The Roots of Education
GA 309
13 April 1924, Bern
Lecture One
New Education and the Whole Human Being
Here in Bern, I have spoken to you often about anthroposophy in general. And it is a special pleasure to be able now to speak to you in the spirit of anthroposophy about education—the sphere of life that must lie closest to the human heart. We must develop an art of education that can lead us out of the social chaos into which we have fallen during the last few years and decades. Our chances of overcoming this chaos are very slight. In fact, one is tempted to say that there is no escaping this chaos unless we find a way to bring spirituality into human souls through education, so that human beings may find a way to progress and to further the evolution of civilization out of the spirit itself.
We feel confident that this is the right way to proceed, because in our hearts we know that the world is created in spirit and arises from spirit. Therefore, human creation will be fruitful only when it springs from the fountainhead of spirit itself. To achieve such fruitful creation from spirit, however, people must also be educated and taught in the spirit. I believe that anthroposophy in fact has much to say about the nature of education and teaching, therefore, it gives me great satisfaction that I can present these lectures here.
There are many all over the world who feel that a new impetus of some kind is needed in education and teaching. It is true that the nineteenth century was full of progressive ideas and much was done to further schooling and education. However, a recent tendency of our civilization has been that individuals are seldom brought into touch with their own humanity. For many centuries we have been able to record the most wonderful progress in the realm of natural science and in its resulting technology.
We have also seen that a certain worldview has gradually crystallized out of that scientific progress. The world as a whole—which includes the human being—seems to be viewed exclusively in terms of what the senses tell us about natural phenomena, and what the intellect, which is related to the brain, tells us about the realm of the senses. Nevertheless, all of our recently acquired knowledge about the natural world does not, in fact, lead us to the human being; this is not clearly recognized today. Although many people feel this to be the situation, they are unprepared to acknowledge that—regardless of all that the modern age has provided us in terms of information about the natural world—we are still no closer to understanding the human being.
This impossibility is most likely to be felt when we attempt to understand the growing human being, the child. We sense a barrier between the teacher and the child. Anthroposophy, which is based on a real and comprehensive understanding of the human being, would hear this heartfelt appeal coming from all sides—not by establishing theories on education, but by showing men and women as teachers how to enter the school’s practical life. Anthroposophic education is really the practical life of the school, and our lectures should provide practical details about how to deal with the various details of teaching.
Something else must come first, however; for if we were to begin by speaking of practical details in this way, then the spirit that gives birth to all this could not reveal itself. Therefore, you must kindly permit me to speak today of this spirit of anthroposophic education as a kind of introduction. What we have to say about it will be based on a comprehensive, truly penetrating knowledge of the human being—the active force of anthroposophy in education.
A penetrating knowledge of the human being—what does this mean to us? If a growing human being, a child, stands before us, it is not enough, as I have said, to make certain rules for teaching and educating this child, merely conforming to rules as one would when dealing with a technical problem. This will not lead to good teaching. We must bring an inner fire and enthusiasm to our work; we must have impulses that are not transmitted intellectually from teacher to child according to certain rules, but ones that pass intimately from teacher to child. An educator’s whole being must be at work, not just the thinking person; the person who feels and the person who wills must also play their roles.
Recently, the thinking and worldview of natural science have taken hold of people more deeply and closer to the marrow than they like to think. Even those not specifically trained as scientists think, feel, and act scientifically. This is not acceptable for teachers, since scientific thinking provides an understanding of only one member of the whole human being—the physical body, or body of the senses. But this is only one member of the entire human being, and anthroposophy shows us that when we have genuine knowledge of the human being, we see that the human being possesses three clearly distinguished members—physical body, soul, and spirit.
We see the whole human being only when we have enough wisdom and knowledge to recognize the soul’s true nature as clearly as we recognize the physical body. We must also be able to recognize the human spirit as an individual being. Nevertheless, the connections among the body, soul, and spirit in the child are not the same as in the adult; and it is precisely a loosening of the connection with the physical body that allows us to observe the soul and spirit of the child as the greatest wonder of knowledge and practical life in human existence.
The First Stage of Childhood
Let’s look for a moment at the tiny child and see how that child is born into the world. Here we see a genuinely magical process at work. We see how spirit, springing from the innermost being of the little child, flows into undefined features, chaotic movements, and every action, which seem still disjointed and disconnected. Order and form come into the child’s eyes, facial expressions and physical movements, and the child’s features become increasingly expressive. In the eyes and other features, the spirit manifests, working from within to the surface, and the soul—which permeates the entire body—manifests.
When we look at these things with a serious, unbiased attitude, we see how they come about by observing the growing child; in this way we may gaze reverently into the wonders and enigmas of cosmic and human existence. As we watch in this way while the child develops, we learn to distinguish three clearly differentiated stages. The only reason such stages are not generally distinguished is because such discernment depends on deep, intimate knowledge; and people today, with their crude scientific concepts, are not going to trouble themselves by acquiring this kind of intimate knowledge.
Soul and Spirit Build the “Second” Human Being
The first significant change in a child’s life occurs around the seventh year when the second teeth appear. The outer physical process of the change of teeth is itself very interesting. First we have the baby teeth, then the others force their way through as the first are pushed out. A superficial look at this process will see no farther than the actual change of teeth. But when we look into it more deeply (through means I will describe later in these lectures) we discover that this transformation can be observed throughout the child’s body, though more delicately than the actual change of teeth. The change of teeth is the most physical and basic expression of a subtle process that in fact occurs throughout the body.
What really happens? Anyone can see how the human organism develops. We cut our nails, our hair, and we find that our skin flakes off. This demonstrates how physical substance is cast off from the surface as it is constantly pushed out from within. This pushing from within—which we observe in the change of teeth—is present throughout the whole human body. More exacting knowledge shows us that indeed the child gradually forced out the body received through inheritance; it was cast out. The first teeth are forced out, and likewise the child’s whole initial body is forced out.
At the change of teeth, a child stands before us with a body that—in contrast to the body at birth—is entirely formed anew. The body from birth has been cast out as are the first teeth, and a new body is formed. What is the nature of this more intimate process? The child’s first body was inherited. It is the result of a collaboration between the father and mother, so to speak, and it is formed from the earthly physical conditions. But, just what is this physical body? It is the model that the Earth provides to the person as a model for true development as a human being. The soul and spirit aspect of a human being descends from a realm of soul and spirit where it lived prior to conception and birth. Before we became earthly beings in a physical body, we were all beings of soul and spirit in a soul and spirit realm. What we are given by our parents through inherited physical substance unites in embryonic life with what descends from a higher realm as pure spirit and soul. Spirit and soul take hold of the physical body, whose origin is in the stream of inheritance. This physical body becomes its model, and on this model an entirely new human organism is formed, while the inherited organism is forced out.
Thus, when we consider a child between birth and the change of teeth we can say that the physical body’s existence is due to physical inheritance alone. But, two other forces then combine to work on this physical body. First is the force of those elements the human being brought with it to Earth; the second is assimilated from the matter and substance of the Earth itself. By the time the teeth change, the human being has fashioned a second body modeled after the inherited body, and that second body is the product of the human soul and spirit.
Having arrived at such conclusions by observing the human being more intimately, one will naturally be aware of objections that may be raised; such objections are obvious. One is bound to ask: Can’t you see that a likeness to the parents often appears after the change of teeth—that, therefore, a person is still subject to the laws of inheritance, even after the change of teeth? One could raise a number of similar objections.
Let’s consider just this one: We have a model that comes from the stream of inheritance. On this model the spirit and soul develop the second human being. But when something is built from a model we don’t expect to find a complete dissimilarity to the model; thus, it should be clear that the human spirit and soul use the model’s existence to build up the second human organism in its likeness.
Nevertheless, when you can perceive and recognize what really occurs, you discover something. Certain children come into their second organism between nine and eleven, and this second body is almost identical to the initial, inherited organism. With other children, one may notice a dissimilarity between the second organism and the first, and it is clear that something very different is working its way from the center of their being. In truth, we see every variation between these two extremes. While the human spirit and soul aspect is developing the second organism, it tries most of all to conform to the being it brings with it from the realm of spirit and soul.
A conflict thus arises between what is intended to built as the second organism and what the first organism received through inheritance. Depending on whether thy have had a stronger or weaker spiritual and soul existence (in the following lectures we shall see why this is), human beings can either give their second organism an individual form that is strongly impregnated with soul forces, or, if they descend from the spiritual world with weaker forces, stay as closely as possible to the model.
Consider what we must deal with to educate children during the first period of life between birth and the change of teeth. We are inspired with great reverence when we see how divine spiritual forces work down from supersensible realms! We witness them working daily and weekly, from month to month and year to year, during the first phases of children’s lives, and we see how such work carries them through to forming a second individual body. In education we participate in this work of spirit and soul; for human physical existence, we continue what divine spiritual forces began. We participate in divine labor.
The Child as a Sense Organ
These matters require more than strictly intellectual understanding; one’s whole being must comprehend them. Indeed, when we are brought face to face with the creative forces of the world, we may sense the magnitude of our task in education, especially during the early years. But I would like to point out to you that the way spirit and soul enter the work of creating a second human organism shows us that, in the child, the formation of the body, the activity of the soul, and the creation of the spirit are a unity. Whatever happens while forming a new organism and pushing out the old involves a unity of spirit, soul, and body.
Consequently, children reveal themselves very differently than do adults. We may observe this clearly in individual instances. As adults, when we eat something sweet, it is the tongue and palate that perceive its sweetness; a little later, the experience of sweetness ceases when the sweet substance has gone into another part of the body. As adults, we do not follow it farther with our taste. This is very different for a child, in whom taste permeates the whole organism; children do not taste only with the tongue and palate but with the whole organism. The sweetness is drawn throughout the organism. In fact, the whole child is a sensory organ.
In essence, what is a sensory organ? Let’s consider the human eye. Colors make an impression on the eye. If we properly consider what is involved in human seeing, one has to say that will and perception are one in the human eye. The surface is involved—the periphery of the human being. During the first years of life, however, between birth and the change of teeth, such activity permeates the whole organism, though in a delicate way. The child’s whole organism views itself as one all-inclusive sense organ. This is why all impressions from the environment affect children very differently than they would an adult. An expression of the soul element in the human being—the element of human morality—is occurring in the environment, and this can be seen with the eye.
The Effects of the Teacher’s Temperament on Children
Subconsciously—even unconsciously—children have a delicate and intimate capacity for perceiving what is expressed in every movement and act of those around them. If a choleric person expresses fury in the presence of a child and allows the child to see this in the unconscious way I described, then, believe me, we are very mistaken to believe that the child sees only the outer activity. Children have a clear impression of what is contained within these moral acts, even when it is an unconscious impression. Sense impressions of the eye are also unconscious. Impressions that are not strictly sensory impressions, but expressions of the moral and soul life, flow into a child exactly the way colors flow into the eye, because the child’s organism is a sense organ.
