| The Christmas Conference : List of Names
|
|---|
| Ruhr 1887–1954 Arlesheim) Art dealer. Co-founder of the first Waldorf school in Cologne, named ‘Neuwacht School’ by Rudolf Steiner. GROSHEINTZ, DR. |
| This drew him to the attention of Rudolf Steiner who requested him to join the Waldorf School in Stuttgart. He taught there from 1921. Its re-institution after the Second World War was largely due to his initiative. In 1946 he brought the Waldorf schools in Germany together in the Association of Waldorf Schools, of which he was the chairman. |
| The Christmas Conference : List of Names
|
|---|
WITH BIOGRAPHICAL NOTESABELS, JOAN (b. India – d.1962 Heidenheim a. d. Brenz) AEPPLI, WILLI (Accra 1894–1972 Basel) ALEXANDER THE GREAT BEMMELEN, DANIEL J. VAN (Indonesia 1899–1983) BESANT, ANNIE BRANDTNER, W. BÜCHENBACHER, DR HANS (Fürth 1887–1977 Arlesheim) BÜRGI-BANDI, LUCIE (Bern 1875–1949 Bern) CARNEGIE, ANDREW CESARO, DUKE GIOVANNI ANTONIO OF (Rome 1878–1940 Rome) COLLISON, HARRY (London 1868–1945 London) CROSS, MARGARET FRANCES (Preston 1866–1962 Hemel Hempstead) DONNER, UNO (Helsingfors 1872–1958 Arlesheim) DRECHSLER, LUNA (b. Lemberg/Lvov – d.1933 Poland, in her fifties) DUNLOP, DANIEL NICOL (Kilmarnock 1868–1935 London) DÜRLER, EDGAR (St Gallen 1895–1970 Arlesheim) EISELT, DR HANS (b. Prague – d.1936 Prague) ERZBERGER, MATTHIAS FERRERI, CHARLOTTE (d.1924 in Milan) FREUND, IDA (d.1931 in Prague) GEERING-CHRIST, RUDOLF (Basel 1871–1958) GEUTER, FRIEDRICH (Darmstadt 1894–1960 Ravenswood) GEYER, REVEREND JOHANNES (Hamburg 1882– 1964 Stuttgart) GLEICH, GENERAL GEROLD VON GNÄDIGER, FRANZ (d.1971) GOYERT, WILHELM RUDOLF (Witten a. d. Ruhr 1887–1954 Arlesheim) GROSHEINTZ, DR. MED. DENT. EMIL (Paris 1867–1946 Dornach) GROSHEINTZ, DR OSKAR (d. 1944 in Basel) GYSI, PROFESSOR DR MED H. C. ALFRED (Aarau 1864–1957 Zurich) HAAN, PIETER DE (Utrecht 1891–1968 Holland) HAHL, ERWIN (d.1958) HARDT, DR MED HEINRICH (Stargard 1896– 1981) HART-NIBBRIG, FRAU J (b. Holland–1957 Dornach in her late eighties) HARTMANN, EDUARD VON HENSTRÖM, SIGRID HEROSTRATOS HOHLENBERG, JOHANNES (1881–1960 Kopenhagen) HUGENTOBLER, DR JAKOB (d.1961) HUSEMANN, GOTTFRIED (b.1900–1972 Arlesheim) IM OBERSTEG, DR ARMIN (b.1881–1969 Basel) INGERÖ, KARL (d.1972 in Oslo) JONG, PROFESSOR DE KAISER, DR WILHELM (Pery 1895–1983 Dornach) KAUFMANN (LATER ADAMS), DR GEORGE (Maryampol 1894–1963 Birmingham) KELLER, KARL (Basel 1896–1979 Arlesheim) KELLERMÜLLER, JAKOB (Räterschen 1872–1947 Dornach) KOLISKO, DR MED EUGEN (Vienna 1893–1939 London) KOLISKO, LILLY (Vienna 1889–1976 Gloucester) KOSCHÜTZKY, RUDOLF VON (Upper Silesia 1866–1954 Stuttgart) KREBS, CHRISTIAN (d.1945) KRKAVEC, DR OTOKAR KRÜGER, DR BRUNO (b.1887–1979 Stuttgart) LEADBEATER, CHARLES WEBSTER LEER, EMANUEL JOSEF VON (b. in Amersfoort – 1934 Baku) LEHRS, DR ERNST (Berlin 1894–1979 Eckwälden) LEINHAS, EMIL (Mannheim 1878–1967 Ascona) LEISEGANG, HANS LJUNGQUIST, ANNA (d.1935 in Dornach) MACKENZIE, PROFESSOR MILLICENT MAIER, DR RUDOLF (Schorndorf 1886–1943 Hüningen) MARYON, LOUISE EDITH (London 1872–1924 Dornach) MAURER, PROFESSOR DR THEODOR (Dorlisheim 1873–1959 Strasbourg) MAYEN, DR MED WALTHER MERRY, ELEANOR (Durham 1873–1956 Frinton-on-Sea) MONGES, HENRY B. (1870–1954 New York) MORGENSTIERNE, ETHEL MÜCKE, JOHANNA (Berlin 1864–1949 Dornach) MUNTZ-TAXEIRA DEL MATTOS, FRAU (b. Holland – d. 1931 in Brussels) NEUSCHELLER-VAN DER PALS, LUCY (St Petersburg 1886–1962 Dornach) PALMER, DR MED OTTO (Feinsheim 1867–1945 Wiesneck) PEIPERS, DR MED FELIX (Bonn 1873–1944 Arlesheim) POLLAK, RICHARD (Karlin, Prague 1867–1940 Dachau) POLZER-HODITZ, LUDWIG COUNT OF (Prague 1869–1945 Vienna) PUSCH, HANS LUDWIG (1902–1976) PYLE, WILLIAM SCOTT (b. America – d.1938 The Hague) RATHENAU, WALTHER REICHEL, DR FRANZ (d.1960 in Prague) RENZIS, BARONESS EMMELINA DE (d.1945 in Rome) RIHOUET-COROZE, SIMONE (Paris 1892–1982 Paris) SAUERWEIN, ALICE (b. Marseille – d.1931 in Switzerland) SIMON, FRÄULEIN SCHMIDT, HERR SCHMIEDEL, DR OSKAR (Vienna 1887–1959 Schwäbisch Gmünd) SCHUBERT, DR KARL (Vienna 1889–1949 Stuttgart) SCHWARZ, LINA (d.1947) SCHWEBSCH, DR ERICH (Frankfurt/Oder 1889–1953 Freiburg i.Br.) SCHWEIGLER, KARL RICHARD STEFFEN, ALBERT (Murgenthal/Aargau 1884–1963 Dornach) STEIN, DR WALTER JOHANNES (Vienna 1891–1957 London) STEINER, MARIE, NEE VON SIVERS (Wloclawek/Russia 1867–1948 Beatenberg/ Switzerland). STIBBE, MAX (b. Padang 1898 – d.1983) STOKAR, WILLY (Schaffhausen 1893–1953 Zurich) STORRER, WILLY (Töss bei Winterthur 1896–1930 Dornach) STUTEN, JAN (Nijmegen 1890–1948 Arlesheim) THUT, PAUL (b.1872–1955 Bern) TRIMLER, DR TRINLER, KARL (d.1964) TYMSTRA, FRANS (b.1891–1979 Arlesheim) UNGER, DR CARL (Bad Cannstatt 1878–1929 Nuremberg) USTERI, DR ALFRED (Säntis area of Switzerland 1869–1948 Reinach) VREEDE, DR ELISABETH (The Hague 1879–1943 Ascona) WACHSMUTH, DR GUENTHER (Dresden 1893–1963 Dornach) WACHSMUTH, DR WOLFGANG (Dresden 1891–1953 Arlesheim) WEGMAN, DR MED ITA (Java 1876–1943 Arlesheim) WEISS, FRAU WERBECK, LOUIS MICHAEL JULIUS (Hamburg 1879–1928 Hamburg) WINDELBAND, WILHELM WULLSCHLEGER, FRITZ (Zofingen 1896–1969 Zofingen) ZAGWIJN, HENRI (d.1954) ZEYLMANS VAN EMMICHOVEN, DR MED F W WILLEM (Helmond 1893–1961 Johannesburg) |
| 336. The Big Questions of our Time and Anthroposophical Spiritual Knowledge: Independent Spiritual Life in the Threefold Social Organism
27 Jun 1921, Dornach |
|---|
| Of course, anthroposophical spiritual science is the source of the pedagogy and didactics of the Waldorf School. I gave the seminar course for the teachers of this Waldorf School based on anthroposophical spiritual science before the opening of the Waldorf School. |
| Initially, the children's group at the Waldorf School was made up of the children of workers at the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory; after all, it was our friend Emil Molt in Stuttgart who founded this Waldorf School, and initially the children were “the children of workers” at the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory. |
| The opinion has never been expressed that I have ever ordered anyone to do anything at the Waldorf School. On the other hand, everyone seeks advice on all kinds of matters, and there is a unified spirit in this Waldorf School. |
| 336. The Big Questions of our Time and Anthroposophical Spiritual Knowledge: Independent Spiritual Life in the Threefold Social Organism
27 Jun 1921, Dornach |
|---|
Dear attendees! When I published my “Key Points of the Social Question in the Necessities of Life in the Present and the Near Future” in the spring of 1919, the public life of the West was somewhat different from what it is today. It should actually be made perfectly clear how fast the pace of current events is. We should realize how much the configuration of Western civilization has changed again in the last two years. In the spring of 1919, there was sufficient reason to hope that a sufficiently large number of people would unite in the belief that spiritual impulses could counteract the forces of social decline. The terrible experiences of the war years lay behind the Western world's humanity. These terrible experiences, which at the time many people felt were incomparable in the historical life of humanity. And from these terrible experiences had emerged the opinion that something very drastic had to be done, something that had to be brought about from the depths of intellectual life, so that the forces of decline could be paralyzed in an appropriate way and humanity could be brought out of the rising forces through work. One would like to say: After only a few months, one could see that this opinion, which was very much present in the broadest circles, had actually receded considerably. Therefore, in February, March, April and May of 1919, one could have believed that by asserting such ideas, as they were presented in my “Key Points of the Social Question” and as they were summarized in my appeal “To the German People and to the World of Culture,” one could have believed that by putting forward such ideas one could reach those people who held the opinion just characterized. It was not necessary to cherish the arrogant opinion that the right ideas had been hit upon if they were put forward in this way. It was enough to believe that the ideas had been honestly drawn from the depths of existence, from the legitimate depths of of existence, such ideas had been brought up, and then one could believe that from the experiences that had just arisen, a sufficiently large number of people would be found to support the whole ductus, the whole will of such ideas, with understanding and energy. One could see how very soon people again believed that humanity would be helped by first gluing together these or those old impulses that had been torn apart. One could see how the energy that had been noticeable for a while back then was gradually paralyzed and so on. At that time, in the spring of 1919, what I called “The Threefold Social Organism” had to be thrown into the situation, as it were. As I said, it might need to be corrected, as always, but it had to be thrown into the situation because it arose out of two presuppositions. The first prerequisite is an historical one, a spiritual-historical one, one that is gained from observing the course of human development as it emerges from the spiritual-historical observation that is carried out here as anthroposophical. The other prerequisite arose from decades of observation of the impulses that were striving from the undergrounds of spiritual, state-political and economic life everywhere towards the surface. The second prerequisite arose from the observation of what actually wanted to be realized, to which one should only help to realize, from this observation, from the directly practical observation of the three different formations of life. The first premise was not theoretical either. The purpose of spiritual science, as it is here, is to lead to full reality. Therefore, all its considerations, including those on the development of humanity, are imbued with a sense of reality. Who could not recognize the democratic principle by an unbiased observation of that which has asserted itself more and more intensely in the emergence of modern humanity? I do not need to define this democratic principle. Of course, one person understands one thing by it and another person something else. But in general, one has a sense of what has been emerging in recent history as the democratic principle, the principle that man, simply by being man, must assert within the social community, that as much as the judgment of the individual human being is worth, this judgment must also mean in social events. This urge for democracy had been there for a long time, expressed through the most diverse movements and convulsions of the newer historical life of Western humanity, with its American offshoot. But on the other hand, it could be seen that this democratic life cannot actually be realized in all respects. And it becomes apparent to the unbiased observer of human society that there is only one area of social life that can truly become democratic, and that is the political-state area. But the political-state area, if it wants to become democratic, can only include those matters on which every person who has come of age is capable of judgment. And if you think practically, you can clearly define the area of social life that can be subject to the judgment of every person who has come of age. On the other hand, there are two areas that simply cannot be democratized because they can only develop if they develop in terms of the expertise and specialist knowledge of the people, of the individual human individuality. This is, on the one hand, the entire area of intellectual life, namely that area of intellectual life that is actually public, the area of teaching and education, and, on the other hand, that of economic life. Spiritual life and its main component, the system of teaching and education, can only develop properly if it arises from the professional judgment and expertise of the individuals active in this field and is also administered, administered in complete independence. Not every person who has come of age can judge in this area. Therefore, in this area there can be no such thing as a democratic constitution and democratic administration. Nor can there be democratic constitution and democratic administration in the field of economic life. In this connection I should like to call attention to a fact which may be multiplied a hundredfold or a thousandfold by the experiences of life, a fact which has taken place in modern times. About the middle of the nineteenth century and towards the last third of it, the question of the gold standard, the actual gold standard, became particularly pressing, I might say. And one can make a very interesting observation if one considers everything that was said for and against the gold standard by very clever people in parliaments, trading companies, associations of entrepreneurs, industrial associations of entrepreneurs, and so on, up to the second half of the nineteenth century and towards the last third of it. I do not mean any irony when I say that in those days a huge amount of cleverness was raised for and against the gold standard. And in particular, a conclusion-type played a major role back then, namely that if one really came to this unified gold currency, then