The Philosophy of Freedom
GA 4
Preface to the revised edition of 1918
[ 1 ] There are two fundamental questions in the life of the human soul towards which everything to be discussed in this book is directed. One is: Is it possible to find a view of the essential nature of man such as will give us a foundation for everything else that comes to meet us—whether through life experience or through science—which we feel is otherwise not self-supporting and therefore liable to be driven by doubt and criticism into the realm of uncertainty? The other question is this: Is man entitled to claim for himself freedom of will, or is freedom a mere illusion begotten of his inability to recognize the threads of necessity on which his will, like any natural event, depends? It is no artificial tissue of theories that provokes this question. In a certain mood it presents itself quite naturally to the human soul. And one may well feel that if the soul has not at some time found itself faced in utmost seriousness by the problem of free will or necessity it will not have reached its full stature. This book is intended to show that the experiences which the second problem causes man's soul to undergo depend upon the position he is able to take up towards the first problem. An attempt is made to prove that there is a view of the nature of man's being which can support the rest of knowledge; and further, that this view completely justifies the idea of free will, provided only that we have first discovered that region of the soul in which free will can unfold itself.
[ 2 ] The view to which we here refer is one which, once gained, is capable of becoming part and parcel of the very life of the soul itself. The answer given to the two problems will not be of the purely theoretical sort which, once mastered, may be carried about as a conviction preserved by memory. Such an answer would, for the whole manner of thinking on which this book is based, be no real answer at all. The book will not give a ready-made self-contained answer of this sort, but will point to a field of experience in which man's inner soul activity supplies a living answer to these questions at every moment that he needs one. Whoever has once discovered the region of the soul where these questions unfold, will find that the very contemplation of this region gives him all that he needs for the solution of the two problems. With the knowledge thus acquired, he may then, as desire or destiny impels him, adventure further into the breadths and depths of this enigmatical life of ours. Thus it would appear that a kind of knowledge which proves its justification and validity by its own inner life as well as by the kinship of its own life with the whole life of the human soul, does in fact exist.
[ 3 ] This is how I thought about the content of this book when I first wrote it down twenty-five years ago. Today, once again, I have to set down similar sentences if I am to characterize the main ideas of the book. At the original writing I limited myself to saying no more than was in the strictest sense connected with the two fundamental questions which I have outlined. If anyone should be astonished at not finding in this book any reference to that region of the world of spiritual experience described in my later writings, I would ask him to bear in mind that it was not my purpose at that time to set down the results of spiritual research, but first to lay the foundations on which such results can rest.
The Philosophy of Freedom does not contain any results of this sort, any more than it contains special results of the natural sciences. But what it does contain is in my judgment absolutely necessary for anyone who seeks a secure foundation for such knowledge. What I have said in this book may be acceptable even to some who, for reasons of their own, refuse to have anything to do with the results of my researches into the spiritual realm. But anyone who feels drawn towards the results of these spiritual researches may well appreciate the importance of what I was here trying to do. It is this: to show that open-minded consideration simply of the two questions I have indicated and which are fundamental for every kind of knowledge, leads to the view that man lives in the midst of a genuine spiritual world.
In this book the attempt is made to show that a knowledge of the spirit realm before entering upon actual spiritual experience is fully justified. The course of this demonstration is so conducted that for anyone who is able and willing to enter into these arguments it is never necessary, in order to accept them, to cast furtive glances at the experiences which my later writings have shown to be relevant.
[ 4 ] Thus it seems to me that in one sense this book occupies a position completely independent of my writings on actual spiritual scientific matters. Yet in another sense it is most intimately connected with them. These considerations have moved me now, after a lapse of twenty-five years, to republish the contents of this book practically unaltered in all essentials. I have, however, made additions of some length to a number of chapters. The misunderstandings of my argument which I have met seemed to make these more detailed elaborations necessary. Changes of text have been made only where it appeared to me that I had said clumsily what I meant to say a quarter of a century ago. (Only ill will could find in these changes occasion to suggest that I have changed my fundamental conviction.)
[ 5 ] For many years my book has been out of print. In spite of the fact, which is apparent from what I have just said, that my utterances of twenty-five years ago about these problems still seem to me just as relevant today, I hesitated a long time about the completion of this revised edition. Again and again I have asked myself whether I ought not, at this point or that, to define my position towards the numerous philosophical views which have been put forward since the publication of the first edition. Yet my preoccupation in recent years with researches into the purely spiritual realm prevented me from doing this in the way I could have wished. However, a survey of the philosophical literature of the present day, as thorough as I could make it, has convinced me that such a critical discussion, tempting though it would be in itself, would be out of place in the context of this book. All that it seemed to me necessary to say about recent philosophical tendencies, from the point of view of the Philosophy of Freedom, may be found in the second volume of my Riddles of Philosophy.