This organism, however, has such a delicate structure that every impression permeates all of it. The first impression a child receives from any moral manifestation is a soul impression. For a child, however, the soul always works down into the bodily nature. Whether it be fear or joy and delight that a child experiences in the environment, all this passes—not crudely but in a subtle and delicate way—into the processes of growth, circulation, and digestion. Children who live in constant terror of what may come their way as expressions of fury and anger from a choleric person, experience something in the soul that immediately penetrates the breathing, the circulation of the blood, and even the digestive activities. This is tremendously significant. In childhood we cannot speak only of physical education, because soul education also means educating the body; everything in the soul element is metamorphosed into the body—it becomes body.
We will realize the significance of this only when, through genuine knowledge of the human being, we do more than merely look at children and imprint certain educational maxims on them, and instead consider all of human earthly life. This is more difficult than merely observing children. We may record observations regarding memory, thinking powers, sensory functions of the eye, ear, and so on, but such records are made for the moment or, at most, for a short while. But this has not helped us in any way toward true knowledge of the human being as such.
When we look at a plant, something is already contained there in the seed that takes root and, after a long time, will appear as blossom and fruit. Similarly, in children before the change of teeth, when the bodily nature is susceptible to the soul’s influences, there are seeds of happiness and unhappiness, health and sickness, which will affect all of life until death. As teachers and educators, whatever we allow to flow into children during their first phase of life will work down into the blood, breathing, and digestion; it is like a seed that may come to fruition only in the form of health or sickness when they are forty or fifty years old. It is in fact true that the way educators act toward the little child creates the predispositions for happiness or unhappiness, sickness or health.
This is particularly noticeable when we observe in detail the effects of teachers on the children, based on actual life events. These phenomena may be observed just as well as the phenomena of botany or physics in laboratories, but we seldom see this. Let us consider individual examples. Let us consider, for instance, the teacher’s relationship to a child in school. Consider the teacher’s temperament. We may know that, due to temperament, a choleric teacher may be energetic, but also quick-tempered and easily angered. A melancholic teacher may be the kind of person who withdraws into the self—an introvert who is self-occupied and avoids the world. A sanguine teacher may be quick to receive outer impressions, flitting from one impression to the next. Or, we may find a phlegmatic person who allows things to slide, someone indifferent to everything, who remains unaffected by outer impressions, generally gliding over things.
Let’s imagine for the moment that a teachers’ training college did nothing to moderate these temperaments and prepare teachers to function well in the school life—that these temperaments were allowed full and total expression with no restraint. The choleric temperament—let us imagine that, before the change of teeth, a child is exposed to a choleric temperament. If a teacher or educator lets loose with a temperament of this kind, it permanently affects the child’s soul, leaving its mark on the circulatory system and all that constitutes the inner rhythmic life. Such effects do not initially penetrate very deeply; really, they are only there in seed, but this seed grows and grows, as all seeds do. It sometimes happens that, at forty or fifty years of age, circulatory disorders of the rhythmic system appear as a direct result of a teacher’s unrestrained choleric temperament. Indeed, we do not educate children only for childhood, but for their whole earthly existence and even, as we shall see later, for the time beyond.
Or, let’s imagine a melancholic giving rein to that particular temperament—someone who was not motivated during teacher training to harmonize it and find an appropriate way to channel it into working with children. Such teachers succumb to their own melancholy in their interactions with children. But by living, feeling, and thinking such inner melancholy, such a person continually withholds from children exactly what should flow from teacher to child—that is, warmth. This warmth, which is so often missing in education, acts first as a warmth of soul, and then passes into the body, primarily into the digestive system. This quickens the seed of certain tendencies that appear later in life as all kinds of disorders and blood diseases.
Or consider the phlegmatic, a person who is indifferent to interactions with the child. A very peculiar relationship arises between them—not exactly a coldness, but an extremely watery element is active in the soul realm between the child and such a teacher. The foundation is not strong enough for the proper interplay of soul between teacher and child. The child is insufficiently aroused to inner activity. If you observe someone who developed under the influence of a phlegmatic person, and if you follow the course of that person’s life into later years, you will often notice a tendency to brain weakness, poor circulation in the brain, or a dulling of brain activity.
And now let us look at the effects of sanguine people on the child—those who allow their sanguine nature to get out of hand. Such an individual responds strongly to every impression, but impressions pass quickly. There is a kind of inner life, but the person’s own nature is taken right out into the surroundings. Children cannot keep up with such a teacher, who rushes from one impression to the next, and fails to stimulate the child properly. In order to arouse sufficient inner activity in a child, the teacher must lovingly hold that child to one impression for a certain period of time. If we observe a child who has grown up under the influence of an uncontrolled sanguine nature, we see in later life that there is a certain lack of vital force—an adult life that lacks strength and content.
Thus, if we have the ability to see it (and education depends on a capacity for subtle perception), we recognize various types of people in their fortieth or fiftieth year of life, and we are able to say whether a person has been influenced by the temperament of an educator who was melancholic, phlegmatic, choleric, or sanguine.
The Lasting Effects of a Teacher’s Actions
I mention these things in introducing my lectures, not to give instructions on how to work out these things for training teachers, but to show you how actions meant to affect the child’s soul life do not just remain in the soul, but go all the way into the physical nature. To educate the soul life of children means to educate them for their whole earthly life, even in their bodily nature.
Anthroposophy is often criticized for wanting to speak of spirit as well as soul. There are many today who become very critical and antagonistic whenever they even hear the word spirit, and anthroposophy is easily assumed to be a kind of fantasy. Anthroposophists are accused of reducing the reality of the sense world to a kind of vague abstraction, and those who speak rationally of spiritual things should naturally be unconcerned with such abstraction.
In fact, what anthroposophy attempts in education is to apply the correct principles for bodily education, since we understand that precisely during the first stage of life, the entire physical nature of a child is influenced by soul impulses. Anyone who consciously tries to discover how all physical activity is based fundamentally on soul and spirit can still choose to be a materialist when working on child development between birth and the change of teeth. The way matter works in a child is contained in a unity of soul and spirit. No one can understand matter in a child unless soul and spirit are considered valid. Indeed, soul and spirit are revealed in the outer appearance of matter.
The ability to educate necessitates a sense of responsibility. The considerations I have presented to you strongly arouse one’s sense of responsibility as a matter of heartfelt concern. If you take up educational work knowing what affects the young child and that it will continue through all of life as happiness or unhappiness, sickness or health, such knowledge may initially seem like a burden on the soul; but it will also spur you on to develop forces and capacities and above all, as a teacher, a mental attitude that is strong enough to sow “seeds” of soul in the young child that will blossom only later in life, even in old age.
This knowledge of the human being is what anthroposophy presents as the basis for an art of education. It is not merely knowledge of what we find in a human being in a single stage of life—for example, in childhood; it springs from contemplating all of human earthly life. What, in fact, is a human life on Earth? When we view a person before us at any given moment, we may speak of seeing an organism, since each detail is in harmony with the formation of the whole.
To gain insight into the inner connections of size or form in the individual members of the human organism—how they fit together, how they harmonize to form both a unity and a multiplicity—let us look, for example, at the little finger. Although I am only looking at the little finger, I also get some idea of the shape of the earlobe, since the earlobe’s form has a certain connection with the form of the little finger, and so on. Both the smallest and the largest members of the human organism receive their shape from the whole, and they are also related in form to every other member. Consequently, we cannot understand, for example, an organ in the head unless we see it in relation and in harmony with an organ in the leg or foot. This also applies to the spatial organism—the organism spread out in space.
Besides having a spatial organism, however, the human being has also a time organism. We have seen that within the space organism, the earlobe receives its form from the body as a whole, as well as from the form of, say, the little finger or knee; but the time organism must also be considered. The configuration of a person’s soul in the fiftieth year—the person’s physical health or sickness, cheerfulness or depression, clarity or dullness of mind—is most intimately connected with what was present there in the tenth, seventh, or fourth year of life. Just as the members of a spatial organism have a certain relationship to one another, so do the members of a time organism separated from one another by time.
From one perspective, it may be asserted that when we are five years old, everything within us is already in harmony with what we will be at forty. Of course, a trivial objection may be raised that one might die young, but it doesn’t apply, since other considerations enter in. Additionally, as a spatial organism, a human being is also organized in time. And if you ever find a finger lying around somewhere, it would have to have been very recently dislodged to look like a finger at all—very soon, it would no longer be a finger. A limb separated from the organism soon shrivels and ceases to be a human limb. A finger separated from the human organism is not a finger at all—it could never live apart from the body, but becomes nothing, and since it cannot exist on its own, it is not real. A finger is real only while united with the whole physical body between birth and death.
Such considerations make it clear that in all our teaching, we must consider the time organism. Imagine what would happen to the space organism if it were treated the way people often treat their time-organism. Let say, for example, that we put some substance into a man’s stomach, and it destroys his head. Imagine, however, that we examined only the stomach and never looked at what happened to this substance once it dispersed into the organism, where it eventually reached the head. To understand the human organism, we must be able to examine the process that the substance goes through in the human stomach and also see what it means for the head. In passing from the stomach to the head the substance must continually alter and change; it must be flexible.
In the time organism, we continually sin against children. We teach them to have clear, sharp ideas and become dissatisfied if their ideas are flexible and not sharply defined. Our goal is to teach children in such a way that they retain in their mind what we teach them, so they can tell us just what we told them. We are often especially gratified when a child can reproduce exactly what we taught several years later. But that’s like having a pair of shoes made for a child of three and expecting them to fit when the child is ten years old. In reality, our task is to give children living, flexible ideas that can grow in the soul just as the outer physical limbs grow with the body. It is much less trouble to give a child definitions of various things to memorize and retain, but that is like expecting the shoes of a three-year- old to fit a child of ten.
We ourselves must take part in the inner activities of children’s souls, and we must consider it a joy to give them something inwardly flexible and elastic. Just as their physical limbs grow, so can their ideas, feelings, impulses, and soon they themselves are able to make something new out of what we gave them. This cannot happen unless we cultivate inner joy in ourselves toward growth and change. We have no use for pedantry or sharply defined ideas of life. We can use only active, life forming forces—forces of growth and increase. Teachers who have a feeling for this growing, creative life have already found their relationship to the children because they contain life within themselves, and such life can then pass on to the children who demand it of them. This is what we need most of all. Much that is dead in our pedagogy and educational systems must be transformed into life. What we need, therefore, is a knowledge of the human being that doesn’t say only that a human being is like this or like that. We need knowledge of the human being that affects the whole human being, just as physical nourishment affects the blood. Blood circulates in human beings, and we need human knowledge that gives blood to our souls also; it would not only make us sensible, clever, and intelligent, but also enthusiastic and inwardly flexible, able to enkindle love in us. This would be an art of education that springs from true knowledge of the human being, borne by love.