the pursuit of free trade and the realization of free trade would prevail everywhere. Free trade will finally triumph. You can tell, my dear audience, when you read what was said at the time, what was said at the time, it is really clever, it was not said by stupid people, but it was said by extraordinarily clever people. But reality soon said the opposite. Reality has shown that everywhere the gold standard has led to efforts to establish protective tariff systems and to close the individual national borders. That is to say, the cleverest people, those people who, out of their industrial cleverness, said the most sensible things, had to be taught by reality that, in line with reality, the opposite should have been said! As I said, I am not being ironic when I speak of “cleverness”; I mean it quite seriously. For this fact - and it could be multiplied a hundredfold - points us in many directions. What does it point us to? That in the economic field the individual cannot be decisive at all, that he can only be decisive if his judgment coincides with that of others who, in turn, are experienced and skilled in another area of economic life, that is to say, that the individual with his judgment has only one value within the association. And so we have two areas: the spiritual area of teaching and education, which must be placed in the power of the individual human individuality; and the economic area, which must be placed in the power of the association, the association of the appropriate cooperation of the individual economic sectors, of production, consumption, and the circulation of goods. The proper form of interaction that results from all of this, from the judgment within the associations, must shape economic life. So that we have three links, not parts; by speaking of the tripartite division of the social organism, one has given rise to many misunderstandings; one cannot speak of the three-part human being either, one cannot divide the human being into head, trunk, limbs and metabolism, whereas the human being really consists of these three parts; so one cannot speak of the three of the social organism, but only of the threefold social organism, because these three members should not go their own way, as it were, the head, the circulation system - the rhythmic one - and the metabolism system can go their own way, but precisely because of their relative independence, they also work together in the most economical and rational way. If you take this threefold social order seriously, you can be honest as a democrat, because then you can really implement democracy in the area where it should be implemented, in the area of state and political affairs, where the mature human being faces the mature human being, and where only that which can be judged by a mature human being is decided and administered. It is entirely possible to find the detailed, concrete form of how to work towards this threefold social organism. However, you see, conditions have become so unnatural in this respect that sometimes, even back in the spring of 1919, when the threefold social organism was taken much more seriously than it is today, sometimes you had to give strange answers. In one country, for example, where a so-called Ministry of Labor had been set up, I was asked by the Minister of Labor: “Yes, but if the social organism is to be threefolded, where do I actually belong?” He meant as Minister of Labor. Well, if you think about the necessities very concretely, the Ministry of Labor is a hybrid between economic life and political life. That is why I said to the minister in question: Yes, unfortunately for you, you have to be cut in half. - Like the brave Swabian who was not afraid and cut the Turk in half, so a half labor minister should have fallen out of our unnatural present circumstances on both the left and the right. But it is precisely these things that prove how things are, and how everything is mixed up, confounded. And so we have to say: the necessity of the threefold social order arose out of the historical, spiritual-scientific observation of the emergence of democracy. If we observe the quite radical change that occurred in the second decade of the twentieth century, we can also see that that experiences are now possible that could lead people to take such a thing seriously and understand it. One could also say that it was basically only the final consequence of what had already emerged at the end of the eighteenth century in the call for liberty, equality and fraternity. This appeal for liberty, equality and fraternity, which emerged from the French Revolution, is such that it cuts deep into the hearts of all unbiased people, that it must be taken for granted, that it must be striven for. But anyone who is even slightly familiar with the cultural-political literature of the nineteenth century knows how much has been said – and again not by stupid people, but by very clever ones – against these three ideas of liberty, equality, fraternity. Just read the extraordinary multi-volume work of the very talented Magyar [Eötvös] from the 1850s, and you will see how it is proved in a very subtle philosophical that the idea of equality cannot be realized alongside [the idea of] freedom, and that, in turn, the idea of fraternity cannot be realized alongside the idea of absolute equality, and so on. It must be said: what is being put forward here is clever. One sees at last that these very ideas, in the course of the historical development of mankind, well up from the underground to the surface as something quite justified, but that nevertheless the whole of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century were still under the sway of the suggestion of the unitary state. This suggestion of the unitary state was so great that people worked more and more, especially in Central Europe and also over Western Europe, with the exception of England, to shape the unitary state more and more intensively in terms of its agents. One was under the suggestion of the omnipotence of the unitary state, which had to extend over everything. And into that one could not then fit the ideas of liberty, equality, fraternity. If we recognize that this unified state is striving towards threefold order, then we also very soon realize that spiritual life is striving towards freedom, state and political life towards equality of all mature human beings, and economic life towards true brotherhood in associations, and from there out into all of life. As soon as one has the idea of threefolding, one also has the agent for realizing freedom, equality and fraternity. Now, of course, there have been many people, my dear audience, who, when they heard something like the threefolding of the social organism, spoke of utopia. But it is not utopian. Just as it emerged from a spiritual-scientific-historical observation, on the other hand, it emerged from a practical observation of life itself, and it is simply not true that this threefold social order would be about imposing over humanity, which has become somewhat chaotic, but rather it is a matter of the fact that for the person who understands this threefold social order, it can be tackled from every single point of life. You can start anywhere, and then the individual beginnings will flow together into a whole by themselves. This is how we started with the threefold social order in the realm of spiritual life. We started at our Stuttgart Waldorf School, because it is just a school like any other, but a school that has been created out of a truly free spiritual life, I want to mention it first. However, it is difficult to get through today, especially with views on the school system. In this regard, one also experiences strange things. I recently read an article in a magazine that was somewhat critical of the 'National Assembly' that took place in the city of Goethe and Schiller, Weimar, after the so-called German Revolution; of course I have nothing against criticizing this National Assembly, because basically one can say: it is really hardly an exaggeration to describe this national chatter – parliamentarism always has something to do with a chattering association or talkativeness, doesn't it, the special way of talking together! I have nothing against holding up a proper image of this National Assembly. But something strange was said. It was said that this Weimar National Assembly had actually only caused havoc in all areas of public life – with the exception of a single area where it had delivered something useful, namely in the area of schools, through the creation of the so-called primary school, the so-called unified school, and so on. Now, this essay is based on nothing more than the fact that it is easier to see what nonsense the “Weimar National Assembly” has inaugurated in other areas of life than in the field of education, where everyone can prattle on for a very long time before the nonsense is noticed. Now, when our “Freie Waldorfschule” was founded in Stuttgart, it was important that the spiritual life itself should be the foundation and soil with its own requirements, from which teaching and education are derived here. Of course, anthroposophical spiritual science is the source of the pedagogy and didactics of the Waldorf School. I gave the seminar course for the teachers of this Waldorf School based on anthroposophical spiritual science before the opening of the Waldorf School. But this Waldorf School was not misused to instill dogmatic anthroposophy into children in a school of world view. The founding of the Waldorf School was quite the opposite of this. The aim of the Waldorf School was to apply a pedagogy and didactics in which anthroposophical spiritual science can be practically demonstrated right down to the skill of the fingers; from the application of pedagogy and didactics and from what one did, one wanted to show the fruits of anthroposophical feeling and thinking, not by instilling any dogmas. That is why they almost, I would even say radically, refrained from making the Waldorf school a school of world view. That is why religious education was separated from the other subjects. Religious education for Catholic children was entrusted to the Catholic priest, and for Protestant children to the Protestant pastor. And then, in the course of the school's effectiveness, it became apparent that there was a large number of children, dissident children, who did not attend any lessons, neither Catholic nor Protestant. What should be done with these children? Initially, the children's group at the Waldorf School was made up of the children of workers at the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory; after all, it was our friend Emil Molt in Stuttgart who founded this Waldorf School, and initially the children were “the children of workers” at the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory. Now, there were a great many parents who did not want to send their children to any of the religious lessons; but they felt that their children should not grow up without religion, without being introduced to spiritual things. And so we were obliged to set up a kind of anthroposophical free religious education alongside the other lessons, which we then also developed in terms of pedagogy and didactics, and which now stands as a third one, on an equal footing with the other two. The Protestant religion teachers in particular had to state that they feared that the children would run away from them and run over to the anthroposophical religious education, didn't they? But as I said, it was precisely in this treatment of the religious education questions that it should be shown how far the Waldorf School is from wanting to be a school of world view. On the other hand, anthroposophical spiritual science is able to answer the question: What are the forces that have taken on physical form in the child after it has descended from the spiritual world, and what are the forces that are particularly active in the child up to the year in which the teeth change, around the age of seven? They are mainly powers of imitation, and everything that is to be brought to the child at this age must be achieved through a certain study of these childlike powers of imitation. Other powers then emerge from the background of the child's mind around the seventh year. One has to take these powers into account. One then sees how one has to approach reading, writing and so on; from what one knew from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, a pedagogy and didactics were formed, a real art of education that works towards not introducing reading and writing to children in an abstract way, but in such a way that reading and writing are brought out of a certain artistic, holistic humanity. Between the ages of six, seven and nine, teaching is such that nothing abstract, nothing that engages the mere head, the mere intellect, is presented to the child. Our mere numbers and letter signs engage the mere intellect if they are not taken from the full activity of the human being. And so it was particularly important for this childhood age to have a great deal of light shed on it through anthroposophical observation of human development. The corresponding pedagogy and didactics were based on this. Between the ages of nine and ten, there is an important point in a child's development that must be