[ 1 ] Rudolf Steiner,
April 1918.
Voredde zur Neuausgabe 1918
[ 1 ] Zwei Wurzelfragen des menschlichen Seelenlebens sind es, nach denen hingeordnet ist alles, was durch dieses Buch besprochen werden soll. Die eine ist, ob es eine Möglichkeit gibt, die menschliche Wesenheit so anzuschauen, daß diese Anschauung sich als Stütze erweist für alles andere, was durch Erleben oder Wissenschaft an den Menschen herankommt, wovon er aber die Empfindung hat, es könne sich nicht selber stützen. Es könne von Zweifel und kritischem Urteil in den Bereich des Ungewissen getrieben werden. Die andere Frage ist die: Darf sich der Mensch als wollendes Wesen die Freiheit zuschreiben, oder ist diese Freiheit eine bloße Illusion, die in ihm entsteht, weil er die Fäden der Notwendigkeit nicht durchschaut, an denen sein Wollen ebenso hängt wie ein Naturgeschehen? Nicht ein künstliches Gedankengespinst ruft diese Frage hervor. Sie tritt ganz naturgemäß in einer bestimmten Verfassung der Seele vor diese hin. Und man kann fühlen, es ginge der Seele etwas ab von dem, was sie sein soll, wenn sie nicht vor die zwei Möglichkeiten: Freiheit oder Notwendigkeit des Wollens, einmal mit einem möglichst großen Frageernst sich gestellt sähe. In dieser Schrift soll gezeigt werden, daß die Seelenerlebnisse, welche der Mensch durch die zweite Frage erfahren muß, davon abhängen, welchen Gesichtspunkt er gegenüber der ersten einzunehmen vermag. Der Versuch wird gemacht, nachzuweisen, daß es eine Anschauung über die menschliche Wesenheit gibt, welche die übrige Erkenntnis stützen kann; und der weitere, darauf hinzudeuten, daß mit dieser Anschauung für die Idee der Freiheit des Willens eine volle Berechtigung gewonnen wird, wenn nur erst das Seelengebiet gefunden ist, auf dem das freie Wollen sich entfalten kann.
[ 2 ] Die Anschauung, von der hier mit Bezug auf diese beiden Fragen die Rede ist, stellt sich als eine solche dar, welche, einmal gewonnen, ein Glied lebendigen Seelenlebens selbst werden kann. Es wird nicht eine theoretische Antwort gegeben, die man, einmal erworben, bloß als vom Gedächtnis bewahrte Überzeugung mit sich trägt. Für die Vorstellungsart, die diesem Buche zugrunde liegt, wäre eine solche Antwort nur eine scheinbare. Nicht eine solch fertige, abgeschlossene Antwort wird gegeben, sondern auf ein Erlebnisgebiet der Seele wird verwiesen, auf dem sich durch die innere Seelentätigkeit selbst in jedem Augenblicke, in dem der Mensch dessen bedarf, die Frage erneut lebendig beantwortet. Wer das Seelengebiet einmal gefunden hat, auf dem sich diese Fragen entwickeln, dem gibt eben die wirkliche Anschauung dieses Gebietes dasjenige, was er für diese beiden Lebensrätsel braucht, um mit dem Errungenen das rätselvolle Leben weiter in die Breiten und in die Tiefen zu wandeln, in die ihn zu wandeln Bedürfnis und Schicksal veranlassen. — Eine Erkenntnis, die durch ihr Eigenleben und durch die Verwandtschaft dieses Eigenlebens mit dem ganzen menschlichen Seelenleben ihre Berechtigung und Geltung erweist, scheint damit aufgezeigt zu sein.