These have been the introductory remarks I wanted to present about the essential ideas that an art of education must get from anthroposophy. In future lectures we will see how the spirit of anthroposophic education can be realized in the practical details of school.
Erster Vortrag
Sehr verehrte Anwesende, vor allen Dingen möchte ich für die freundliche und liebevolle Begrüßung meinen herzlichen Dank aussprechen. Ich durfte ja gerade aus dem Gebiet anthroposophischer Weltanschauung heraus von diesem Ort hier in Bern seit vielen Jahren reden. Und es ist ja auch hier eine Gruppe anthroposophischer Freunde, welche für die Pflege anthroposophischer Weltanschauung ihre Opfer bringen und ihre Persönlichkeit einsetzen. Das alles scheint mir in die Empfindungen aufgenommen werden zu müssen, wenn ich für die liebevollen Worte, die hier gesprochen worden sind, herzlichen Dank sage. Denn es gewährt mir schon eine ganz besondere Befriedigung, nachdem ich so oftmals hier in Bern über Anthroposophie im allgemeinen gesprochen habe, über das pädagogische Gebiet aus dem Geiste der Anthroposophie heraus nunmehr sprechen zu können, jenes Gebiet, das ja vor allen Dingen den Menschen auf dem Herzen liegen muß. Denn wieviel hängt ab davon, daß tatsächlich gewonnen werden könne eine solche Kunst der Erziehung und des Unterrichts, daß die Menschen erstens über manches hinauskommen, was ja in deutlicher Weise zeigt, wie sehr wir in den letzten Jahren und Jahrzehnten in eine Art sozialen Chaos hineingekommen sind. Und aus diesem sozialen Chaos wird ja kaum etwas anderes herausführen können, ja man möchte sagen, ganz gewiß nicht etwas anderes herausführen können, als lediglich, wenn es uns gelingt, in die Seelen der Menschen Geistigkeit hinein zu erziehen, so daß die Menschen aus dem Geiste heraus den Weg finden zum Fortschritt, zur Fortentwickelung der Zivilisation aus dem Geiste heraus; was uns so vertrauensvoll aus dem Grunde ansprechen muß, weil ja schließlich die Welt im Geiste und aus dem Geiste heraus geschaffen ist, und so auch menschliches Schaffen nur aus dem Urquell des Geistes heraus fruchtbar geschehen kann. Will aber der Mensch zu solchem fruchtbaren Schaffen aus dem Geiste heraus kommen, so muß er im Geiste erzogen und unterrichtet werden. Weil ich nun glaube, daß Anthroposophie in der Tat manches zu sagen hat über Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesen, gereicht es mir zur tiefen Befriedigung, hier diesen Kursus halten zu können, und aus dieser Befriedigung heraus ist mein Dank für die freundlichen, liebevollen Begrüßungsworte ausgesprochen.
Nun, es fühlen heute zahlreiche Menschen überall in der Welt, daß das Erziehungs-, das Unterrichtswesen in einem gewissen Sinne einen neuen Einschlag erhalten muß. Nicht, als ob nicht außerordentlich viel geschehen wäre im Laufe des an Fortschritten so fruchtbaren 19. Jahrhunderts gerade für das Unterrichts- und Erziehungswesen, sondern vielmehr aus dem Grunde, weil die neuere Zivilisation eine Richtung genommen hat, welche eigentlich den Menschen wenig an den Menschen herankommen läßt. Wir haben seit Jahrhunderten die großartigsten Fortschritte zu verzeichnen auf dem Gebiet der Naturwissenschaft und auf den Gebieten der Technik, die aus den Naturwissenschaften heraus erblühten. Wir haben auch gesehen, wie eine Art Weltanschauung aus diesen naturwissenschaftlichen Fortschritten heraus sich allmählich in der Zivilisation niedergeschlagen hat. Wir haben gesehen, wie das Weltgebäude einschließlich des Menschen gedacht wird im Sinne desjenigen, was die Sinne über die Naturerscheinungen und Naturwesen lehren, und was der an das Gehirn gebundene Verstand über die Sinneswelt auszusagen vermag. Allein, was noch nicht eine klare, deutliche Erkenntnis heute ist, unzählige Menschen fühlen es, wollen es sich oftmals nur nicht gestehen, daß man mit all denjenigen Erkenntnissen, die die neuere Zeit gewonnen hat über den großen Umkreis der Natur, eigentlich nicht an den Menschen herankommen kann.
Und dieses Nicht-herankommen-Können, es muß ja ganz besonders gefühlt werden, wenn herangekommen werden soll an den werdenden Menschen, an das Kind. Daß etwas Fremdes sich gerade hineinschiebt zwischen den Lehrenden, Unterrichtenden und das Kind, das wird empfunden. Anthroposophie möchte auf der Grundlage wahrer und umfassender Menschenerkenntnis diesem Herzensruf, der von so vielen Seiten kommt, Rechnung tragen; Rechnung tragen in der Art, daß sie nicht irgendwie Theorien aufstellt über Pädagogik und Didaktik, sondern Rechnung tragen in dem Sinne, daß sie unmittelbar den Menschen dahin bringt, in die Schulpraxis einzugreifen. Anthroposophische Pädagogik ist eigentliche Schulpraxis. Daher müßte .man im Grunde genommen, wenn man über anthroposophische Pädagogik reden will, die einzelnen praktischen Handhabungen im Unterricht vielleicht beispielsweise besprechen, allein da würde zunächst der Geist, aus dem das alles herausgeboren ist, sich nicht offenbaren können. Daher müssen Sie es mir schon gestatten, daß ich heute wenigstens einleitungsweise spreche über diesen Geist anthroposophischer Pädagogik aus umfassender Menschenerkenntnis heraus, aber auch aus eindringlicher Menschenerkenntnis aus dem anthroposophisch-pädagogischen Wirken.
Eindringliche Menschenerkenntnis! Was hat man sich darunter vorzustellen? Wenn man dem Menschen, namentlich dem werdenden Menschen, dem Kinde, wie ich schon sagte, gegenübertritt, kann man nicht auskommen damit, daß man gewisse Regeln hat darüber, wie es gut ist, zu erziehen und zu unterrichten, und dann sich etwa nach diesen Regeln richten will, wie man die Sache in der Technik tun kann. Das führt niemals zu einer wirklichen Schulpraxis. Zur Schulpraxis braucht man im Handhaben des Unterrichts, im Handhaben der Erziehung inneres Feuer, inneren Enthusiasmus; man braucht Impulse, die nicht verstandesmäßig nach Regeln von dem Lehrenden und Erziehenden auf das Kind übergehen, sondern die in intimer Weise hinüberwirken von dem Erziehenden oder Lehrenden auf das Kind. Der ganze Mensch muß als Erzieher wirken, nicht bloß der denkende Mensch; der fühlende Mensch muß es, der wollende Mensch muß es.
Die naturwissenschaftliche Gesinnung und Weltanschauung ist viel mehr der neueren Menschheit in die Glieder gefahren, als man denkt. Auch derjenige, der keine besondere Bildung in Naturwissenschaft hat, denkt, fühlt und will eigentlich, man möchte sagen, auf naturwissenschaftliche Art. Das kann man in der Schule eben nicht; denn mit dieser naturwissenschaftlichen Art, mit dieser naturwissenschaftlichen Gesinnung erreicht man nur ein Glied der menschlichen Wesenheit: den physisch-sinnlichen Leib. Aber das ist eben nur ein Glied dieser menschlichen Wesenheit. Und gerade Anthroposophie zeigt, daß der ganze Mensch von einer wahren Menschenerkenntnis angeschaut werden kann nach drei deutlich voneinander unterschiedenen Gliedern: nach dem körperlichen, physischen Glied, nach dem seelischen Gliede, nach dem geistigen Gliede. Und nur dann sehen wir auf den ganzen Menschen hin, wenn wir ebensoviel Sinn und Erkenntnisfähigkeit haben, die Seele zu erkennen in ihrer ursprünglichen Eigenart wie den physischen Leib; und wenn wir weiter ebensoviel Sinn und Erkenntnisfähigkeit haben, den Geist im Menschen als selbständige Wesenheit zu erkennen. Aber im Kinde sind eben auf andere Art Leib, Seele und Geist miteinander verbunden als später beim erwachsenen Menschen. Und gerade dieses Heraustreten aus der Verbindung mit dem physischen Leibe läßt die Beobachtung von Seele und Geist am Kinde, ich möchte sagen, als das größte Erkenntnis- und lebenspraktische Wunder im menschlichen Dasein erkennen.
Sehen wir einmal auf das kleine Kind hin, wie es in die Welt hereingeboren wird. Zauberhaft ist es, wie in die unbestimmten Gesichtszüge, in die chaotischen Bewegungen, in all dasjenige, was von dem Kinde ausgeht und noch nicht zusammenzugehören scheint, wie in all das, hervorquellend aus dem tiefsten Inneren, Geist getragen wird; wie Ordnung hineinkommt in den Blick, in die Bewegung der Gesichtsglieder und die anderen Glieder des menschlichen Leibes, wie immer ausdrucksvoller und ausdrucksvoller die Gesichtszüge werden; wie immer mehr in Auge und Gesichtszügen der aus dem Inneren an die Oberfläche arbeitende Geist sich zeigt, die das ganze Leibliche durchdringende Seele sich offenbart. Wie das alles geschieht, das kann derjenige, der unbefangen und ernsten Sinnes solches zu betrachten vermag, nicht anders ansehen, als indem er gerade durch das, was das werdende Kind ihm sagt, mit scheuer Ehrfurcht hineinblickt in die Wunder und Rätsel des Welten- und des menschlichen Daseins.
Und wenn wir sehen, wie dieses Kind sich entwickelt, so zeigt sich uns wiederum, wie das Leben dieses Kindes gegliedert ist in einzelne Lebensepochen, die deutlich voneinander unterschieden sind, die nur gewöhnlich nicht unterschieden werden, weil sie in intimer Erkenntnis unterschieden werden müssen, und weil man heute aus den groben naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffen heraus sich nicht gern zu solch intimer Erkenntnis bequemt.