taken into account by educators and teachers. Something occurs that usually goes unnoticed. Before that, the child hardly differs from his or her surroundings. It is best to teach the child in a way that appeals as little as possible to its sense of self. But between the ages of nine and ten, something breaks into the child's mind, the main development of which lasts only a short time. One must be grown to observe what is happening in the child's development, because sometimes it depends on a few days to find the right words, the right encouragement for the child, to bring the right thing forward in the right way. And so it is important to know what human nature wants every year, every week. And so you bring the child up, and we have developed this pedagogy and didactics to bring the child up to the age of 13, 14, 15, where something completely different occurs in child development. Eight days ago, I was obliged to ensure in an evening course for teachers that our so-called tenth class could now be opened in the appropriate way. This is the class that children enter when they have reached sexual maturity, or, as we say in anthroposophical spiritual science, at the age when the childlike astrality, the astral body, as we say, the actual spiritual-soul body, is born. This requires a very special deepening into this important age. And in opening this class, the pedagogical-didactic maxim had to be found again to guide young people into this age. You see, you have to feel the full weight of the age on your soul in a certain way if you really want to practice contemporary pedagogy and didactics in this way. Because you have seen it: in the last few decades – I would say it is an international affair – the so-called youth movement has emerged in the most diverse forms. What did this youth movement mean? The young suddenly demanded something completely new and were aware that the old could not give them what they were demanding. The wanderer instinct and so on, as they are all called, have become known to people. Now this youth movement has clearly shown that the old were no longer able to be the right authority for the young. The young no longer expected what had previously been expected of the young by the old, and a terrible yearning went through the young. I would like to say: In this yearning, however mistaken and nebulous it was in certain respects, the call for a new pedagogy and didactics is clearly expressed. There is no need to [see] whether something that comes up with such elementary power from the depths of life, whether it is more or less right or wrong, but you only have to look at it in its actuality, then it can already prove this or that to you. In particular, anyone who has seen the latest phase of these youth movements, which have only emerged in recent years, must admit that this youth movement first expressed itself in such a way that the nebulous, chaotic urge of one person to join another emerged. I would like to say – the young lived out their lives in packs, in cliques. Then suddenly a strange turn occurred, only in the last few years and especially among the best members of this youth movement a colossal turn occurred. They got tired of connecting one to the other in small cliques. And those who had previously had a strong urge to join one another in small cliques began to feel a kind of disgust for being together. A certain hermit-like behavior asserted itself, youthful hermit-like behavior. They closed themselves off, they encapsulated themselves, the young people. A complete turnaround has taken place. This is also deeply significant. And again, it is not a Central European, but an international issue that has taken hold of all possible youth groups in the civilized world today. It is a matter of the necessity today to provide for spiritual life from the very depths of all of life. Something like this should be created by the Waldorf School in Stuttgart, which, I would like to say, was also created out of social circumstances. All the blustering about the unified school, which arises from all kinds of enmity and antipathy and sympathy, is of course immediately lost in the objective when one teaches and educates out of the nature of the human being. There, of course, people are taught and educated uniformly. But the matter is brought into being appropriately, not out of political proposals or antipathies and ranklings and räsonnements. The fruitful further development of humanity depends on this, that out of the factual the factual be founded. But to achieve something like this, to really have teachers who can approach young people in such a way with such a pedagogy and didactics, you need a free spiritual life, because you have to be able to use the full power of the teachers. My dear attendees, many a person has thought for a long time, especially in times of liberal ideas, when freedom has been so greatly undermined, many a person has thought: we need programs, we need comprehensive ideas. Many programs have been devised about the best way to teach, especially about curricula. Now, ladies and gentlemen, when you put five, six, twelve not particularly clever people together – forgive this somewhat delicate or undelicate allusion – when so and so many people sit down and let their abstract minds , then they come up with the most ideal programs, all of it perfect; Clause I, the teacher has to teach this in class, Clause II, the teacher has to treat the students in such and such a way, Clause III, this or that has to happen. For the eighth year, this is how it has to be done, and so on. In the greatest perfection, paragraph I to x, everything can be presented in this way, and you can get an ideal program out of it, with the average intellectual predisposition of the twelve people who sat down together. Not much is needed to define anything in abstracto. Only because these people have the urge to disagree, we have received not one, but many programs. There are programs and cleverness buzzing through the world. When would there have been more programs and cleverness – whereby the word “cleverness” is not even used ironically – buzzing through the world than precisely in the nineteenth century. But you see, that is not what matters, what matters is what happens in reality. What matters is real, practical life. Well, we have indeed gradually entered into strange realms of abstraction. Today, people even think about very strange theories in theory. For example, they think about the fact that if they travel from point A to point B at ordinary speed, and a cannon is fired at point A and another cannon is fired at point B, they will hear the cannon that was fired later than the one that was fired earlier. But if they move faster and faster, the interval changes; and then they work out that if they move at the speed of sound, they even hear the one cannon that is fired later at the same time. And if they move faster than the speed of sound, they even hear the cannon that is fired later earlier than the one that is fired earlier! Now, you see, that may seem quite correct in theory, and there is nothing to be said against it. But someone who thinks in a spiritual sense, thinks realistically, not just logically, has something to object to, because that is only one way to get to the truth, and he wants to think realistically, and then he also has to imagine what such a person would look like who would now move faster than sound. Einstein even calculated what a clock would look like if it were to fly out into space at the speed of light and then come back again. Theoretically, all this can be done, and of course it is all theoretically correct. It has been much admired. But just imagine what the clock would look like when it comes back, or what a person would look like if he were to move at the speed of sound! One thing is certain: one would not be able to judge the differences in the speed of sound, because the human being would have to become sound himself. This would lead one to the conclusion that one cannot help but let concrete reality flow into one's soul, not abstract theory. Only then are we on the right path to truth. But then we also realize that a dozen people can work out very beautiful programs. But a dozen teachers can only realize what lies within the power of these teachers. And the most beautiful ideals have no value at all compared to what really lives in people. Therefore, what is to be achieved must be taken from the reality of the human being. You simply have to create this school republic out of the individual personalities of the teachers, you must not want more than the teachers can achieve, who you can put in their place. You have to take the specific teachers into account, and the school program emerges from this specific teaching staff. But this is only possible in a free spiritual life, in a spiritual life such as is striven for in the threefold social organism, where the individual human being is actually directly confronted with the spiritual world, and feels responsible for what he has to achieve in the field of spiritual life, directly responsible to the spiritual world, not to the school inspector, or through him to the minister of education and so on, but directly to the powers of the spiritual world. For an education and training system such as I have just described can only be developed if one does not merely have an abstract, intellectual spiritual life, but a real spiritual life, when it is the spirit itself that reigns on earth through the deeds of men, when one appeals to the living spirit, not merely to concepts and ideas, not merely to the intellectual and the intellectualizing. But you can only bring it out, bring it forth, this living spiritual life, this active spirit, from the individual human personalities themselves. From the teacher of the lowest elementary school class up to the teacher of the highest school system, each one is integrated into the independent spiritual organism, so that each one can only follow himself, and has so much teaching to do that he still has time to perform administrative tasks, so that everything that is administered is done by those who are still teaching, who really still teach, not by those who have retired or been taken out of the school system. The administration of the school system is the responsibility of those who are still actively teaching. There would be no authority, people say. No, that is precisely where the true authority of spiritual life would be found, namely, the self-evident authority. In no other field can authority arise except that which arises of its own accord. I would like to know how authority can fail to arise when someone really has the will to do something beneficial and knows that someone else can give them advice, then it will come, and then the one who can give the advice will have the self-evident authority. I have the task of running the Waldorf School in Stuttgart. Each teacher is independent in his or her class. The person who does something in class does so on his or her own initiative. The opinion has never been expressed that I have ever ordered anyone to do anything at the Waldorf School. On the other hand, everyone seeks advice on all kinds of matters, and there is a unified spirit in this Waldorf School. The authority is there, as a matter of course. And one could see it grow, this self-evident authority, on the spirit of the Waldorf School in the last two years since this Waldorf School has existed. One could start in this school, which started two years ago with not quite 200 children, which now has over 500 children, who are once again facing difficulties because they do not want to increase the size of the classes, the lower four classes, there should only be as many children admitted as were there before the Elementary School Law was passed. Recently, however, it has become clear that parents will not put up with this. Now, [in] this Waldorf School, there is a place where you can actually realize in a certain area what you can know from the free spiritual life. Sometimes one has strange experiences there, which I perhaps, for easily understandable reasons, in so far as they arise from the interaction, in the social interaction that we do not, however, let into the teaching, with the official life, about which I I prefer not to make any comments on now; but it is already possible to see how the individual things that lie in this threefolding of the social organism can be tackled from the practical, concrete point of view, and how one does not have to deal with some utopia. Likewise, this can be done in other areas of spiritual life. And in fact, the anthroposophical worldview will not impose itself dogmatically, but will prove its right to exist through its viability. Because, my dear audience, one should not believe at all that someone who writes something like 'The Key Points of the Social Question' from such a basis, from a realistic basis, is thinking of anything utopian. There is no question of that, not even in the choice of expressions: threefold social order. In recent years, when many people have made the threefold order into a sect, which of course it was certainly not meant to be by me, I have had to experience it again and again, especially in Germany: how is it to be organized? How this, how that? It is really quite bad when, even in the post-war period, you