given statement of Goethe's signifies within his world view. Upon the spiritual heights on which the poet stands, his scientific needs are also more intense. Without scientific needs, however, there is no science. What questions did Goethe address to nature? That is what is important. Whether and how he answered them are matters of only secondary consideration. If today we have more adequate means, a richer experience—well, then we will succeed in finding more comprehensive solutions to the questions he posed. But my expositions are meant to show that we can do no more than just this: to proceed with our greater means upon the paths he marked out for us. What we should learn from him, therefore, above all else, is how one should address questions to nature.

[ 2 ] One overlooks the main point if one does not credit Goethe with anything more than having given us many an observation that was rediscovered by later research, and that constitutes today an important part of our world view. The important thing for him was not at all the communicated finding, but rather the way in which he arrived at it. He himself declares appropriately: “With the opinions that one risks, it is like pieces that one pushes forward on the board; they can be taken, but they have initiated a game that will be won.” He arrived at a method thoroughly in accord with nature. He sought, with the help of those means available, to introduce this method into science. It may be the case that the individual results he attained by this have been transformed by the progress of science; hut the scientific process that he introduced is a lasting gain for science.

[ 3 ] These points of view could not be without influence upon the arrangement of the materials to be published. One can, with some seeming justification, ask: Why, since I have already departed from the order of the writings that has been usual until now, did I not right away take the route that seems recommended over all the others: to bring the general scientific writings in the first volume, the organic, mineralogical, and meteorological ones in the second volume, and those on physics in the third. The first volume would then contain the general points of view, and the following volumes the particular elaborations of the basic thoughts. As tempting as this might be, it could never have occurred to me to use this arrangement. In doing so, I would not have been able coming back to Goethe's comparison once more—to achieve what I wanted: by the pieces that are risked first, to make the plan of the game recognizable.

[ 4 ] Nothing was farther from Goethe's nature than taking one's start in a conscious way from general concepts. He always takes his start from concrete facts, compares and orders them. During this activity, the ideas underlying the facts occur to him. It is a great mistake to assert that, because of that familiar enough remark he made about the idea of Faust, it is not ideas that are the driving principle in Goethe's creative work. In his contemplation of things, after he has stripped away everything incidental, everything unessential, there remains something for him that is idea in his sense. The method Goethe employs remains—even there where he lifts himself to the idea—one that is founded upon pure experience. For, nowhere does he allow a subjective ingredient to slip into his research. He only frees the phenomena from what is incidental in order to penetrate into their deeper foundations. His subject has no other task than that of arranging the object in such a way that it discloses its innermost nature. “The true is Godlike; it does not appear directly; we must divine it from its manifestations.” The point is to bring these manifestations into such a relationship that the “true” appears. The true, the idea, already lies within the fact which we confront in observation; we must only remove the covering that conceals it from us. The true scientific method consists in the removing of this covering. Goethe took this path. And we must follow him upon it if we wish to penetrate completely into his nature. In other words: we must begin with Goethe's studies on organic nature, because he began with them. Here there first revealed itself to him a rich content of ideas that we then find again as components in his general and methodological essays. If we want to understand these last, we must already have filled ourselves with that content. The essays on method are mere networks of thought for someone who is not intent upon following the path Goethe followed. As to the studies on physical phenomena: they first arose for Goethe as a consequence of his view of nature.

7. Über die Anordnung der naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften Goethes

[ 1 ] Bei der Herausgabe von Goethes naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften, die ich zu besorgen hatte, leitete mich der Gedanke: das Studium der Einzelheiten derselben durch die Darlegung der großartigen Ideenwelt zu beleben, die ihnen zugrunde liegt. Es ist meine Überzeugung, daß jede einzelne Behauptung Goethes einen völlig neuen und zwar den richtigen Sinn erhält, wenn man an sie mit dem vollen Verständnis für seine tiefe und umfassende Weltanschauung herantritt. Es ist ja nicht zu leugnen: Manche der Aufstellungen Goethes in naturwissenschaftlicher Beziehung erscheint ganz bedeutungslos, wenn man sie vom Standpunkte der mittlerweile so fortgeschrittenen Wissenschaft ansieht. Das kommt aber gar nicht weiter in Betracht. Es handelt sich darum: was sie innerhalb der Weltansicht Goethes zu bedeuten hat. Auf der geistigen Höhe, auf der der Dichter steht, ist auch das wissenschaftliche Bedürfnis ein gesteigertes. Ohne wissenschaftliches Bedürfnis gibt es aber keine Wissenschaft. Was für Fragen stellte Goethe an die Natur? Das ist das Wichtige. Ob und wie er sie beantwortet hat, das kommt erst in zweiter Linie in Betracht. Haben wir heute zulänglichere Mittel, eine reichere Erfahrung: nun wohl, dann wird es uns gelingen, ausreichendere Lösungen der von ihm gestellten Probleme zu finden. Daß wir aber nicht mehr vermögen als eben dies: die von ihm vorgezeichneten Bahnen mit unseren größeren Mitteln zu wandeln, das sollen meine Darstellungen zeigen. Was wir von ihm lernen sollen, ist also vor allem das, wie man an die Natur Fragen zu stellen hat.