Ein erster bedeutsamer Umwandlungsprozeß geht mit dem Kinde vor sich ungefähr um das 7. Jahr herum, wenn das Kind die zweiten Zähne bekommt. Schon der äußere physische Prozeß dieses ZweiteZähne-Bekommens ist ja interessant genug: wie sie da sind, die ersten Zähne, die anderen sich nachschieben, wie die ersten ausgestoßen werden. Solange man nur oberflächlich diesen Vorgang ansieht, kann man beim Zahnwechsel stehenbleiben. Wenn man aber tiefer hineinschaut mit den Mitteln, die gerade in diesem Kursus besprochen werden sollen, wird man gewahr, wie da, wenn auch in feinerer Weise als beim Zahnwechsel selber, in dieser Umwandlungsphase durch den ganzen Körper des Kindes etwas vorgeht. Dasjenige, was nur in gröbster, radikalster Weise im Zahnwechsel sich zeigt, das geht eigentlich im ganzen Körper vor sich. Denn, was geschieht da eigentlich? Sie können ja alle sehen, wie eigentlich der menschliche Organismus sich entwickelt: Sie schneiden sich die Nägel, Sie schneiden die Haare, Sie finden, daß die Haut abschuppt. Das alles zeigt, daß an der Oberfläche physische Substanz abgestoßen wird, und daß sie von innen heraus nachgeschoben wird. Dieses Nachschieben, das wir beim Zahnwechsel sehen, ist beim ganzen Menschenleib vorhanden. Eine genauere Erkenntnis zeigt uns, daß in der Tat das Kind den Leib, den es durch Vererbung mitbekommen hat, jetzt nach und nach ausgetrieben hat, ausgestoßen hat. So wie die ersten Zähne abgestoßen sind, so ist der ganze erste Leib abgestoßen. Und in der Epoche des Zahnwechsels steht das Kind vor uns mit einem gegenüber dem Geburtsleib völlig neugebildeten Leib. Der Geburtsleib ist wie die ersten Zähne abgestoßen, ein neuer Leib ist gebildet.
Was ist da im Intimeren geschehen? Den ersten Leib, den das Kind erhalten hat, hat es aus der Vererbung erhalten. Er ist sozusagen das Produkt desjenigen, was durch das Zusammenwirken von Vater und Mutter geschehen ist. Er bildet sich aus den physischen Erdenverhältnissen heraus. Aber was ist er, dieser physische Leib? Er ist das Modell, das die Erde dem Menschen gibt für seine eigentliche menschliche Entwickelung. Denn das Seelisch-Geistige des Menschen, es steigt ja herunter aus einer seelisch-geistigen Welt, in der es war, bevor die Empfängnis und die Geburt eingetreten sind. Wir alle waren, bevor wir Erdenmenschen geworden sind im physischen Leib, geistig-seelische Wesenheiten in einer geistig-seelischen Welt. Und dasjenige, was uns an physischer Vererbungssubstanz Vater und Mutter geben, das vereinigt sich im Embryonalleben mit demjenigen, was rein geistig-seelisch aus einer höheren Welt heruntersteigt. Der geistig-seelische Mensch ergreift den physischen Leib, der aus der Vererbungsströmung herrührt. Der wird sein Modell, und nach diesem Modell wird jetzt ein völlig neuer menschlicher Organismus mit Abstoßung des vererbten Organismus gebildet. So daß, wenn wir auf das Kind hinschauen zwischen der Geburt und dem Zahnwechsel, wir sagen müssen: Da arbeitet sich hinein in den physischen Leib, der lediglich der physischen Vererbung sein Dasein verdankt, das Ergebnis des Zusammenwirkens dessen, was der Mensch mitbringt auf die Erde, mit demjenigen, was er an Stoffen und Substanzen von der Erde aufnimmt. Mit dem Zahnwechsel hat der Mensch nach dem Modell des vererbten Leibes einen zweiten Leib sich gebildet; und dieser zweite Leib ist das Produkt des seelisch-geistigen Wesens des Menschen.
Selbstverständlich kennt derjenige, der aus einer intimeren Menschenbeobachtung heraus zu solchen Ergebnissen kommt, wie ich sie jetzt ausgesprochen habe, die Einwendungen, die dagegen gemacht werden können. Diese Einwendungen sind auf der Hand liegend. Man wird selbstverständlich sagen: Zeigt sich nicht in der Ähnlichkeit mit den Eltern, die oftmals nach dem Zahnwechsel auftritt, zeigt sich da nicht, wie der Mensch auch später, nach dem Zahnwechsel, den Gesetzen der Vererbung auch weiter unterliegt? — So könnte man vieles einwenden. Aber nehmen Sie nur das Folgende: Wir haben ein Modell, das aus der Vererbungsströmung herrührt. Nach diesem Modell arbeiten jetzt Geist und Seele den zweiten Menschen aus. Da ja auch sonst nicht die Tendenz besteht, dasjenige, was nach einem Modell ausgearbeitet wird, just ganz unähnlich dem Modell auszugestalten, so ist es auch klar, daß das Geistig-Seelische die Anwesenheit des Modelles dazu benützt, den zweiten menschlichen Organismus ähnlich zu gestalten. Aber immerhin, wenn man Sinn und Erkenntnisfähigkeit hat für das, was da eigentlich vorgeht, wird man auf das Folgende kommen: Es gibt Kinder, die zeigen in ihrem 9.,10.,11. Lebensjahr, wie fast ganz ähnlich ihr zweiter Organismus — denn ein zweiter Organismus ist eben da — dem ersten, vererbten, ist. Andere Kinder zeigen, wie unähnlich dieser zweite Organismus diesem ersten wird, wie etwas ganz anderes aus dem Zentrum des Menschenwesens heraus arbeitet, als vorerst vererbt war. Alle Varianten zwischen diesen beiden Extremen treten auf im menschlichen Leben. Denn indem das Geistig-Seelische den zweiten Organismus ausarbeitet, will es vor allen Dingen der Wesenheit gehorchen, welche es mitbringt aus der geistig-seelischen Welt, wenn es heruntersteigt. Es entsteht ein Kampf zwischen dem, was den zweiten Organismus herausarbeiten soll, und dem, was der erste Organismus aus der Vererbung bekommen hat. Je nachdem der Mensch stärker oder schwächer ist — wir werden in den folgenden Vorträgen sehen, warum das so ist — aus dem geistig-seelischen Dasein, desto mehr kann er seinem zweiten Organismus eine besonders durchseelte, individuelle Gestalt geben, oder aber, wenn er schwächer herabkommt, wird er sich möglichst genau an das Modell halten.
Aber bedenken Sie, womit wir es da zu tun haben, wenn wir das Kind erziehen sollen in seinem ersten Lebensalter von der Geburt bis zum Zahnwechsel hin! Wir müssen gestehen, wir schauen ehrfurchtsvoll hin, wie die göttlich-geistigen Mächte herunterarbeiten aus übersinnlichen Welten. Wir sehen sie von Tag zu Tag, von Woche zu Woche, von Monat zu Monat, von Jahr zu Jahr in den ersten Lebensepochen herausarbeiten, so weit herausarbeiten, daß sie einen besonderen zweiten Leib bilden. Und indem wir erziehen, nehmen wir teil an dieser Arbeit des Geistig-Seelischen; wir setzen fort für das physische Menschendasein dasjenige, was die göttlich-geistigen Mächte eingeleitet haben. Wir nehmen an göttlicher Arbeit teil.
Solche Dinge dürfen nicht bloß mit dem Verstande erfaßt werden. Solche Dinge müssen mit dem ganzen Menschen erfaßt werden. Dann bekommt man vor allen Dingen ein Gefühl von der ganzen Größe der Aufgabe gegenüber den schaffenden Mächten der Welt, welche die Erziehung insbesondere im ersten kindlichen Lebensalter hat. Aber ich möchte sagen, dieser erste Anhub, den das Geistig-Seelische unternimmt, um einen zweiten menschlichen Organismus zu schaffen, der zeigt uns wirklich, wie beim Kinde körperliches Gestalten, seelisches Wirken, geistiges Schaffen eine Einheit sind. Alles das, was da geschieht im Bilden des neuen Organismus, im Abstoßen des alten, ist beim Kinde Einheit von Geist, Seele und Leib.
Daher zeigt sich das Kind in einer ganz anderen Art als später der Erwachsene. Das kann an einzelnen Erscheinungen durchaus beobachtet werden. Im erwachsenen Zustand bekommen wir irgend etwas Süßes in den Mund, unsere Zunge, unser Gaumen nimmt das Süße wahr. Allein diese Geschmackswahrnehmung hört auf, wenn die süße Substanz in einer gewissen Weise an eine gewisse Stelle des Organismus hingekommen ist. Den weiteren Verlauf verfolgen wir als erwachsene Menschen nicht mehr mit dem Geschmack. Im Kinde geht das anders. Beim Kinde geht der Geschmack durch den ganzen Organismus; es schmeckt nicht nur mit Zunge und Gaumen, es schmeckt mit dem ganzen Organismus; es zieht die Süßigkeit durch den ganzen Organismus. Das Kind ist eben ganz Sinnesorgan.
Worin besteht das Wesen eines Sinnesorganes? Nehmen wir das menschliche Auge. Farbeneindrücke werden auf das menschliche Auge gemacht. Wer dasjenige, was der Mensch beim Sehen vollbringt, richtig ansieht, der sagt: Wille und Wahrnehmung ist im Auge eines; das bleibt an der Oberfläche, an der Peripherie des Menschen. Im ersten Kindesalter, von der Geburt bis zum Zahnwechsel, geht das - allerdings in feiner Weise — durch den ganzen Organismus. Der ganze Organismus des Kindes schaut sich an wie ein umfassendes Sinnesorgan. Und daher machen alle Eindrücke, die aus der Umgebung auf das Kind wirken, ganz andere Wirkungen im kindlichen Menschen als im erwachsenen Menschen. Dasjenige, was in der Umgebung vor sich geht, was mit dem Auge geschaut werden kann, ist im Menschen der Ausdruck des menschlich Seelenhaften, der menschlichen Moralität. Das Kind hat ganz unterbewußt oder unbewußt, allerdings nicht im Bewußtsein, ein feines, intimes Wahrnehmungsvermögen für dasjenige, was sich ausspricht in jeder Bewegung, jeder Regung bei den Menschen der Umgebung. Wenn ein Jähzorniger in der Umgebung des Kindes aus dem Jähzorn heraus seine Regungen durchmacht, und in der äußeren Sinneswahrnehmung das Kind in solcher unbewußten Art schauen läßt, was er tut: oh, man täuscht sich sehr, wenn man glauben würde, daß das Kind nur diese Bewegungen sieht. Das Kind hat einen deutlichen Eindruck von dem, was in den moralischen Regungen drinnen liegt, wenn auch nicht bewußt. Das Auge hat auch keinen bewußten Sinneseindruck, sondern einen unbewußten. Alles, was sich moralisch-seelisch in unsinnlicher Weise offenbart, strömt in das Kind ein wie die Farben in das Auge, weil der ganze kindliche Organismus Sinnesorgan ist.