are always confronted with the word “organize,” and especially when you call something you would like to see realized an organism, and you still hear the words: “organize, organize”; you organize where there is something mechanical; an organism is precisely there so that you cannot organize it. You cannot organize the organic. That must appear as an organism. Where you want to organize something, you only have the [inorganic] at hand. You cannot organize an organism. You have to let it become. You can see the thoroughly misunderstood nature of things when such things occur. And so the threefold structure of the social organism is based on the fact that things must form, that one only has to develop the formative forces, that the threefold social organism must arise. Therefore, it cannot be described in the abstract. Especially those who have spoken of utopia would actually always like to have utopias. When speaking of such things, one can hear it asked, well: what then will be the position regarding ownership of a sewing machine in the threefolded social organism? This question has been asked here at this place, and so on. Now, my dear attendees, a free spiritual life is only possible under the condition of a real spiritual life. Once, when I was talking about such things in a Swiss city, a university teacher replied to me: Yes, but we already have the freedom of the spiritual life, because in all state constitutions it says: Science and its teaching are free. But, ladies and gentlemen, the point is that science, which is free, should only be there as a free science. If, from the outset, science is raised in such a way that people are trained who are suitable for this or that office, and who are taught the program of their office, then you can safely decree that science and its teaching are free. If science itself is enslaved, then enslaved science naturally feels very free when it is allowed to develop as a slave. And so it was often replied: In such and such a country, the state does not interfere in schools at all. That is the worst thing to say, because then you no longer notice it, and that is much worse than when you notice it and rebel against it, than when you no longer even notice how what flows in is only based on state principles arising without factual or specialized knowledge from the incorrect democratic, when one no longer even notices what should arise from the abilities for each new generation, what the human being still brings with him from the spiritual world by entering into physical existence through birth. We simply need teachers and educators who stand with holy reverence before the child and say to themselves: something from the spiritual world has been entrusted to me in this child, which I have to fathom and solve as a mystery. I must inquire what message from the spiritual world they have given him. Knowledge of the spiritual world must be alive in teaching and education; this spiritual world must be real in teaching and education. When the coming generation is tyrannized by that which is already there, by the living generation, then the spiritual life is made unfree. And to a large extent, the question of teaching and education in a free spiritual life is a question of teachers, the question of finding the right teachers, those who stand before the growing children as I have just characterized it. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, I wanted to use a few strokes, which of course must always remain fragmentary, to point out how the free spiritual life is to be thought of in the threefold social organism. As I said at the beginning of my talk, today we are actually facing a different time from that in the spring, in the spring of 1919. At that time one could believe that there would really be a sufficiently large number of people who would support the realization of the threefold social order. Today one would be out of touch with the times if one had the same faith as one had then. Threefolding must not become a sect either, something that one can believe in and advocate everywhere and at all times, theoretically as one's opinion. Today it is quite clear, however heavy-heartedly one has to admit it, that within European civilization the people who actually do the economic work have no sense of progress, no insight into real needs, that one is preaching to deaf ears if one wants to work into economic life with reasonable foundations. Today it is clear that one can present individual productive examples to the world, as we tried to do in “The Coming Day” and “Futurum”. These examples will exist as individual white ravens, they will be careful to survive, and they will fulfill the expectations placed on them, at least as individuals. But today we cannot speak of the fact that one comes across an insight in general economic life in order to be able to grasp such things with such ideas, as one could still believe in the first urge of human experiences and results in 1919. In the meantime, people have become accustomed to glossing over the old declining forces. They are still downward forces, after all, and the collapse is still coming. They have only decided to delay the collapse a little, to let everything slide, so that they do not have to expend the energy to move forward to new ideas. And humanity is largely asleep and does not notice how the downward forces are actually raging, and how, with each quarter, civilized humanity is drawing closer to this decline. People would much rather face the convulsions and terrible upheavals that lie in wait for the future in the present if they cannot warm to ideas in the immediate present that could be properly extracted from reality in a calm development, which will nevertheless be needed in the future. And so we can say that there is little hope to be placed in economic life today. People will have to be forced to take up the new ideas, through their own need, through the effect of the forces of decline. But in the spiritual life we must work unstintingly to develop the free spiritual life as a member of the threefold organism. This is what must not flag, what must be cultivated unconditionally, because the time in which we live is such that people's souls are becoming emptier and emptier, more and more desolate. They are too lazy to admit this to themselves today, but we are heading for terrible times in terms of people's mental state, which will also be reflected in their physical condition. I have spoken of this often, including in public lectures. The spiritual life must save us through to the times when reasonable people will also see something on the economic front. It is necessary that this spiritual life be cultivated in its freedom wherever it can be cultivated. Anthroposophical soil is the best soil imaginable for this, because then work must be done out of complete freedom. For what needs to be worked out is not yet there. And since it is spirit, it can only be worked out through freedom. And so, especially in the near future, anthroposophical striving and true social striving will increasingly coincide. And we will have to face the souls with the fact that the economic will have to lag behind, that the spiritual simply has to go ahead today. This is also shown by the qualities of our opponents; in Central Europe, a strange, well-organized opposition is now asserting itself. This well-organized opposition had already worked its way up to the point that at the time, on printed slips of paper distributed to all the people in this packed, largest Stuttgart hall, it was written, not only in allusions, but quite clearly, that it was actually my fault that the Battle of Marnesch was lost in 1914, and that Minister Simons in England has done poorly in recent times. It was not just in innuendo, but it was written on the slips of paper in a very crude way! You could see how it is here with widely extended parties that do not want to admit what has actually happened, that need scapegoats because it no longer works to say that the stab in the back, with which one first wanted to cover up a really eminently lost war, a war that was lost by every trick in the book, they wanted to cover that up with the 'stab in the back'; now they wanted to cover up the absolute incompetence of anyone who has ever led an army, of Ludendorffism, that's what they want to cover up. Today they want to make great geniuses out of people who are quite incapable. A cultural life steeped in lies is a cultural life in decline. And the situation is no different in the West, no different in America. There, everything is a little more pronounced, where defeat makes things stand out more sharply. Everywhere we need to extract a real, a true, a free spiritual life from the corruption of humanity, which is suffocating in lies and untruthfulness today. For this is identical with truth, and this is at the same time identical with a striving that is in keeping with reality. Therefore, even if there is little prospect of success today, we may still believe that a sufficiently large number of people can warm to a full understanding of the idea of threefolding. Those who can muster the necessary enthusiasm and courage for a free spiritual life will help the threefold social organism to get back on its feet. Then a truly free spiritual life will become a reality. If it becomes a reality in people's hearts, in their powers and in their actions, then the threefold social organism will most certainly follow of its own accord out of the necessity, out of the need of the time. (Lively applause!) Discussion Question: How can an ordinary person, who has no influence on public institutions, work in the spirit of threefolding? Rudolf Steiner: The question that was asked here first is: How can an ordinary person, who has no influence on public institutions, work in the spirit of threefolding? Well, firstly, it is not quite clear to me how someone can be without influence on public institutions. Unless he is in prison or in some other place where he can hardly move, he is actually always subject to a certain influence on public institutions. The outside world ensures that one is never completely without influence on public institutions; one has to pay taxes and so on, so one always has some influence on public institutions. So the question cannot really be put that way. But then, if perhaps what is meant is: How can one work in the sense of the threefold social order, when one perhaps does not have the opportunity to speak, to speak freely somehow, when one does not have the opportunity to be, let's say, a member of parliament or something similar, how can one work in the sense of the threefold social order of the social organism? Then you have to say: Well, this impulse for threefolding is something very concrete. And that is why you can actually only talk about it in concrete examples. You see, I want to say the following, for example. There are institutions everywhere in the sense of nationalization, partial or more or less extensive nationalization - let's say, of medical matters, of nursing. Now, it has happened time and again that good people – who, in their own opinion, are “good” followers of our philosophy – come and say that they would like to have this or that remedy, and so on! So they would actually like to encourage quackery and to violate the law! They can be won over for that, those people! They don't need to have any influence on public institutions, but when they lack something, they don't recognize - perhaps with more or less justification - the state-recognized doctor and want to cure somehow from behind. I have even known ministers who appeared in public parliament to speak out against quackery and for the protection of the medical profession by law, and afterwards, when they themselves became ill, or anyone else became ill, they turned to someone who was not a state-recognized doctor! It is terribly difficult to persuade people to really join those movements that simply correspond to the introduction of such institutions, which are necessary if one wants to have a free spiritual life, or in general, if one wants that which one professes! Many such examples could be cited, where everyone, in their place, by not being afraid to speak out wherever it is possible for them, takes a stand against what they recognize as evil. If you recognize the state protection of medicine as an absurdity, then speak up for it! Or, ladies and gentlemen, is it not an absurdity that over there, across the border, at Leopoldshöhe, there must be a different art of healing than here just a few steps away? But a doctor who is licensed over there is not allowed to help here. If you give in to reason, you will immediately see the matter as an absurdity. But if, let us say, for example, you are a member of the Federal Council or something similar, then you do not see this absurdity! And if you do see it, then you do not find it opportune to represent it. But if one person finds another, there will eventually be enough people to really come to reason. And instead of asking: How can an ordinary person, who has no part in public affairs, become active in the spirit of threefolding, do what one finds in every step and turn of life, in order to carry it out in the spirit of threefolding. Then one will see that every hour, every day, one finds opportunities to become active in the spirit