[ 2 ] Man übersieht die Hauptsache, wenn man Goethe nichts anderes zugesteht, als daß er manche Beobachtung aufzuweisen habe, die von der späteren Forschung wieder gefunden, heute einen wichtigen Bestandteil unserer Weltanschauung bildet. Bei ihm kommt es gar nicht auf das überlieferte Ergebnis an, sondern auf die Art, wie er dazu gelangt. Treffend sagt er selbst: «Es ist mit Meinungen, die man wagt, wie mit Steinen, die man voran im Brette bewegt; sie können geschlagen werden, aber sie haben ein Spiel eingeleitet, das gewonnen wird.» [«Sprüche in Prosa»; Natw. Schr., 4. Bd., 2. Abt., S. 362.] Er kam zu einer durchaus naturgemäßen Methode. Er suchte diese Methode mit jenen Hilfsmitteln, die ihm zu Gebote standen, in die Wissenschaft einzuführen. Es mag nun sein, daß die hierdurch gewonnenen Einzelergebnisse durch die fortschreitende Wissenschaft umgewandelt worden sind; aber der wissenschaftliche Prozeß, der damit eingeleitet wurde, ist ein dauernder Gewinn der Wissenschaft.

[ 3 ] Diese Gesichtspunkte konnten nicht ohne Einfluß auf die Anordnung des herauszugebenden Stoffes bleiben. Man kann mit einigem Schein von Recht fragen, warum ich, da ich schon einmal von der bisher üblichen Einteilung der Schriften abgegangen bin, nicht gleich jenen Weg betreten habe, der sich vor allem zu empfehlen scheint: die allgemein-naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften im 1. Bande, die organischen, mineralogischen und meteorologischen im 2. und die physikalischen Schriften im 3. Bande zu bringen. Es enthielte dann der 1. Band die allgemeinen Gesichtspunkte, die folgenden die besonderen Ausführungen der Grundgedanken. So verlockend das nun auch ist: es hätte mir nie einfallen können, diese Anordnung zu treffen. Ich hätte damit - um auf das Gleichnis Goethes noch einmal zurückzukommen - nicht erreichen können, was ich wollte: an den Steinen, die voran im Brette gewagt, den Plan des Spieles erkenntlich zu machen.

[ 4 ] Nichts lag Goethe ferner, als in bewußter Weise von allgemeinen Begriffen auszugehen. Er geht immer von konkreten Tatsachen aus, vergleicht sie, ordnet sie. Darüber geht ihm die Ideengrundlage derselben auf. Es ist ein großer Irrtum, zu behaupten, nicht die Ideen seien das treibende Prinzip in Goethes Schaffen, weil er über die Idee des Faust jene sattsam bekannte Bemerkung gemacht. In der Betrachtung der Dinge bleibt ihm nach Abstreifung alles Zufälligen, Unwesentlichen etwas zurück, das Idee in seinem Sinne ist. Die Methode, der sich Goethe bedient, bleibt selbst da noch die auf reine Erfahrung gebaute, wo er sich zur Idee erhebt. Denn nirgends läßt er eine subjektive Zutat in seine Forschung einfließen. Er befreit nur die Erscheinungen von dem Zufälligen, um zu ihrer tieferen Grundlage vorzudringen. Sein Subjekt hat keine andere Aufgabe, als das Objekt so zurechtzulegen, daß es sein Innerstes verrät. «Das Wahre ist gottähnlich; es erscheint nicht unmittelbar, wir müssen es aus seinen Manifestationen erraten.» [«Sprüche in Prosa»; Natw. Schr., 4. Bd., 2. Abt., S. 378.] Es kommt darauf an, diese Manifestationen in solchen Zusammenhang zu bringen, daß das «Wahre» erscheint. In der Tatsache, der wir beobachtend gegenübertreten, steckt schon das Wahre, die Idee; wir müssen nur die Hülle entfernen, die es uns verbirgt. In der Entfernung dieser Hülle besteht die wahre wissenschaftliche Methode. Goethe schlug diesen Weg ein. Und wir müssen ihm auf demselben folgen, wenn wir ganz in ihn eindringen wollen. Mit anderen Worten: Wir müssen mit Goethes Studien über die organische Natur beginnen, weil er mit ihnen begann. Hier enthüllte sich ihm zuerst ein reicher Gehalt von Ideen, die wir dann als Bestandteile in seinen allgemeinen und methodischen Aufsätzen wiederfinden. Wollen wir die letzteren verstehen, müssen wir uns mit jenem Gehalte bereits erfüllt haben. Die Aufsätze über Methode sind dem bloße Gedankengewebe, der nicht den Weg nachzugehen bemüht ist, den Goethe gegangen. Was dann die Studien über physikalische Erscheinungen betrifft, so entstanden sie bei Goethe erst als die Konsequenz seiner Naturanschauung.