Aber dieser Organismus ist fein organisiert. Deshalb setzt sich jeder Eindruck fort in dem ganzen kindlichen Organismus. Zunächst ist der Eindruck, den das Kind empfindet von dem, was sich moralisch offenbart, ein seelischer Eindruck. Aber bei dem Kinde geht alles Seelische in das Leibliche hinunter. Wenn das Kind einen Schreck erfährt an den Eindrücken der Umgebung, aber ebenso alles, was an Freude und Erhebung lebt, geht über, wenn auch nicht in so grober Art, sondern in feiner Weise, in die Wachstums-, Zirkulations- und Verdauungsprozesse. Ein Kind, das jede Stunde zu fürchten hat die Eindrücke, die von einem Jähzornigen ausgehen, der jeden Augenblick einen Zorn bekommt, erlebt etwas Seelisches, das sogleich eindringt in Atmung und Blutzirkulation und auch in seine Verdauungstätigkeit. Das ist das Bedeutsame, daß wir für das kindliche Alter gar nicht sprechen können bloß von körperlicher Erziehung, weil die Seelenerziehung eine körperliche ist, weil alles Seelische sich metamorphosiert in das Körperliche, ein Körperliches wird.
Und was das für eine Bedeutung hat, wird einem erst klar, wenn man aus wirklicher Menschenerkenntnis heraus nicht bloß auf das Kind hinschaut und Erziehungs- und Unterrichtsgrundsätze prägt, sondern wenn man hinschaut auf das ganze menschliche Erdenleben. Das ist nicht so bequem wie ein bloße Beobachtung des Kindes. Eine Beobachtung des Kindes: nun, man registriert, wie das Gedächtnis ist, das Denkvermögen, die Sinneswahrnehmungen des Auges, des Ohres und so weiter; man registriert für den Augenblick oder doch für eine kurze Zeit. Aber damit hat man gar nichts getan für die Erkenntnis des Menschen. Denn geradeso wie bei der Pflanze in dem Samen, der zur Wurzel wird, schon darin liegt, was nach langer Zeit in Blüte und Frucht zum Vorschein kommt, so liegt in dem Kinde bis zum Zahnwechsel hin, weil es für alles Seelische körperlich empfänglich ist, der Keim für Glück und Unglück, für Gesundheit und Krankheit für das ganze Erdenleben bis zum Tode hin. Und dasjenige, was wir als Lehrer oder Erzieher in das Kind einströmen lassen in der ersten Lebensepoche, die hinunterwirkt in Blut und Atmung und Verdauung, das ist wie ein Keim, der manchmal erst aufgeht in Form von Gesundheit und Krankheit des Menschen im 40., 50. Lebensjahr. Ja, so ist es: Wie der Erziehende sich benimmt gegenüber dem kleinen Kinde, damit veranlagt er es zum innerlichen Glück oder Unglück, zu Gesundheit oder Krankheit.
Das zeigt sich ja insbesondere, wenn wir im einzelnen diese Wirkungen des Erziehenden auf das Kind aus den Tatsachen des Lebens heraus beobachten. Diese Tatsachen lassen sich ebenso beobachten wie die physikalischen Tatsachen im Laboratorium oder wie die Pflanzentatsachen im botanischen Kabinett; aber man tut es gewöhnlich nicht. Nehmen wir einzelne Fälle heraus. Sagen wir einmal, wir wollen rein betrachten zunächst, wie der Lehrer neben dem Kinde in der Schule steht. Betrachten wir zunächst den Lehrer, und betrachten wir ihn nach seinem Temperament. Wir wissen, nach dem Temperament kann der Mensch sein ein energischer, aber auch zornmütiger, jähzorniger Mensch, ein Choleriker, oder ein innerlich sich in sich zusammenziehender und mehr auf sich hinschauender, nur in sich empfindender, die Welt meidender Melancholiker; oder ein für äußere Eindrücke rasch Empfänglicher, der von Eindruck zu Eindruck eilt, ein Sanguiniker; oder einer, der alles gehen läßt, dem alles gleichgültig ist, der nicht gedrückt ist von äußeren Eindrücken, der alles vorübergehen läßt, ein Phlegmatiker.
Nehmen wir zunächst an, die Lehrerbildungsstätte hätte nicht dafür gesorgt, solche Temperamente abzuschleifen und in richtiger Weise in die Schule hineinzustellen, sondern solche Temperamente wirkten sich aus, sie schössen in die Zügel mit einem gewissen Radikalismus. Nehmen wir das cholerische Temperament: ein Kind im Lebensalter bis zum Zahnwechsel ist ausgesetzt dem cholerischen Temperament. Wenn der Lehrende, der Erziehende sich ganz gehen läßt in diesem seinem cholerischen Temperament, dann wird fortdauernd auf das Kind ein seelischer Eindruck ausgeübt, welcher dahin geht, daß dieses Kind in bezug auf sein Zirkulationssystem, in bezug auf alles das, was innerlicher Rhythmus ist, starke Eindrücke erhält. Diese Eindrücke, die ‚gehen zunächst nicht sehr tief, aber sie sind eben auch erst ein Keim; und dieser Keim wächst und wächst, wie alle Keime wachsen. Es kann zuweilen so im 40., 50. Lebensjahr in Zirkulationsstörungen des rhythmischen Systems die Wirkung ungezügelten cholerischen Temperamentes beim Erziehenden auftreten. Wir erziehen eben das Kind nicht bloß für das kindliche Alter; wir erziehen es für das ganze Erdendasein und, wie wir später sehen werden, auch noch für die Zeit darüber hinaus.
Oder nehmen wir an, der Melancholiker läßt seinem Temperament die Zügel schießen; er habe nicht mit der Seminarbildung aufgenommen den Impuls, es zu harmonisieren, es in der richtigen Weise an das Kind herantreten zu lassen; er gibt sich seiner Melancholie hin in dem Verkehr mit dem Kinde. Dadurch, daß er eine solche Melancholie in sich lebt, fühlt und denkt, dadurch entzieht er fortwährend dem Kinde dasjenige, was eigentlich vom Lehrer auf das Kind überströmen sollte: Wärme. Der Erziehung fehlt häufig jene Wärme, die zunächst als Seelenwärme wirkt, die aber beim Kinde heruntergeht vorzugsweise in das Verdauungssystem und Keimanlagen darin hervorruft, die in späterem Lebensalter auftreten in allerlei Störungen, krankhaften Störungen des Blutes oder wenigstens in krankhaften Anlagen des Blutes und so weiter.
Nehmen wir den Phlegmatiker, dem alles gleichgültig ist, was er mit dem Kinde tut. Ein ganz besonderes Verhältnis spinnt sich an zwischen ihm und dem Kinde. Es ist etwas nicht Kaltes, aber furchtbar Wässeriges im seelischen Sinne zwischen einem solchen Erzieher und dem Kinde. Es wird nichts so stark entwickelt, daß ein richtiges Hin- und-Herströmen des Seelischen zwischen dem Erziehenden und dem Kinde da ist; das Kind wird nicht genügend innerlich regsam gemacht. Verfolgt man ein Menschenkind, das unter dem Einfluß des Phlegmas, eines phlegmatischen Temperamentes sich entwickeln mußte bis in ein höheres Lebensalter, so merkt man oftmals, wie Anlage zur Gehirnschwäche, Blutleere im Gehirn, Stumpfheit der Gehirntätigkeit im späteren Lebensalter auftritt.
Sehen wir, wie ein Sanguiniker, der seinem Sanguinismus die Zügel schießen läßt, auf das Kind wirkt. Er ist jedem Eindrucke hingegeben, aber die Eindrücke gehen schnell vorüber. Er lebt auf besondere Art auch in sich, aber mit sich in den äußeren Dingen. Das Kind kann nicht mitgehen; die Reize, die gerade dadurch, daß der Lehrer von Eindruck zu Eindruck eilt, auf das Kind ausgeübt werden, sie greifen nicht an, denn das Kind braucht liebevolles Gehaltenwerden bei einem Eindruck, wenn es wirklich innerlich regsam genug gemacht werden soll. Verfolgen wir ein Kind, das unter übertrieben sich gehenlassendem Sanguinismus aufwächst, so zeigt es sich im späteren Alter, daß der erwachsene Mensch, der sich aus dem Kinde entwickelt hat, Mangel an Vitalkraft hat, zu wenig Lebenskraft zeigt, wenig Gehalt zeigt und dergleichen. So daß man eigentlich, wenn man dafür den Blick hat - und Erziehen beruht auf Intimität des seelischen Blickes -, an dem Typus, den ein Mensch angenommen hat, noch im 40., 50. Lebensjahr sagen kann: auf diesen Menschen hat ein melancholisches, phlegmatisches, cholerisches oder sanguinisches Lehrertemperament eingewirkt.
Ich sage das in der Einleitung nicht, um etwa Angaben zu machen, wie diese Dinge für die Lehrerausbildung fruchtbar zu machen sind; ich möchte zunächst hinweisen, wie dasjenige, was wir mit dem Kinde vornehmen, nicht etwa bloß, wenn es ein Seelisches ist, Seelisches bleibt, sondern daß es durchaus in das Körperliche übergeht. Seelisch das Kind erziehen, heißt, es für das ganze Erdenleben auch körperlich erziehen.
Der Anthroposophie sagt man sehr oft nach, daß sie zu dem Seelischen den Geist suche. Mancher Mensch wird heute schon sehr kritisch und ablehnend, wenn ihm überhaupt vom Geist gesprochen wird; und daher glaubt man leicht, nun ja, Anthroposophie ist so eine Phantasterei. Da wird aus dem Wirklichen, das für die Sinne erscheint, ein Dunst und Nebel heraus abstrahiert; der im Geiste Vernünftige braucht sich nicht einzulassen auf diesen Dunst und Nebel. - Aber gerade Anthroposophie in ihren pädagogischen Auswirkungen möchte, daß im richtigen Sinne die Grundsätze für körperliche Erziehung Anwendung finden, weil sie weiß, daß gerade beim Kinde in der ersten Lebensepoche das Körperliche überall von den seelischen Impulsen beeinflußt wird. Ich möchte sagen: Man suche einmal die Grundlage bewußt, daß ein Seelisch-Geistiges überall zugrunde liegt dem körperlichen Wirken; dann kann man für die Entwickelung des Kindes von der Geburt bis zum Zahnwechsel ganz gut Materialist sein und bloß auf das Stoffliche wirken, denn so wie das Stoffliche im Kinde wirkt, ist es eine Einheit von Seele und Geist. Niemand versteht das Stoffliche im Kinde, der nicht so Seele und Geist ästimiert. Aber es offenbaren sich Seele und Geist durchaus in dem, was äußerlich stofflich zutage tritt.