of threefolding. Question: In Holland, the constitutional ban on official Catholic processions is now to be lifted, which is causing quite a stir. Would this actually be a question of the free spiritual life or also of the public legal life? Rudolf Steiner: With some questions it is so with the threefold social organism, although the idea is quite right, of course: How does the blood of the chest or the head come to play this or that role in the migraine? The blood simply circulates, and so one cannot say that the blood of the chest organism is different from the blood of the head, but one can only speak of the blood in general. And so it is not easy to categorize things again. The threefold social organism is precisely manifested in the fact that things cannot be categorized. However, one does experience very strange things. In recent years I have always had to speak of the three-part human organism, the sensory organism, the rhythmic organism and the metabolic-limb organism, and in recent years a great deal has been done by myself and our medical and scientific friends to develop this idea of the three-part human being. But recently a book was written by someone called Kurt Leese, I believe. He has now, because I said that things should not be put together in boxes, but that the whole human being is head, nevertheless the human being is mainly head in the head, the whole human being is head. Things go into each other. The head is also taken care of and dependent on the limbs. Things all go into each other. Kurt Leese can no longer think this. He can only think of three if it is nicely next to each other, but he cannot think it when it goes into each other. He says: It's a shocking idea. But we will have to get used to such shocks, even in the tripartite social organism, if we are to imagine, through the effect of abstractions, what a clock looks like when it flies away at the speed of sunlight and returns after years, is difficult to verify for a variety of reasons: firstly, because of the nature of the clock; secondly, because of the person who would then have to check it when the clock returns, and so on. So the present is not shocked at all by such ideas of the abstract. But it is shocked when something that is in line with reality is placed before it. So it is necessary not to press things so much that one now asks: Is this a matter of the free spiritual life or of the legal life? One can say: If one begins to prohibit any expressions or revelations of the spiritual life at all, to make legal provisions about it, then one is on a slippery slope with regard to the spiritual life. I must say, you see, with regard to those institutions, that I once showed you here – those who were there – a peculiar document, the document that was once issued as a patent in 1847, I believe, in Switzerland, where it says: It was through the power of the Almighty that the brave Swiss general Dufour succeeded in expelling the Jesuits from the country. Then it is explained in more detail. Today, in free Switzerland, it seems a little strange that the eradication of the Jesuits is attributed to the grace of God and the power that God has given! But it is preserved that way; I had the document photographed because it is so beautiful. I will show the photograph again on occasion. It is, after all, quite good to occasionally bring things home to people face to face. But even with regard to Jesuitism, I am not in favor of combating it by law. Those who want to fight it should fight it with intellectual weapons. One should not spare oneself the inconvenience of having to fight against everything intellectual with intellectual weapons, not by making laws. Laws can be made with majority decisions. One does not need to say that the majority is always nonsense, because then reality, social reality, would always be nonsense. Now, as I said, one does not need to go that far, but in any case one cannot say that the majority is always wisdom. And laws can be made in a democratic state, especially with majority decisions. But certain things just cannot be done by majority vote. They have to live out. And so everything that is regarded as the erring spiritual must also live out. Therefore, one must say: It is a matter of freedom and not of compulsion when efforts are made to reintroduce the banned Catholic processions and to lift the bans against Catholic processions. The only remedy is to show that these processions are not reasonable, and to educate people to this effect, so that they do not take part in them; then they will stop of their own accord! This is the only remedy in spiritual life, just as one can teach a person good taste and he will do the right thing of his own accord, but not by passing laws against it. That is what a free spiritual life must demand. The one who has to resort to laws in the spiritual realm is on the path that I once described in Nuremberg in 1908 in a lecture cycle, where I said - it is not said without significance, using strong inks, but these strong inks should characterize adequately – I said at the time: Actually, today's humanity no longer strives to go out on the street without a doctor on the right and a police officer on the left, the doctor for physical protection, the police officer, well, for protection in materialistic times, yes, for physicality too! That has gradually become the ideal. I have heard many things in my life, but time and again I had to shrink back a little inside when I heard, with increasing frequency, over and over again: “That should be prohibited by law.” That had gradually become an awfully common saying – instead of taking the trouble to teach people good taste themselves, so that these things would stop of themselves – 'it should be banned by law', 'by majority decision' or something like that should be done. That is the one thing that must be asserted in principle. Therefore, all prohibitions against processions and the like should be lifted, and things should be allowed to run their course. Then spiritual life will also be able to express itself freely It is absolutely essential that stupidity, folly and evil be conquered by cleverness and kindness, that ugliness be conquered by beauty, and that nothing be legally eradicated in the realm of spiritual life. Question of the youth movement: The speaker explains that the individual members of the youth movements want and need to experience truth and reality; the economic sphere seems to them to be the area where everyone has a say, where everyone should be active and engaged. Later, the individual often withdraws again to reflect or simply to get away from society. It is almost impossible to reach a solution. Soon it is the economic that provides a value system; there is no recognition of the state or the political, but everything is conditioned by the economic. Individuals are diverted from their spiritual nature by economic life - or they withdraw into solitude]. Rudolf Steiner: In essence, the Lord has characterized what I have already said in the lecture: the phenomena of the youth movements of recent decades. But it would not be entirely correct to stop at this phenomenon of the youth movement. I have already found some understanding among members of this youth movement when I have struck what lives in the deeper foundations of the whole development of time. I had to say to some members of the youth movement, to which you yourself seem to belong and know very well: Yes, the year 1899, for example, is an extraordinarily important one for the development of humanity as a whole, and in particular for the development of Western civilization. And anyone who has an eye for such things knows how fundamentally different those people are who either lived through their childhood before 1899 was around, so they were a few years or ten years old, or those people who, let's say, were even born later, so they are hardly in their twenties now, and those people who were born before 90 and so on. At the bottom of their souls, very important things were going on, I would say, from the very source of existence, and that is connected with the fact that at the end of the nineteenth century, gates to the supersensible world were opened for the first time in the Western world. It was no longer possible, let us say, in the 1880s, to lead a different life, even with a powerful urge for the spiritual life; the Nietzschean life is more or less that life, which one must present as one that has become ill from the decline of Western culture because it could not find what it was looking for: the spiritual basis in everything phenomenal, in everything external, in everything sensual. The life of Nietzsche is therefore extraordinarily interesting to study from this point of view. He participates in Schopenhauerism, becomes ill from Schopenhauerism; he participates in historicism, becomes ill from historicism; he participates in Wagnerism, becomes ill from Wagnerism. He participates in naturalism, in positivism, becomes ill from it. He participates in the Darwinian molding of the idea of humanity, becomes ill from it, and so on, and so on. Instead of the idea of repeated earthly lives, he comes to the idea of the return of the same, becomes ill from it. Nietzsche could not help but fall ill from his urge for the supernatural world. It was simply not possible to achieve this directly and fundamentally at the end of the nineteenth century or before the end of the nineteenth century. The gates have opened, and today we cannot help but turn to the revelations of the spiritual world if we want to achieve an inwardly satisfied existence. Speaking of nature in the way that was justified in the 1880s is no longer justified today. Today we can point out how there was a current of opinion favoring an 'ignorabimus', how a naturalist, Du Bois-Reymond, spoke of 'ignorabimus', how Ranke, the historian, by seeking to present history as an event with the exception of the Christ event; that this comes from the primal forces, that history does not belong there - so 'ignorabimus'. Today we cannot do that. Today we are on the threshold of the supersensible world wanting to enter, and it is only the dull reluctance that is still bracing itself against the acceptance of a spiritual world view. And what is rumbling in the youth, that is the deeper thing, that is rumbling inside. And therefore, no matter how much individual members of the youth movement may say, “We do not want the abstract, we want the emotional,” they will still have to realize: What spiritual science in anthroposophy wants to be is precisely not something abstract, it is the full human being, it is what comes out of the whole human being, it is what expresses itself as art and as religion and as science, and it is the point at which the whole, full human being can come to his inner realization. And today we are only suffering from the fact that economic routine does not want to take leave of economic reason and that we must first begin to work on the recovery of spiritual life, until the unreasonableness of economic life must follow through necessity. And I am convinced that something good and right will come out of the youth movement, just as I do not despair when people keep saying, for my sake, that they cannot distinguish between expressionism and a windmill, a towel just pulled out of the water and hung up to dry, or a human portrait, say, for example, a boot heel. Of course, sometimes you can't distinguish that with the expressionists, but nevertheless, there are approaches to something in it, which, if it is refined in the most diverse places where it appears, will lead to that in which spiritual science, as it is represented here, only wants to be a guide and a leader and to work from the very most elementary. But of course, sometimes you experience the fact that, despite the fact that you mean it to be so concrete, the opposite is held against you. I just want to say that last as a joke. The day before yesterday I had a lecture in Zurich. I spoke with slides about this building here. Then afterwards, one of the audience stood up and said: Yes, why do we need such a building, why do we need a Christ's head and Christ at all, why do we need it today? I was walking on the street this afternoon, there was a very drunk person, I followed him, and I joined him. This is a temple of God, this is a real temple and we do not need built temples. — On this occasion, I only regretted that no friendly spirit was found to find the right door with the person in question. But in view of the unnatural conditions of the present time, one may meet people who do not mean, as I say, that we should not build temples, but who mean that we should follow drunkards. They really want to work from the elementary, and they deserve, so to speak, to have spiritual science brought to their full understanding, because they can understand it. For the youth movement is connected with a very great change that occurred at the end of the nineteenth century and that is actually based not only on superficial historical forces but on profound cosmic forces. |
| 300c. Faculty Meetings with Rudolf Steiner II: Fifty-Ninth Meeting
18 Sep 1923, Stuttgart Translated by Ruth Pusch, Gertrude Teutsch |
|---|
| It would be good if we arranged to have lectures just for the teachers of the Waldorf School during the school year. That would be good. But it does not appear possible during the holidays. |