[ 3 ] So dachte ich über den Inhalt dieses Buches, als ich ihn vor fünfundzwanzig Jahren niederschrieb. Auch heute muß ich solche Sätze niederschreiben, wenn ich die Zielgedanken der Schrift kennzeichnen will. Ich habe mich bei der damaligen Niederschrift darauf beschränkt, nicht mehr zu sagen als dasjenige, was im engsten Sinne mit den gekennzeichneten beiden Wurzelfragen zusammenhängt. Wenn jemand verwundert darüber sein sollte, daß man in diesem Buche noch keinen Hinweis findet auf das Gebiet der geistigen Erfahrungswelt, das in späteren Schriften von mir zur Darstellung gekommen ist, so möge er bedenken, daß ich damals eben nicht eine Schilderung geistiger Forschungsergebnisse geben, sondern erst die Grundlage erbauen wollte, auf der solche Ergebnisse ruhen können. Diese «Philosophie der Freiheit» enthält keine solchen speziellen Ergebnisse, ebensowenig als sie spezielle naturwissenschaftliche Ergebnisse enthält; aber was sie enthält, wird derjenige nach meiner Meinung nicht entbehren können, der Sicherheit für solche Erkenntnisse anstrebt. Was in dem Buche gesagt ist, kann auch für manchen Menschen annehmbar sein, der aus irgend welchen ihm geltenden Gründen mit meinen geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschungsergebnissen nichts zu tun haben will. Demjenigen aber, der diese geisteswissenschaftlichen Ergebnisse als etwas betrachten kann, zu dem es ihn hinzieht, dem wird auch wichtig sein können, was hier versucht wurde. Es ist dies: nachzuweisen, wie eine unbefangene Betrachtung, die sich bloß über die beiden gekennzeichneten für alles Erkennen grundlegenden Fragen erstreckt, zu der Anschauung führt, daß der Mensch in einer wahrhaftigen Geistwelt drinnen lebt. In diesem Buche ist erstrebt, eine Erkenntnis des Geistgebietes vor dem Eintritte in die geistige Erfahrung zu rechtfertigen. Und diese Rechtfertigung ist so unternommen, daß man wohl nirgends bei diesen Ausführungen schon auf die später von mir geltend gemachten Erfahrungen hinzuschielen braucht, um, was hier gesagt ist, annehmbar zu finden, wenn man auf die Art dieser Ausführungen selbst eingehen kann oder mag.
[ 4 ] So scheint mir denn dieses Buch auf der einen Seite eine von meinen eigentlich geisteswissenschaftlichen Schriften völlig abgesonderte Stellung einzunehmen; und auf der andern Seite doch auch aufs allerengste mit ihnen verbunden zu sein. Dies alles hat mich veranlaßt, jetzt, nach fünfundzwanzig Jahren, den Inhalt der Schrift im wesentlichen fast ganz unverändert wieder zu veröffentlichen. Nur längere Zusätze habe ich zu einer ganzen Reihe von Abschnitten gemacht. Die Erfahrungen, die ich über mißverständliche Auffassungen des von mir Gesagten gemacht habe, ließen mir solche ausführliche Erweiterungen nötig erscheinen. Geändert habe ich nur da, wo mir heute das ungeschickt gesagt schien, was ich vor einem Vierteljahrhundert habe sagen wollen. (Aus dem so Geänderten wird wohl nur ein Übelwollender sich veranlaßt finden zu sagen, ich habe meine Grundüberzeugung geändert.)
[ 5 ] Das Buch ist schon seit vielen Jahren ausverkauft. Trotzdem, wie aus dem eben Gesagten hervorgeht, mir scheint, daß heute ebenso noch ausgesprochen werden soll, was ich vor fünfundzwanzig Jahren über die gekennzeichneten Fragen ausgesprochen habe, zögerte ich durch lange Zeit mit der Fertigstellung dieser Neuauflage. Ich fragte mich immer wieder, ob ich nicht müsse an dieser oder jener Stelle mich mit den zahlreichen seit dem Erscheinen der ersten Auflage zutage getretenen philosophischen Anschauungen auseinandersetzen. Dies in der mir wünschenswerten Weise zu tun, verhinderte mich die Inanspruchnahme durch meine rein geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschungen in der letzten Zeit. Allein ich habe mich nun nach möglichst gründlicher Umschau in der philosophischen Arbeit der Gegenwart davon überzeugt, daß, so verlockend eine solche Auseinandersetzung an sich wäre, sie für das, was durch mein Buch gesagt werden soll, nicht in dasselbe aufzunehmen ist. Was von dem in der «Philosophie der Freiheit» eingenommenen Gesichtspunkt aus über neuere philosophische Richtungen mir nötig schien, gesagt zu werden, findet man im zweiten Bande meiner «Rätsel der Philosophie».