7 On the arrangement of Goethe's scientific writings

[ 1 ] In the publication of Goethe's scientific writings, which I had to arrange, I was guided by the thought: to enliven the study of their details by presenting the magnificent world of ideas that underlies them. It is my conviction that every single one of Goethe's assertions takes on a completely new and indeed the correct meaning when one approaches them with a full understanding of his deep and comprehensive world view. It cannot be denied: Some of Goethe's statements in terms of natural science appear completely meaningless if one looks at them from the point of view of science, which is now so advanced. But that is not at all the point. It is a question of what it means within Goethe's view of the world. At the intellectual height at which the poet stands, the need for science is also heightened. Without scientific need, however, there is no science. What questions did Goethe ask of nature? That is the important thing. Whether and how he answered them is only of secondary importance. If we have more adequate means today, a richer experience: well, then we will succeed in finding more adequate solutions to the problems he posed. But that we are not able to do more than this: to walk the paths he has marked out with our greater means, that is what my descriptions are intended to show. What we should learn from him, then, is above all how to ask questions of nature.

[ 2 ] One overlooks the main point if one concedes to Goethe nothing other than that he had many an observation to show, which later research has rediscovered and which today forms an important part of our world view. With him, it is not the traditional result that matters, but the way in which he arrives at it. He himself aptly says: "It is with opinions that one ventures, as with stones that one moves forward in the board; they can be beaten, but they have initiated a game that is won." ["Proverbs in Prose"; Natw. Schr., vol. 4, dept. 2, p. 362] He arrived at a thoroughly natural method. He sought to introduce this method into science with the means at his disposal. It may be that the individual results thus obtained have been transformed by the progress of science; but the scientific process thus initiated is a permanent gain to science.

[ 3 ] These points of view could not remain without influence on the arrangement of the material to be published. One may ask with some justification why, since I have already departed from the hitherto customary division of the writings, I did not immediately take the path that seems to be most recommendable: to bring the general scientific writings in the 1st volume, the organic, mineralogical and meteorological writings in the 2nd volume and the physical writings in the 3rd volume. The first volume would then contain the general points of view, the following volumes the specific expositions of the basic ideas. As tempting as this is, it would never have occurred to me to make this arrangement. To return to Goethe's parable, I would not have been able to achieve what I wanted: to make the plan of the game recognizable by the stones that venture ahead in the board.

[ 4 ] Nothing was further from Goethe's mind than to consciously start from general concepts. He always starts from concrete facts, compares them, classifies them. In doing so, he discovers the basis of their ideas. It is a great mistake to claim that ideas are not the driving principle in Goethe's work, because he made that well-known remark about the idea of Faust. In his contemplation of things, after stripping away everything accidental and insignificant, something remains that is idea in his sense. The method that Goethe uses remains the one based on pure experience even where he elevates himself to the idea. For nowhere does he allow a subjective ingredient to flow into his research. He only frees the phenomena from the accidental in order to penetrate to their deeper foundation. His subject has no other task than to arrange the object in such a way that it reveals its innermost nature. "The true is godlike; it does not appear immediately, we must guess it from its manifestations." ["Proverbs in Prose"; Natw. Schr., 4th vol., 2nd dept., p. 378] The important thing is to bring these manifestations into such a context that the "true" appears. In the fact which we confront by observation there is already the true, the idea; we have only to remove the covering which conceals it from us. The true scientific method consists in removing this shell. Goethe took this path. And we must follow it if we want to penetrate it completely. In other words: We must begin with Goethe's studies of organic nature, because he began with them. Here a rich content of ideas first revealed itself to him, which we then find again as components in his general and methodical essays. If we want to understand the latter, we must have already familiarized ourselves with this content. The essays on method are the pure fabric of thought that does not endeavor to follow the path Goethe took. As far as the studies on physical phenomena are concerned, they only arose in Goethe as a consequence of his view of nature.