| I certainly think we need something. From the perspective of the entirety of Waldorf pedagogy, it would be desirable for us to speak about the effects of moral and religious impulses upon other subjects. |
| A teacher: Someone wants to make a brochure with pictures of the Waldorf School. Dr. Steiner: I haven’t the slightest interest in that. If we did that, we would have The Coming Day print it. |
| 300c. Faculty Meetings with Rudolf Steiner II: Fifty-Ninth Meeting
18 Sep 1923, Stuttgart Translated by Ruth Pusch, Gertrude Teutsch |
|---|
Dr. Steiner: Before I leave, we need to discuss the fate of the fifth grade, and I would also like to hear about your experiences. The teachers who went to England will tell you about their experiences themselves. Haven’t you already reported your successes? It is a fact that the teachers’ activities made a great impression; seen from behind the scenes, each Waldorf teacher is a person who made a great impression. Everyone did that individually. Baravalle made an enormously deep impression with his presentation of the metamorphosis of surfaces, which merges into the Pythagorean theorem. Miss Lämmert’s presentation on teaching music also made a very deep impression. Dr. Schwebsch then made an impression through his knowledge and ability, and Dr. Schubert was very convincing about the truth of the Waldorf School as a whole. We must, of course, say the same about Dr. von Heydebrand, an impression so large that most people said they would like to have their children taught by such a person. That was the impression she made. Miss Röhrle was more active behind the scenes, and I think she could tell you about her success herself. Is the last issue of The Goetheanum here? I would like to recommend that you all read the book by Miss MacMillan, Education through the Imagination. In my copy, I wrote something I did not include in my essay: “It is as though someone were very capable of describing the dishes on the table without knowing how they were prepared in the kitchen.” What is so interestingly described in the book is the surface, an analysis of the surface of the soul, at least to the extent that it develops imaginative forces, but she does not describe the work that gives rise to them. It is excellent as a description of the child’s soul, only she does not understand the forces that give rise to it. I think that if you apply the foundation anthroposophy offers, it would illuminate everything. Every anthroposophist can gain a great deal from that book because a great deal of anthroposophy can be read into it. It is a sketch everyone can develop wonderfully for themselves—it is a reason for working thoroughly with anthroposophy. Miss MacMillan would like to come with some assistants at Christmas. I would ask that you treat her kindly. For some, she is one of the most important pedagogical reformers. If you go into her school, you will see a great deal, even if the children are not present. She is a pedagogical genius. She wants to arrange things so that she will see some of your teaching. I already told her that if she looks at our school without seeing the teaching, she will get nothing from it. We had planned the Zurich course, but when Wachsmuth and I came back from England and heard that it was being seriously undertaken, we both nearly fainted. We will need to change it to Easter. We will also present an Easter play for the first time. I have already arranged for that. It will be at Easter. Perhaps the teachers who were in England would like to say something. A teacher asks whether such things as sewing cards are proper to use at the age of twelve for developing the strengths of geometry. Dr. Steiner: That is correct. After twelve, they would be too much like a game. I would never use things at school that do not exist in real life. The children cannot develop a relationship to life from things that contain nothing of life. The Fröbel things were created for school. We should create nothing for school alone. We should bring only things that exist in real life into school, but in an appropriate form. Some teachers report about their impressions of England. Dr. Steiner: You need to take into account that the English do not understand logic alone, even if it is poetic. They need everything to be presented in concrete pictures. As soon as you get into logic, English people cannot understand it. Their mentality is such that they understand only what is concrete. A teacher thought that the people organized through improvisation. He had the impression they were at the limits of their capabilities. Dr. Steiner: All the anthroposophists and a number of other guests drove from Wales to London. All of the participants were from Penmaenmawr. There was an extra train from Penmaenmawr. We had two passenger cars and a luggage car. The train left late so it could go quickly. The conductor came along, and the luggage was still outside. Wachsmuth said it needed to be put aboard. The passengers saw to it that the train waited. That is something that is not possible in Germany. At some stations there was a lot of disorder. Here, people don’t know what happens, and there you have to go to the luggage car yourself. In Manchester, two railway companies meet, and the officials there had a small war. One group did not want to take us aboard, and the other wanted to get rid of us. They often lose the luggage but then find it again. These private companies have some advantages, but also disadvantages. No trains leave from such stations on Sunday because the same people who own the hotels also own the railways. People have to stay over until Monday because there are no trains on Sunday. I discussed the inner aspects of Penmaenmawr in a lecture. A teacher: In England they spoke about the position of women in ancient Greece and how women were not treated as human beings. Schuré describes the Mysteries in which women apparently played a major role. Dr. Steiner: Women as such certainly played a role, particularly those chosen for the Mysteries. They were, however, women who did not have their own families. Women who had their own family were never brought into public life. Children were raised at home, so everyone assumed women would not participate in public life. Until the child was seven, he or she knew almost nothing of public life, and fathers saw their children only rarely. They hardly knew them. It was a different way of life that was not seen as less valuable. The women chosen for the Mysteries often played a very important role. Then there were those like Aspasia. We need to divide the fifth grade. I would have liked to have a male teacher, if for no other reason than that people say we are filling the faculty only with women. However, since we don’t have an overwhelming majority of women and the situation is still relatively in balance, and, in fact, I was unable to find a man, we can do nothing else. As I was looking around for someone capable, I put together some statistics. I looked at how things are. It is the case that in middle schools women have a greater capacity. Men are more capable only in the subjects that are absolutely essential, whereas women can teach throughout. Men are less capable. That is one of the terrible things of our times. Thus, there was nothing to do other than to hire this young woman. I think she will make a good teacher. She did her dissertation on a remark in one of my lectures about how Homer begins with “Sing me, Muse, of the man,” and on something from Klopstock, “Sing, undying soul!” The 5c class will thus be taken over by Dr. Martha Häbler. I think she is quite industrious. I want you, that is, the two fifth grade teachers, to make some proposals about which children we should move from the current classes into the new class. We will take children from both classes. Dr. Häbler will be visiting, and I will introduce her when I come on the tenth. She will immediately become part of the faculty and will participate in the meetings. That leads me to a second question. I am going to ask Miss Klara Michels to take over the 3b class. I have asked Mrs. Plinke to go to Miss Cross’s school in Kings Langley. The gardening teacher asks whether they should create class gardens. Dr. Steiner: I have nothing against that. Until now the garden work has been more improvised. Write something up. It can go into the curriculum. The science teacher: From teaching botany, I have the feeling that we should grow plants in the garden that we will study in botany. Dr. Steiner: That is possible. In that way there will be more of a plan in the garden. A teacher asks about handwork. Dr. Steiner: Mrs. Molt can turn over her last two periods in handwork to Miss Christern. Since we have let a number of things go, I would ask you to present them now. I would like you to take a serious look at S.T. He is precocious. He is very talented and also quite reasonable, but you always have to keep him focused. I gave him a strong reminder that he needs to take an interest in his school subjects. He has read Plato, Kant, and Intuitive Thinking as a Spiritual Path: A Philosophy of Freedom. He pretty much has his mind made up. If you think he needs some extra help, he should receive it. He would prefer that you analyze esoteric science for him. He has gone from school to school and was in a cloister school first. He will be a hard nut to crack. A teacher asks about a second conference for young people and also about lectures for anthroposophical teachers outside the Waldorf School. Dr. Steiner: We are planning another conference for young people, but you will need to decide how you want it. It is all the same to me, as I can adjust my lectures accordingly. It would be good if we arranged to have lectures just for the teachers of the Waldorf School during the school year. That would be good. But it does not appear possible during the holidays. I don’t know about such a conference when so many deadly thoughts fly around between such beautiful ones. Those four days were terrible. Such conferences are not very useful for what we need here at school. It seems to me, and I think we should discuss this, as though a somewhat different impulse is living here. That is what I think. I believe that an entirely new feeling of responsibility will arise out of the seriousness with which the pedagogy was taken up in England. That clearly indicates that we must develop very strong forces. I certainly think we need something. From the perspective of the entirety of Waldorf pedagogy, it would be desirable for us to speak about the effects of moral and religious impulses upon other subjects. We should speak about direct teaching experience, which we could do more easily at a youth conference. The youth conference will have open meetings. I think that is easier than if we have a conference where people sit from morning until evening. I will be here again from the tenth to the fourteenth of October, so we can plan to speak about this question in more detail then. Other than your participation, you will not have much to do with that conference. Since today’s youth want to be let loose, I think I will not have very much to do with such a conference either. It might be possible to have no school during those days, so that it would be easy to give a lecture. I cannot easily be here at any other time; I have too many things to do. If we are to build, I must be in Dornach. During the fall holidays, we can speak about higher pedagogical questions, but only Waldorf teachers can attend. The public could attend the conference. We could arrange things so that everyone gets something from the conference, the parents as well as the teachers, but what they receive would be different. If I can present everything I have to say as something living, it will be that way. (Speaking about a newly hired teacher, X.) I was satisfied with the periods I observed. He is really serious about the work and has found his way into the material well. The students understand him, but he needs some guidance. I have not allowed him here today because I wanted to say that. He needs to feel that you are all behind him. He needs to remain enthusiastic, which he is very much so now. The music teacher asks about presenting rhythms in music that are different from those in eurythmy. He uses the normal rhythms and would like to know whether only the two-, three-, and four-part rhythms are important, or whether he should go on to five- and seven-part. Dr. Steiner: Use five- and seven-part rhythms only with the older children, not under fifteen years old. I think if you did it with children under fifteen, it would confuse their feeling for music. I can hardly imagine that those who do not have the talent to become musicians would learn it alone. It is sufficient to go only up to four-part rhythm. You need to be careful that their musical feeling remains transparent as long as possible, so that they can experience the differences. It will not be that way once they have learned seven-part rhythm. There are certainly pedagogical advantages when the children actively participate in conducting—they participate dynamically, but everyone should do that. You can use the standard conductor’s movements. The music teacher: Until now, I have only done that with all of them together. Should I allow individuals to