Zum Erziehen gehört Verantwortlichkeitsgefühl. Dieses Verantwortlichkeitsgefühl, es tritt einem aus einer solchen Betrachtung wirklich recht stark vor das Seelenauge und ergreift das menschliche Herz. Denn geht man an die Erziehung heran, indem man weiß, dasjenige, was man an dem Kinde bewirkt, lebt fort als Glück, Unglück, Gesundheit, Krankheit im ganzen Erdenleben: es lastet zunächst auf der Seele, aber es spornt auch an, diejenigen Kräfte und Fähigkeiten und vor allen Dingen diejenige Seelenverfassung als Erzieher in sich auszubilden, die stark genug sein wird, jene Seelenkeime im kindlichen Alter zu pflanzen, die erst im späteren, manchmal im sehr späten Alter aufgehen.
So ist diejenige Menschenerkenntnis, die Anthroposophie zur Grundlage der pädagogischen Kunst macht. Sie ist nicht bloß die Erkenntnis dessen, was gerade in einem bestimmten Lebensstadium, zum Beispiel im kindlichen, vor uns steht, sondern sie ist hervorgegangen aus der Anschauung des ganzen menschlichen Erdenlebens. Denn der Mensch, was ist er denn seinem Erdenleben nach? Sehen Sie, wenn wir den Menschen anschauen, wie er vor uns steht in jedem Augenblick, so sagen wir, er sei ein Organismus. Warum ist er das? Weil alles, alles einzelne an ihm in Harmonie mit der ganzen Bildung des Organismus steht. Wer sich einen Blick aneignet für die inneren Beziehungen in Gestalt, Größe und so weiter der einzelnen Glieder des menschlichen Organismus, wie sie zusammenpassen, sich aneinander harmonisieren, eine Einheit bilden, eine Mannigfaltigkeit in der Einheit bilden, wer sich dafür den Blick aneignet, schaut sich den kleinen Finger des Menschen an. Wenn er das Ohrläppchen auch nicht sieht, weiß er ungefähr, wie das Ohrläppchen gestaltet ist; denn bei einer gewissen Gestaltung des kleinen Fingers wird das Ohrläppchen in einer gewissen Weise gestaltet sein und so weiter. Es ist so, daß das kleinste und das größte Glied des menschlichen Organismus nach dem Ganzen gebildet ist, aber daß es auch nach jedem anderen Glied gebildet ist, so daß wir ein Organ im Kopfe nicht verstehen, wenn wir es nicht in Einklang, in Beziehung zu schauen vermögen mit einem Organ am Bein oder Fuße. Das ist der Fall für den Raumesorganismus, den Organismus, der im Raume ausgebreitet ist. Aber der Mensch hat nicht nur den Raumesorganismus, er hat auch den Zeitorganismus. Und ebenso wie das Ohrläppchen gebildet ist nach der Bildung des Ganzen und auch nach der Bildung, sagen wir des kleinen Fingers oder des Knies und so weiter, so steht dasjenige, was der Mensch im 50. Lebensjahr erlebt an physischer Gesundheit, an Krankheit, an seelischem Aufgeräumtsein oder Niedergeschlagensein, an geistiger Klarheit oder Dumpfheit, diese seelische Konfiguration des Menschen im 50. Lebensjahr steht im innigsten Verhältnis mit dem, was der Mensch im 10., 7. oder 4. Lebensjahr in dieser Beziehung in sich trug. So wie die Glieder im Raumesorganismus, so stehen die zeitlich voneinander getrennten Glieder im Zeitenorganismus in Beziehung zueinander. In gewisser Beziehung können wir sagen: Wenn wir 5 Jahre geworden sind — natürlich, der triviale Einwand gilt nicht, daß wir eher sterben können, da liegen andere Verhältnisse vor -, wenn wir 5 Jahre alt geworden sind, ist das, was in uns ist, schon im Einklang mit dem, was wir sein werden, wenn wir 40 Jahre alt sein werden. Der Mensch ist außerdem, daß er ein Raumesorganismus ist, ein Zeitenorganismus. Und wenn jemand einen Finger findet, so müßte schon dieser Finger eben erst abgeschnitten sein, damit er überhaupt einem Finger ähnlich sein kann: er wird sehr bald nicht mehr ein Finger sein; wenn er lange vom Organismus getrennt ist, verschrumpft er, wird er etwas anderes als ein menschliches Glied. Ein vom menschlichen Organismus getrennter Finger ist kein Finger; er könnte niemals leben, abgetrennt von seinem Leibe, und das ist nichts, ist kein in sich Beständiges, ist gar keine Wirklichkeit; er ist nur eine Wirklichkeit mit dem ganzen Erdenleib zwischen Geburt und Tod zusammen.
Wenn wir dies betrachten, werden wir uns auch klar sein darüber, daß wir in alldem, was wir an das Kind heranbringen, den Zeitenorganismus berücksichtigen müssen. Denken Sie sich nur einmal, wenn der Mensch ebenso beeinflussen könnte den Raumesorganismus, wie er den Zeitenorganismus oftmals beeinflußt, was dann aus diesem Raumesorganismus würde! Nehmen wir an, wir führten in den Menschenmagen eine Substanz ein, die den Kopf zerstört. Wir schauten nur auf den Magen, wir schauten nicht auf das, was aus dieser Substanz wird, wenn sie sich im Organismus verteilt und bis zum Kopfe kommt. Derjenige, der den menschlichen Organismus verstehen will, muß sagen können aus dem, was vorgeht mit einer Substanz im menschlichen Magen, was dieser Vorgang für eine Bedeutung für den Kopf hat. Die Substanz muß vom Magen bis zum Kopf fortwährend Veränderungen, Metamorphosen durchmachen, muß beweglich sein. Beim Zeitenorganismus versündigen wir uns dem Kinde gegenüber häufig. Wir sehen darauf, daß das Kind uns schon entgegenbringe so klare, scharfe Begriffe, Begriffe mit scharfen Konturen; wir werden unwillig, wenn das Kind elastische Begriffe hat, die nicht recht scharf sind. Wir arbeiten dahin, dem Kinde etwas beizubringen, das es dann so in der Seele behält, daß es uns das wieder vorschwatzen kann. Wir sind oftmals besonders glücklich, wenn wir einem ganz jungen Kinde etwas beibringen, das es nach Jahren in derselben Gestalt wieder vorschwatzt. Aber das ist gerade so, wie wenn wir einem Kinde mit 3 Jahren Stiefel machen lassen und verlangen, daß es mit 10 Jahren diese Stiefel anziehe und sie ihm noch passen. In Wahrheit handelt es sich darum, daß wir dem Kinde beibringen lebendige, biegsame, elastische Begriffe, die, wie die äußeren physischen Glieder wachsen, so seelisch mit dem Menschen heranwachsen. Das ist unbequemer, als dem Kinde Definitionen zu geben von dem und jenem, die es sich merken muß, die bleiben sollen, wie wenn man verlangen würde, daß Stiefel eines Kindes von 3 Jahren passen sollen für Füße eines Kindes von 10 Jahren. Man muß mit den Regungen des Kindes mitleben, muß eine Freude haben, dem Kinde etwas zu geben, was innerlich biegsam und elastisch ist, damit das Kind, so wie es mit den physischen Gliedern wächst, mit diesen Begriffen, Empfindungen, Gefühlsregungen heranwächst, so daß es in kurzer Zeit etwas anderes macht aus dem, was wir ihm gegeben haben. Da braucht man innige Freude am Werden und Wachsen; man kann nicht Pedantismus brauchen, nicht das Leben in zu scharf konturierten Begriffen brauchen. Man kann nur gebrauchen dasjenige, was regsames, sich gestaltendes, wachsendes, gedeihendes Leben ist. Und derjenige, der für solches wachsende, gedeihende Leben etwas an Sinn hat, der ist schon verwandt als Erzieher mit dem Kinde, weil Leben in ihm ist und das Leben von ihm auf das Leben verlangende Kind übergeht. Und das brauchen wir vor allen Dingen, daß vieles Totes, das in unserer Didaktik und Pädagogik ist, in Leben umgewandelt werde. Daher brauchen wir eine Menschenerkenntnis, die nicht sagt: so und so und so ist der Mensch bloß, das und das ist der Mensch; wir brauchen eine Menschenerkenntnis, die auf den ganzen Menschen wirkt, wie die physische Nahrung auf das Blut wirkt. Das Blut zirkuliert im Menschen. Wir brauchen eine Menschenerkenntnis, die uns seelisches Blut gibt, die uns nicht nur gescheit und verständig und vernünftig machen kann, sondern die uns enthusiastisch machen kann, innerlich beweglich machen kann, die Liebe entzünden kann. Denn liebegetragen muß dasjenige an Pädagogik sein, was aus wahrer Menschenerkenntnis hervorquillt.
Damit wollte ich zunächst nur einleitende Andeutungen geben über die Voraussetzungen, welche der Pädagogik aus der Anthroposophie heraus gegeben werden sollen. Es wird sich im weiteren darum handeln, wie nun in der Schulpraxis im einzelnen dieser Geist anthroposophischer Pädagogik verwirklicht werden kann. Davon darf ich dann morgen und die folgenden Tage weiter sprechen.
First Lecture
Dear attendees, first of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks for your kind and warm welcome. For many years now, I have had the privilege of speaking here in Bern about the anthroposophical worldview. And here, too, there is a group of anthroposophical friends who make sacrifices and devote their personalities to the cultivation of the anthroposophical worldview. All of this must be taken into account when I express my heartfelt thanks for the kind words that have been spoken here. For it gives me particular satisfaction, after having spoken so often here in Bern about anthroposophy in general, to now be able to speak about the field of education from the spirit of anthroposophy, a field that must be close to everyone's heart. For how much depends on whether we can actually achieve such an art of education and teaching that people can first of all overcome many things that clearly show how much we have fallen into a kind of social chaos in recent years and decades. And hardly anything else will be able to lead us out of this social chaos; indeed, one might say that nothing else will be able to lead us out of it, except if we succeed in educating spirituality into the souls of human beings, so that they find their way to progress and the further development of civilization out of the spirit; which must appeal to us with such confidence, because after all, the world is created in and out of the spirit, and so human creativity can only be fruitful when it springs from the original source of the spirit. But if human beings want to achieve such fruitful creativity out of the spirit, they must be educated and taught in the spirit. Because I believe that anthroposophy indeed has much to say about education and teaching, it gives me deep satisfaction to be able to hold this course here, and out of this satisfaction I express my thanks for the kind and loving words of welcome.