April 1918
Rudolf Steiner
Preface to the new edition of 1918
[ 1 ] There are two root questions of human soul life, according to which everything that is to be discussed in this book is organized. One is whether there is a way of looking at the human being in such a way that this view proves to be a support for everything else that comes to man through experience or science, but of which he has the feeling that it cannot support itself. It can be driven into the realm of uncertainty by doubt and critical judgment. The other question is this: Can man as a volitional being ascribe freedom to himself, or is this freedom a mere illusion that arises in him because he does not see through the threads of necessity on which his volition hangs just as much as a natural event? This question does not arise from an artificial web of thought. It arises quite naturally in a certain state of the soul. And one can feel that the soul would lose something of what it is supposed to be if it were not faced with the two possibilities: Freedom or necessity of will, if it did not see itself confronted with the greatest possible seriousness of question. The aim of this paper is to show that the experiences of the soul which man must undergo through the second question depend on the point of view he is able to adopt in relation to the first. The attempt is made to prove that there is a view of the human being that can support the rest of knowledge; and the further attempt is made to indicate that with this view full justification is gained for the idea of the freedom of the will, if only the area of the soul is found in which the free will can unfold.
[ 2 ] The view referred to here with regard to these two questions presents itself as one which, once gained, can become a part of the living life of the soul itself. It is not a theoretical answer which, once acquired, one carries with one merely as a conviction preserved by memory. For the way of thinking on which this book is based, such an answer would only be an apparent one. It is not such a ready-made, finished answer that is given, but reference is made to a field of experience of the soul in which, through the inner activity of the soul itself, the question is answered anew in every moment in which man needs it. Whoever has once found the area of the soul in which these questions develop, the real contemplation of this area gives him what he needs for these two riddles of life in order to walk with what he has attained further into the breadths and depths of the enigmatic life into which need and destiny prompt him to walk. - An insight that proves its justification and validity through its own life and through the relationship of this own life with the whole of human soul life seems to have been demonstrated.
[ 3 ] This is what I thought about the content of this book when I wrote it down twenty-five years ago. Even today, I have to write down sentences like this if I want to characterize the main ideas of the book. When I wrote it down at that time, I limited myself to not saying more than what is connected in the strictest sense with the two root questions identified. If anyone should be surprised that in this book there is still no reference to the field of the spiritual world of experience, which has been presented in my later writings, let him consider that at that time I did not want to give a description of the results of spiritual research, but first wanted to build the foundation on which such results can rest. This "Philosophy of Freedom" contains no such special results, just as little as it contains special scientific results; but what it does contain, in my opinion, cannot be dispensed with by those who seek certainty for such knowledge. What is said in the book may also be acceptable to some people who, for some reason or other, do not want to have anything to do with my research results in the humanities. But for those who can regard these spiritual scientific results as something that attracts them, what has been attempted here will also be important. It is this: to show how an impartial contemplation, which extends only over the two questions indicated as fundamental to all cognition, leads to the view that man lives within a true spiritual world. The aim of this book is to justify a knowledge of the spiritual realm before entering into spiritual experience. And this justification is undertaken in such a way that nowhere in these explanations need one look at the experiences I later assert in order to find what is said here acceptable, if one can or likes to go into the nature of these explanations themselves.
[ 4 ] So, on the one hand, this book seems to me to occupy a completely separate position from my actual writings on the humanities; and on the other hand, it seems to be connected with them in the most fundamental way. All this has prompted me now, after twenty-five years, to republish the contents of the book almost completely unchanged. I have only made longer additions to a whole series of sections. The experiences I have had with misunderstandings of what I have said have made such extensive additions seem necessary. I have only made changes where what I wanted to say a quarter of a century ago seemed awkward today. (Only a malicious person would find it necessary to say that I have changed my basic convictions from what I have changed.)
[ 5 ] The book has been sold out for many years. Despite the fact that, as can be seen from what I have just said, it seems to me that what I said twenty-five years ago about the marked questions should still be said today, I hesitated for a long time before completing this new edition. I asked myself again and again whether I would not have to deal here or there with the numerous philosophical views that have come to light since the publication of the first edition. I have recently been prevented from doing this in the way I would have liked by the demands of my purely humanistic research. However, after looking around as thoroughly as possible in the philosophical work of the present, I have convinced myself that, as tempting as such a discussion would be in itself, it cannot be included in my book. What seemed to me necessary to be said about more recent philosophical trends from the point of view adopted in the "Philosophy of Freedom" can be found in the second volume of my "Riddles of Philosophy".
April 1918
Rudolf Steiner