conduct in the lower grades? Dr. Steiner: I think that could begin around age nine or ten. Much of what is decisive during that period comes out of the particular relationship that develops when one child stands as an individual before the group. That is also something we could do in other subjects; for example, in arithmetic one child could lead the others in certain things. That is something we could easily do there, but in music it becomes an actual part of the art itself. A teacher asks about the order of the eurythmy figures. Dr. Steiner: I had them set up so that the vowels were together, then the consonants, and then a few others. There are twenty-two or twenty-three figures. You could, of course, put the related consonants together, in other words, not just alphabetically. It would be best to feel the letter you are working with and not be completely dependent upon some order. You should perceive it more qualitatively, not simply as a series of one next to the other. If this were not such a terribly difficult time, I believe there would be a great deal living here. The difficulties are now more subtle. Before the children have learned a specific gesture, they cannot connect any concept with the figure, but the moment they learn the gesture, you should relate it to the figure. They must recognize the relationship in such a way that they will understand the movement, not just the character and feeling. The feeling is expressed through the veils, but the children are too young for veils. Character is something you can gradually teach them after they have formed an inner relationship to the movement. When they understand what the principle behind the figures is, that will have a favorable effect upon the teaching of eurythmy. Over time, they will develop an artistic feeling; when you can help develop that, you should do so. How is the situation in the 9b class? A teacher: T.L. has left. Dr. Steiner: That is too bad. A teacher: L.A. in the fourth grade is stealing and lying. She also has a poor memory. Dr. Steiner: She is lying because she wants to hide that. It would be good if, and this always helps, you could dictate a little story to her so that she would have to learn it very well. The story should be about a child who steals and then gets into an absurd situation. Earlier, I gave such stories to parents. Make up a little story in which a child ends up in an absurd situation due to the course of events, so that this child will no longer want to steal. You can make up various stories; they could be bizarre or even grotesque. Of course, this helps only when the child carries it in a living way, when she has to review it in her soul time and again. The child should commit the story to memory just as she knows the Lord’s Prayer, so that the story lives within her and she can always bring it forth from her memory. If you can do that, that would really help. If one story is not enough, you should do a second. This is also something you can do in class. It would hurt nothing if others also hear it. The child should repeat it again and again. Others can be around, but they do not need to memorize it. You should not say why you are doing it, don’t speak with the children about it at all. The mother should know only that it will help her child. The child should not know that, and the class, absolutely not. The child should learn in a very naïve way what the story presents. For her sister, you could shorten the story and tell it to her again and again. With L.A., you could do it in class, but the others do not need to memorize it. A teacher asks whether an eighteen-year-old girl who is deaf and dumb can come to the Waldorf School. Dr. Steiner: There is nothing to say against it. However, it would be good if she remained at the commercial art school and took some additional classes here, for instance, art or eurythmy. She is completely deaf. An association can develop just as well with the movements of the limbs as with the movements of the organ of speech. A teacher asks about the groups of animals and whether that should be brought into connection with the various stages of life. Dr. Steiner: The children first need to understand the aspects of the human being. What follows is secondary. You can do that after you tell them about the major divisions of the head, rhythmic, and metabolic animals, but you cannot do it completely systematically. A teacher asks about Th.H. in the fifth grade, who is not doing well in writing. Dr. Steiner: It is quite clear that with this child certain astral sections of the eye are placed too far forward. The astral body is enlarged, and she has astral nodules before her eyes. You can see that, and her writing shows it also. She transposes letters consistently. That is why she writes, for example, Gsier instead of Gries. I will have to think about the reason. When she is copying, she writes one letter for another. Children at this age do not normally do that, but she does it consistently. She sees incorrectly. I will need to think about what we can do with this girl. We will need to do something, as she also does not see other things correctly. She sees many things incorrectly. This is in interesting case. It is possible, although we do not want to do an experiment in this direction, that she also confuses a man with a woman or a little boy with an older woman. If this confusion is caused by an incorrect development in the astral plane, then she will confuse only things somehow related, not things that are totally unrelated. If this continues, and we do nothing to help it, it can lead to grotesque forms of insanity. All this is possible only with a particularly strong development of the astral body, resulting in temporary animal forms that again disappear. She is not a particularly wideawake child, and you will notice that if you ask her something, she will make the same face as someone you awaken from sleep. She starts a little, just as someone you awaken does. She would never have been in a class elsewhere, that is something possible only here with us. She would have never made it beyond the first grade. She is a very interesting child. A teacher: Someone wants to make a brochure with pictures of the Waldorf School. Dr. Steiner: I haven’t the slightest interest in that. If we did that, we would have The Coming Day print it. If we wanted such a brochure, we would publish it ourselves. Aside from that, we cannot go so far as to create competition for our own companies. It would be an impossible situation to undermine our own publisher by having publications printed somewhere else. Under certain circumstances, it could cause quite a commotion. Considering the relationship between the Waldorf School and The Coming Day, it would not be very upright. If we were to make such a brochure, I see no reason why we should not have it published by The Coming Day. We would earn more that way. For now, though, it would not be right. Did one of the classes go swimming? I am asking because that terrible M.K. who complains about everything also wrote me a letter complaining about the school. I didn’t read it all. He is one of those sneaky opponents we cannot keep out, who are always finding things out. He is the one I was speaking of when I said it is not possible to work bureaucratically in our circles as is normally done, by having a list and sending things to the people on it. The Anthroposophical Society needs to be more personal, and we do not need to send people like M.K. everything. We need to be more human in the Anthroposophical Society. I mean that in regard to how we proceed, whether we are bureaucratic about deciding whether to send something to someone or not. He just uses the information to create a stir and to complain. He complains with an ill intent, even though he is a member. |
| 303. Soul Economy: Body, Soul and Spirit in Waldorf Education: Religious & Moral Education
07 Jan 1922, Dornach Translated by Roland Everett |
|---|
| Consequently, I welcome the fact that, in the Stuttgart Waldorf school, something has emerged that could easily go unnoticed by a passing visitor; nevertheless it is a concrete reality. |
| It is characteristic of this feeling that it is closely related to our powers of comprehension. In the Waldorf school, we do not appeal to faith as handed down by tradition; this is left to our visiting religion teachers. |
| Fundamentally, Waldorf education tries to bring about what most people are looking for, though their goals may be somewhat abstract or ill-defined. |
| 303. Soul Economy: Body, Soul and Spirit in Waldorf Education: Religious & Moral Education
07 Jan 1922, Dornach Translated by Roland Everett |
|---|
In this final lecture of our conference on education based on anthroposophic insight into the human being, I would like to speak about the moral and religious aspect in teaching, two related subjects that naturally belong together. Again, there is time for only a few characteristic observations. There is hardly any other subject that pervades every aspect and branch of education with such an all-embracing and unifying spirit, born from a real knowledge of the human being. Yesterday I spoke to you about physical education, whereas today’s theme must be considered truly spiritual—very much so when we look at it from the spirit of our civilization. I want to emphasize immediately that these two subjects—both physical and spiritual in nature—must flow together and form a unity in the kind of education we are considering here, even though they tend to be treated as two very separate branches in traditional education. It may take time for this to happen in general. But in our Waldorf school, we have tried to make a small beginning in this intimate intermingling of spiritual and physical activities by introducing eurythmy as a required subject in all classes that could be seen as a kind of soul and spiritual form of gymnastics. Eurythmy uses the human physical body as a medium to express whatever it brings. Yet, right down to the smallest detail, every movement is also meaningfully permeated by soul and spirit. Eurythmy depends on the physical organs, as speech depends on the human speech organs, without which there could be no vocal communication. The physical speech organs carry soul and spiritual content. The spiritual element in language can lead directly into the moral and even religious sphere if we are perceptive enough; there is a reason that the Gospel of St. John begins with “In the beginning was the Word.” Thus we can say, This flowing together of body, soul, and spirit is cultivated by teaching eurythmy in every class of the Waldorf school, though it is not a well known subject and, as yet, employs a somewhat instinctive way. Although directly linked to physical movements, eurythmy is one of the subjects that can show, perhaps more clearly than any other, how the unification of body, soul, and spirit can be practiced methodically within class lessons. In the future, many other activities will have to stand alongside eurythmy, offering possibilities as yet undreamed of by people today, and working even more directly into the soul and spiritual realm. Such possibilities are inherent in what has already been given, and waiting to be realized; the way is there. Even if our first efforts in eurythmy are far from perfect and limited in scope, the principles of eurythmy will eventually overcome all imbalance in gymnastics, which is the result of today’s materialistic influences. One really feels an inner urge to speak about the ethical and religious aspects of education, even if this can be done only aphoristically. On the one hand, we wish to appeal most strongly to what all human beings share as a common bond, beyond the limits of race and nationality. On the other, it has become obvious that it is almost impossible to speak of matters so intimately connected with people’s inner lives in a way that is both understood and accepted by all nationalities. An example may show how very different moral and religious attitudes are in various regions of the world, and how one thus feels inhibited when trying to reach people on this particular level. In reality, such intimate questions of morality and religion can be approached only through the national and religious background of the people concerned. In all the previous considerations during our conference, I was able to speak in far more general terms about human affairs than I can today. But the anthroposophic view of the world engenders a strong desire to build bridges across all divisions into nationalities, races, and so on. In its inmost being anthroposophy feels compelled to speak with a voice that is supranational, or international. Nevertheless, we are acutely aware of the difficulties in speaking with a voice of universal humanity about such intimate matters of human life, especially in the contemporary scene, which, after all, is the reality that confronts us. So I must beg you to take what I am going to say with the attitude I just mentioned. It is an example intended to illustrate the deep gulfs dividing humankind. During these lectures I have mentioned Herbert Spencer, who, regardless of personal opinions of his philosophy, must be considered an exponent of Western civilization. I have indicated that Spencer introduced the world to specific educational principles, one of which may be summarized