Now, Today, many people all over the world feel that education and teaching must take a new direction in a certain sense. Not that nothing extraordinary has happened in the course of the 19th century, which was so fruitful in terms of progress, especially for teaching and education, but rather because modern civilization has taken a direction that actually allows people little access to other people. For centuries, we have seen tremendous progress in the field of natural science and in the fields of technology that have blossomed from the natural sciences. We have also seen how a kind of worldview has gradually taken root in civilization as a result of these scientific advances. We have seen how the structure of the world, including human beings, is conceived in terms of what the senses teach us about natural phenomena and natural beings, and what the mind, bound to the brain, is able to say about the sensory world. However, what is not yet a clear and distinct insight today is that countless people feel, but often do not want to admit to themselves, that with all the insights that modern times have gained about the vast scope of nature, it is actually impossible to approach human beings.
And this inability to reach people must be felt particularly keenly when it comes to reaching the developing human being, the child. There is a sense that something foreign is coming between the teachers, the educators, and the child. Anthroposophy seeks to respond to this heartfelt call, which comes from so many sides, on the basis of true and comprehensive knowledge of the human being; to respond in such a way that it does not simply put forward theories about pedagogy and didactics, but in the sense that it directly leads people to intervene in school practice. Anthroposophical education is actually school practice. Therefore, if one wants to talk about anthroposophical education, one would basically have to discuss the individual practical applications in the classroom, for example, but then the spirit from which all this has been born would not be able to reveal itself. Therefore, you must allow me today to speak, at least by way of introduction, about this spirit of anthroposophical education based on a comprehensive understanding of human beings, but also on an urgent understanding of human beings derived from anthroposophical educational work.
Profound knowledge of human nature! What does that mean? When we encounter human beings, especially developing human beings, children, as I have already said, it is not enough to have certain rules about how to educate and teach them well and then try to follow these rules in order to do things technically. That will never lead to real school practice. For school practice, one needs inner fire, inner enthusiasm in handling teaching and education; one needs impulses that are not transferred to the child by the teacher and educator according to rules of the intellect, but which have an intimate effect on the child from the educator or teacher. The whole person must act as an educator, not just the thinking person; the feeling person must do so, the willing person must do so.
The scientific mindset and worldview has penetrated modern humanity much more than one might think. Even those who have no special education in science actually think, feel, and will in a scientific way, one might say. This is not possible in school, because with this scientific approach, with this scientific attitude, one reaches only one member of the human being: the physical-sensory body. But that is only one member of the human being. Anthroposophy shows that the whole human being can be viewed from a true understanding of humanity according to three clearly distinguishable parts: the physical part, the soul part, and the spiritual part. And only then do we see the whole human being, when we have just as much sense and ability to recognize the soul in its original nature as we do the physical body; and when we further have just as much sense and ability to recognize the spirit in the human being as an independent entity. But in children, body, soul, and spirit are connected in a different way than in adults. And it is precisely this separation from the physical body that allows us to observe the soul and spirit in children as, I would say, the greatest miracle of knowledge and practical life in human existence.
Let us look at the small child as it is born into the world. It is magical how spirit is carried in the undefined facial features, in the chaotic movements, in everything that emanates from the child and does not yet seem to belong together, in everything that springs from the deepest inner being; how order enters into the gaze, into the movement of the facial features and the other limbs of the human body, how the facial features become more and more expressive; how the spirit working from within to the surface shows itself more and more in the eyes and facial features, how the soul permeating the whole body reveals itself. How all this happens can only be seen by those who are able to observe it with an unbiased and serious mind, by looking with shy reverence into the wonders and mysteries of worldly and human existence through what the developing child tells them.
And when we see how this child develops, we see again how the life of this child is divided into distinct stages, which are clearly distinguishable from one another, but which are not usually distinguished because they must be distinguished through intimate knowledge, and because today, based on crude scientific concepts, people are reluctant to engage in such intimate knowledge.
A first significant process of transformation takes place in the child around the age of 7, when the child gets its second teeth. The external physical process of getting these second teeth is interesting enough in itself: how the first teeth are there, the others follow, how the first ones are pushed out. As long as one looks at this process superficially, one can stop at the change of teeth. But if one looks deeper into it with the means that are to be discussed in this course, one becomes aware of how, albeit in a more subtle way than in the change of teeth itself, something is happening throughout the child's body during this phase of transformation. What is only visible in the most obvious and radical way in tooth replacement is actually happening throughout the whole body. For what is actually happening? You can all see how the human organism develops: you cut your nails, you cut your hair, you find that your skin flakes. All this shows that physical substance is being shed on the surface and that it is being pushed out from within. This pushing out, which we see during tooth replacement, is present throughout the entire human body. A closer look shows us that the child has in fact gradually expelled, cast out, the body it inherited. Just as the first teeth are shed, so the entire first body is shed. And in the epoch of tooth replacement, the child stands before us with a body that is completely new compared to the body it was born with. The body it was born with is shed like the first teeth, and a new body is formed.
What has happened in the most intimate sense? The child has received its first body through heredity. It is, so to speak, the product of the interaction between father and mother. It is formed from the physical conditions on earth. But what is this physical body? It is the model that the earth gives to human beings for their actual human development. For the soul and spirit of the human being descend from a soul and spirit world in which they were before conception and birth took place. Before we became earthly human beings in physical bodies, we were all spiritual-soul beings in a spiritual-soul world. And what our father and mother give us in terms of physical hereditary substance unites in embryonic life with what descends from a higher world in a purely spiritual-soul form. The spiritual-soul human being takes hold of the physical body that comes from the stream of heredity. This becomes its model, and according to this model, a completely new human organism is now formed, rejecting the inherited organism. So that when we look at the child between birth and the change of teeth, we must say: the physical body, which owes its existence solely to physical heredity, is being worked into by the result of the interaction of what the human being brings with them to earth and what they take in from the earth in terms of materials and substances. With the change of teeth, the human being has formed a second body based on the model of the inherited body; and this second body is the product of the human being's soul and spirit.
Of course, anyone who comes to such conclusions as I have just expressed on the basis of a more intimate observation of human beings is aware of the objections that can be made against them. These objections are obvious. One will naturally say: Does not the similarity to the parents, which often occurs after the change of teeth, show that the human being continues to be subject to the laws of heredity even later, after the change of teeth? — One could raise many objections. But consider the following: We have a model that originates from the stream of heredity. According to this model, the spirit and soul now work out the second human being. Since there is no tendency to design something that is based on a model to be completely dissimilar to the model, it is also clear that the spiritual-soul uses the presence of the model to design the second human organism in a similar way. But still, if one has the sense and the ability to recognize what is actually going on, one will come to the following conclusion: There are children who, in their 9th, 10th, and 11th years of life, show how similar their second organism — for a second organism is indeed there — is to the first, inherited one. Other children show how dissimilar this second organism becomes to the first, how something completely different from what was initially inherited works out from the center of the human being. All variations between these two extremes occur in human life. For as the spiritual-soul works out the second organism, it wants above all to obey the essence it brings with it from the spiritual-soul world when it descends. A struggle arises between what is to work out the second organism and what the first organism has received from heredity. Depending on whether the human being is stronger or weaker — we will see why this is so in the following lectures — from the spiritual-soul existence, the more he can give his second organism a particularly soulful, individual form, or, if he descends weaker, he will adhere as closely as possible to the model.
But consider what we are dealing with when we are to educate the child in its first stage of life, from birth to the change of teeth! We must admit that we look with awe at how the divine-spiritual powers work down from supersensible worlds. We see them working day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year in the first stages of life, working to such an extent that they form a special second body. And in educating, we participate in this spiritual-soul work; we continue for physical human existence what the divine-spiritual powers have initiated. We participate in divine work.
Such things cannot be grasped with the intellect alone. Such things must be grasped with the whole human being. Then, above all, one gains a sense of the magnitude of the task that education has, especially in the first years of childhood, in relation to the creative forces of the world. But I would like to say that this first step that the spiritual-soul takes to create a second human organism really shows us how physical formation, soul activity, and spiritual creation are one in the child. Everything that happens in the formation of the new organism, in the rejection of the old, is a unity of spirit, soul, and body in the child.
This is why children behave in a completely different way to adults. This can be observed in individual phenomena. As adults, when we put something sweet in our mouths, our tongue and palate perceive the sweetness. However, this taste perception ceases when the sweet substance has reached a certain part of the organism in a certain way. As adults, we no longer follow the further course with our sense of taste. It is different for children. In children, the taste spreads throughout the entire organism; they do not only taste with their tongue and palate, they taste with their entire organism; the sweetness spreads throughout their entire organism. Children are simply one big sensory organ.
What is the essence of a sensory organ? Let us take the human eye. Color impressions are made on the human eye. Anyone who correctly observes what humans accomplish when they see will say: Will and perception are one in the eye; this remains on the surface, on the periphery of the human being. In early childhood, from birth to the change of teeth, this extends — albeit in a subtle way — throughout the entire organism. The child's entire organism looks like a comprehensive sensory organ. And therefore, all impressions that affect the child from the environment have completely different effects on the child than on the adult. What goes on in the environment, what can be seen with the eye, is in human beings the expression of the human soul, of human morality. The child has, quite subconsciously or unconsciously, but not in consciousness, a subtle, intimate perception of what is expressed in every movement, every emotion of the people around them. If a quick-tempered person in the child's environment acts out their impulses in a fit of rage and allows the child to observe what they are doing in such an unconscious way through their external sensory perception, it would be a great mistake to believe that the child only sees these movements. The child has a clear impression of what lies within the moral impulses, even if not consciously. The eye also has no conscious sensory impression, but an unconscious one. Everything that reveals itself morally and spiritually in a non-sensual way flows into the child like colors into the eye, because the whole child's organism is a sensory organ.
But this organism is finely organized. Therefore, every impression continues throughout the entire child's organism. At first, the impression that the child feels of what is revealed morally is a spiritual impression. But in children, everything spiritual descends into the physical. When children experience fear from the impressions of their surroundings, but also everything that is joyful and uplifting, it is transferred, albeit not in such a crude manner, but in a subtle way, into the processes of growth, circulation, and digestion. A child who has to fear every hour the impressions emanating from a quick-tempered person who flies into a rage at any moment experiences something psychological that immediately penetrates their breathing and blood circulation and also their digestive activity. The important thing is that we cannot speak of physical education alone when it comes to childhood, because education of the soul is physical education, because everything spiritual is transformed into the physical, becomes physical.
And the significance of this only becomes clear when, based on a true understanding of human nature, we look not only at the child and formulate principles of education and teaching, but when we look at the whole of human life on earth. This is not as convenient as simply observing the child. Observing the child: well, one registers how its memory is, its thinking ability, the sensory perceptions of the eye, the ear, and so on; one registers for the moment, or at least for a short time. But that does nothing for the knowledge of the human being. For just as in the plant, the seed that becomes the root already contains what will emerge after a long time in blossom and fruit, so in the child, until the change of teeth, because it is physically receptive to everything spiritual, lies the seed for happiness and unhappiness, for health and illness, for the whole earthly life until death. And what we as teachers or educators instill in the child in the first phase of life, which has an effect on the blood, breathing, and digestion, is like a seed that sometimes only sprouts in the form of health or illness in the 40th or 50th year of life. Yes, that is how it is: the way the educator behaves towards the small child predisposes it to inner happiness or unhappiness, to health or illness.
This becomes particularly apparent when we observe in detail the effects of the educator on the child from the facts of life. These facts can be observed just as easily as physical facts in a laboratory or botanical facts in a botanical cabinet, but people don't usually do so. Let's take a look at some individual cases. Let's say we want to start by looking purely at how the teacher stands next to the child in school. Let's first look at the teacher and consider their temperament. We know that, depending on their temperament, people can be energetic, but also angry, quick-tempered, choleric, or introverted, more self-absorbed, only feeling within themselves, avoiding the world, melancholic; or someone who is quickly receptive to external impressions, who rushes from impression to impression, a sanguine person; or someone who lets everything go, who is indifferent to everything, who is not oppressed by external impressions, who lets everything pass, a phlegmatic person.
Let us first assume that the teacher training college did not ensure that such temperaments were smoothed out and properly integrated into the school, but that such temperaments had an effect, that they broke free with a certain radicalism. Let us take the choleric temperament: a child up to the age of tooth replacement is exposed to the choleric temperament. If the teacher, the educator, allows himself to be completely carried away by his choleric temperament, then a psychological impression is continuously exerted on the child, which means that this child receives strong impressions in relation to his circulatory system, in relation to everything that is inner rhythm. These impressions do not initially go very deep, but they are just a seed; and this seed grows and grows, as all seeds grow. Sometimes, in the 40th or 50th year of life, the effect of the educator's unbridled choleric temperament can manifest itself in circulatory disorders of the rhythmic system. We do not educate the child merely for childhood; we educate it for its entire earthly existence and, as we shall see later, even for the time beyond.
Or let us suppose that the melancholic person gives free rein to his temperament; he has not taken up the impulse to harmonize it, to approach the child in the right way, with his seminary education; he indulges in his melancholy in his dealings with the child. By living, feeling, and thinking such melancholy within himself, he continually deprives the child of what should actually flow from the teacher to the child: warmth. Education often lacks that warmth which initially acts as warmth of the soul, but which in the child descends primarily into the digestive system and causes germ cells to develop there, which later in life manifest themselves in all kinds of disorders, pathological disorders of the blood or at least pathological predispositions of the blood, and so on.
Take the phlegmatic person, who is indifferent to everything he does with the child. A very special relationship develops between him and the child. There is something not cold, but terribly watery in the spiritual sense between such an educator and the child. Nothing is developed so strongly that there is a proper flow of spirit between the educator and the child; the child is not made sufficiently active inwardly. If one follows a human child who has had to develop under the influence of phlegm, a phlegmatic temperament, into a higher age, one often notices how a predisposition to brain weakness, blood deficiency in the brain, and dullness of brain activity occurs in later life.
Let us see how a sanguine person who gives free rein to his sanguine nature affects the child. He is devoted to every impression, but the impressions pass quickly. He also lives in a special way within himself, but with himself in external things. The child cannot keep up; the stimuli exerted on the child precisely because the teacher rushes from one impression to the next do not take effect, because the child needs to be lovingly held in one impression if it is to be made truly active enough inwardly. If we follow a child who grows up with exaggerated sanguineism, it becomes apparent in later life that the adult who has developed from the child lacks vitality, shows too little life force, shows little substance, and so on. So that if you have an eye for it – and education is based on the intimacy of the soul's gaze – you can still say at the age of 40 or 50, based on the type of person a person has become: this person has been influenced by a melancholic, phlegmatic, choleric, or sanguine teacher temperament.
I am not saying this in the introduction in order to provide information on how these things can be made fruitful for teacher training; I would first like to point out that what we do with the child, if it is something spiritual, does not remain merely spiritual, but that it definitely transitions into the physical. To educate the child spiritually means to educate it physically for its entire earthly life.
Anthroposophy is very often accused of seeking the spirit in the spiritual. Many people today become very critical and dismissive when they hear talk of the spirit, and so it is easy to believe that anthroposophy is just a fantasy. The reality that appears to the senses is abstracted into a haze and mist; the spiritually reasonable person does not need to engage with this haze and mist. But anthroposophy, in its educational implications, wants the principles of physical education to be applied in the right sense, because it knows that, especially in children in the first stage of life, the physical is influenced everywhere by soul impulses. I would like to say: Let us consciously seek the foundation that a soul-spiritual basis underlies all physical activity; then one can be quite materialistic in the development of the child from birth to the change of teeth and work only on the material, because the way the material works in the child is a unity of soul and spirit. No one understands the material in the child who does not appreciate the soul and spirit in this way. But the soul and spirit reveal themselves quite clearly in what appears externally as material.
A sense of responsibility is part of education. This sense of responsibility really comes across very strongly in such a view and touches the human heart. For if one approaches education knowing that what one does to the child lives on as happiness, unhappiness, health, or illness throughout its entire earthly life: it weighs heavily on the soul at first, but it also spurs one on to develop those powers and abilities, and above all that state of mind, which will be strong enough to plant those seeds in the child's soul that will only blossom later, sometimes at a very late age.
This is the knowledge of human beings that makes anthroposophy the basis of the art of education. It is not merely the knowledge of what lies before us at a particular stage of life, for example in childhood, but has emerged from the observation of the whole of human life on earth. For what is the human being in terms of his or her life on earth? You see, when we look at the human being as he stands before us at every moment, we say that he is an organism. Why is he that? Because everything, every single part of him, is in harmony with the whole structure of the organism. Anyone who acquires an eye for the inner relationships in form, size, and so on, of the individual members of the human organism, how they fit together, harmonize with each other, form a unity, form a diversity within unity, anyone who acquires an eye for this, looks at the little finger of the human being. Even if they cannot see the earlobe, they know approximately how it is shaped, because with a certain shape of the little finger, the earlobe will be shaped in a certain way, and so on. It is so that the smallest and largest members of the human organism are formed according to the whole, but also according to every other member, so that we cannot understand an organ in the head unless we are able to see it in harmony and relationship with an organ in the leg or foot. This is the case for the spatial organism, the organism that is spread out in space. But human beings do not only have the spatial organism, they also have the temporal organism. And just as the earlobe is formed according to the formation of the whole and also according to the formation, say, of the little finger or the knee and so on, so too is what a person experiences at the age of 50 in terms of physical health, illness, mental cheerfulness or despondency, mental clarity or dullness; this mental configuration of a person at the age of 50 is intimately related to what the person carried within themselves in this respect at the age of 10, 7, or 4. Just as the members of the spatial organism are related to one another, so too are the members of the temporal organism, separated from one another in time. In a certain sense, we can say that when we reach the age of 5 — of course, the trivial objection that we may die before then does not apply, as other circumstances may prevail — when we reach the age of 5, what is within us is already in harmony with what we will be when we reach the age of 40. In addition to being a spatial organism, the human being is also a temporal organism. And if someone finds a finger, this finger would have to be freshly severed in order to resemble a finger at all: very soon it will no longer be a finger; if it is separated from the organism for a long time, it will shrivel up and become something other than a human limb. A finger separated from the human organism is not a finger; it could never live, separated from its body, and that is nothing, it is not permanent in itself, it is not reality at all; it is only a reality together with the whole body of the earth between birth and death.
When we consider this, we will also be clear that we must take the time organism into account in everything we bring to the child. Just imagine what would happen to the organism of time if human beings could influence it in the same way that they often influence the organism of space! Let us suppose that we introduced a substance into the human stomach that destroys the head. We would only be looking at the stomach, we would not be looking at what happens to this substance when it spreads through the organism and reaches the head. Anyone who wants to understand the human organism must be able to say, based on what happens to a substance in the human stomach, what significance this process has for the head. The substance must undergo continuous changes, metamorphoses, from the stomach to the head; it must be mobile. In the time organism, we often sin against the child. We expect the child to already have clear, sharp concepts, concepts with sharp contours; we become unwilling when the child has elastic concepts that are not quite sharp. We work to teach the child something that it then keeps in its soul so that it can repeat it back to us. We are often particularly happy when we teach a very young child something that it repeats back to us in the same form years later. But this is just like making boots for a 3-year-old child and expecting it to wear these boots at the age of 10 and for them to still fit. In truth, it is a matter of teaching the child living, flexible, elastic concepts that grow with the human being spiritually as the outer physical limbs grow. This is more inconvenient than giving the child definitions of this and that, which it must memorize and which are to remain, as if one were to demand that boots made for a 3-year-old child should fit the feet of a 10-year-old child. One must live with the child's emotions, must take pleasure in giving the child something that is internally flexible and elastic, so that as the child grows physically, it also grows with these concepts, sensations, and emotions, so that in a short time it does something different with what we have given it. This requires a deep joy in becoming and growing; pedantry is not needed, nor is life in overly sharply defined concepts. One can only use that which is lively, formative, growing, and thriving life. And those who have a sense for such growing, thriving life are already related to the child as educators, because there is life in them and that life is transferred from them to the child who craves life. And what we need above all is for much of what is dead in our didactics and pedagogy to be transformed into life. Therefore, we need a knowledge of human nature that does not say: this and that is what human beings are, this and that is what human beings are; we need a knowledge of human nature that affects the whole human being, just as physical nourishment affects the blood. Blood circulates in the human being. We need a knowledge of human beings that gives us spiritual blood, that can not only make us intelligent, understanding, and reasonable, but that can also make us enthusiastic, make us inwardly flexible, and ignite love. For what springs from a true knowledge of human beings must be carried by love in pedagogy.
With this, I wanted to give only introductory hints about the prerequisites that should be given to education from anthroposophy. In the following, we will discuss how this spirit of anthroposophical education can be realized in detail in school practice. I will continue to speak about this tomorrow and in the following days.