as follows: It is the goal of humankind to reproduce in kind; consequently, it is in our moral interests to raise and educate our offspring accordingly. We must therefore endeavor to provide suitable parents and educators. Such, approximately, are Spencer’s views, which begin with, and aim at, a physical picture of the human being. He follows the development of the human race with an eye on its reproduction and adapts his educational goals accordingly. Now let us look at another person who, though living a little later, can nevertheless be seen as representing an Eastern worldview. Let us consider the philosophy of Vladimir Solovyov. Although he expresses himself in Western terminology, a true Russian folk soul speaks through his works. And so we find that the ethical and religious aims of Solovyov have a very different message for humankind, one permeated by the spirit of the East. He tells us that, on the one hand, people must strive for perfection with regard to truth, and, on the other, people must partake of immortality. Here Solovyov does not imply an earthly immortality resulting from fame or glory, but the real immortality of the soul, which rightly belongs to every human soul. He goes on to say that, without this effort toward perfection in truth—in other words, without the attainment of real knowledge—human existence would be worthless. Only if we are able to perfect ourselves more and more will our human life gain in value. But if the human soul were denied immortality, then all perfection, all ability to strive toward perfection, would be nothing but a monstrous cosmic deception. Then, all human achievements in the search for truth would be submerged, and humankind would be cheated of its most precious aspirations by the very cosmic foundations themselves. However, Solovyov claims, this would be the case if, through earthly development, humankind were to consider human reproduction the final and most important goal. Then humankind’s special task in the world would be shunted from one generation to the next, and the human course would be like the spinning of an unchanging wheel, at least in terms of the moral values of existence. In other words, in the spirit of the East, Solovyov clearly rejects the Western ideals of Spencer. This twofold way of experiencing and judging our human task on earth colors all the many divisions with regard to moral and religious issues. If we wish to understand the ethical and moral aims of humankind, we must first free ourselves from prejudice. Then we need to make an honest effort to understand the various diverging philosophies of life. The opposing views of these two thinkers show how the human constitution differs in terms of the intimate subject of today’s discussion. The anthroposophic worldview itself is intended to help people, wherever they live on earth, toward knowledge that is beyond all limits of race or national language. Consequently, spiritual science tries to speak a supranational language (not in any physical sense, of course), a language that can be understood throughout modern civilization. For now, we can realize these goals only to a limited extent. But even these initial steps will enable us to appreciate wider issues as well. Once we have a better understanding of what was just said, we will see how little can be accomplished in moral and religious education as long as we introduce religious dogmas and fixed moral concepts to children. At best we can teach them to become Christians, Jews, Roman Catholics, or Protestants, according to our own religious beliefs. But we must eradicate from a true art of education any attempt to indoctrinate young people into our own particular ideology. A specific problem in education may help illustrate this point and also help us respect matters of human freedom when dealing with children. And we will quickly realize that we must respect the inherent freedom of children if we also recognized that a dull or a bright student, or even a budding genius, should be treated with equal care. What would happen if teachers were to decide that students should take in only what was near to their own souls? In their bodily nature, those of a lower intelligence are born with a heavy burden. A genius, on the other hand, is born with a winged soul. We must admit to ourselves that we are called to help carry the burden of a disabled person. But we must also admit that, as teachers, we may not be able to follow the flight of a young genius. Otherwise, every school would have to be staffed with great geniuses, and this is probably impossible. Our teaching methods must nevertheless ensure that we do not impede the progress of an inherent genius. We must never clip the wings of a genius’s spirit. We can do these things only by developing an art of education that does not interfere with the spiritual forces that must work freely in growing human beings. All of our previous considerations of this conference were directed to this goal, and once you examine these things in greater depth, you will find it is true. You will also find that the principles of Waldorf education can be implemented in practical life in such a way that teachers need to deal only with what they can develop in children, even in one who will eventually become a genius. Just as a teacher of short stature cannot prevent a student from becoming tall, similarly a teacher’s spiritual limitations need not limit a student’s innate possibilities for spiritual growth. The later lives of students will remain unimpeded by the inevitable shortcomings of teachers as long as we stand on a knowledge of the whole human being, which emanates from the complete human being just as the forces of physical growth do. Consequently, I welcome the fact that, in the Stuttgart Waldorf school, something has emerged that could easily go unnoticed by a passing visitor; nevertheless it is a concrete reality. I’m speaking of the spirit of the Waldorf school, which exists independently, irrespective of the personal situations of various staff members, whose soul and spiritual lives thrive as a result of communal efforts to cultivate it. This spirit encourages teachers more and more to educate children, even when they have to help carry the heavy burden of the disabled. The teachers’ group study of the human being helps them bear this burden while making every effort to avoid the educational error of hindering a highly gifted student’s free development. This is our ideal, and it goes without saying that it does not exist just in the clouds of cuckooland, because the teachers make concerted efforts to bring it into daily life at the Waldorf school. When dealing with the moral and religious aspects of education, we cannot draw material from existing ideologies, religious institutions, or established ethics. Our task is to reach the students’ inner being so that, in keeping with their destinies, they will be able to work freely with others in the social sphere. Consequently, we do not begin teaching by appealing to their conceptual faculties. Although knowledge provides meaning, it does not make it possible to go into the intimate regions of the soul in a living way. When imparting knowledge—and we are bound to do this in our school—when addressing the faculty of thinking as one of the three soul faculties, we must realize that thinking, too, must be channeled toward ethical aims. However, when dealing with the moral and religious aspects of education, we must appeal first and foremost to the feeling life of students. We cannot address the will directly, because human activities immediately connect people socially, and social activities are determined largely by the prevailing conditions and demands of the social milieu. So we cannot turn directly to thinking, which always wants to turn in a certain direction, nor to willing, which must take its impulses from prevailing social conditions. We can, however, always appeal to feeling, which to a certain extent is the private domain of each individual. If we appeal to this element when teaching, we meet forces of the human soul that have a moral and religious quality. Yet, we must go beyond cultivating the students’ thinking, feeling, and willing as though each were a separate faculty. We must try to train the soul forces together. Obviously, it would be wrong to concentrate on training thinking in a lopsided way, just as it would it be wrong to concentrate only on the will. Rather, we must let feeling flow into both thinking and willing. With thinking, only knowledge of the world and the human being—based on spiritual science—really helps us, because it allows us to build on a physical foundation. With such knowledge, we can safely turn to subjects such as physics and chemistry without the danger of being unable to rise to the level of metaphysics, or spirit. If we reach the suprasensory world along the way, we engage not only thinking but also feeling. The very moment we lift knowledge of the world to a suprasensory level, we begin to achieve a moral relationship with the ground of the world and to suprasensory beings themselves. The element of feeling is the first of three soul faculties to which we must turn in moral and religious education. If fostered correctly, feeling will be transformed into gratitude. Right from the very beginning of school life, we must systematically develop a mood of gratitude in children—something that modern education allows in only a limited and relatively unconscious way. We must try to engender a mood of gratitude for everything children receive, with every concrete example we take from life itself. When this feeling is developed properly, it can rise to the highest realms of cosmic laws available to cognition. At such a moment, people feel how the sensory world surrounds them. They come to understand natural laws and see themselves within the sensory realm. They begin to understand that whatever they discover through the senses alone will never make them fully human. Gradually they find a way of knowing the human being that points beyond the limits of the sensory world but, nevertheless, is accessible by scientific methods. They then not only experience the activity of universal cosmic laws in themselves, but divine the existence of spiritual beings. Such awareness changes knowledge into a deep feeling of gratitude toward the suprasensory beings who placed them into the world. Knowledge broadens into gratitude toward divine beings. We know we have given young people knowledge of the world in the right way if it eventually wells up in them as a feeling of gratitude toward the suprasensory world. Thus, a feeling of gratitude is the first quality within the three human soul faculties that leads into the moral and religious sphere and that we must cultivate in young people. Gratitude itself includes a certain quality of knowing, since we must understand why we are grateful. It is characteristic of this feeling that it is closely related to our powers of comprehension. In the Waldorf school, we do not appeal to faith as handed down by tradition; this is left to our visiting religion teachers. After the ground has been prepared by class teachers, religious teachers are invited to relate what they can give to life in general. With the students’ faculty of thinking, we first try to create a mood of gratitude. When we turn to feeling, what we find takes us beyond ourselves and out into the world. With the experience of gratitude, we find ourselves facing other beings. And, if we can identify with other beings to the extent of experiencing them as ourselves, then something begins to develop in our feeling life that we call love in the true sense of this word. Love is the second mood of soul that needs to be nurtured in moral and religious life, the kind of love we can nurture at school by doing whatever we can to help students love one another. We can provide a firm foundation for this kind of love by helping children make a gradual transition from the stage of imitation and authority, in the ninth or tenth year, to a genuine feeling of love for their teachers, whose bearing and general behavior at school must naturally warrant it. In this way we lay the foundations of a twofold human quality; we instill the essence of the ancient call to love your neighbor as you love yourself, while helping to develop a feeling of gratitude that points more to a comprehension of the world. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself ” is complemented by the call to “love Divine Being above everything.” Such words of truth have a familiar ring to most people today, for they have sounded through the ages. However, knowing them in theory and repeating them is not the point. It is most important to find ways to put them into practice in the immediate present, thus every age sees a renewal of humankind. We often hear the admonition to love our neighbor as we love ourselves, and God above everything, yet we see little evidence of it. Life at school should try to assure that such things are not just talked about but become infused with new life. There is only one way that offers a firm foundation for the capacity to love in a mature way, and that is the natural transformation of the childhood stages of imitation and authority to that of love. If we work in harmony with children’s natural development toward the attainment of love—whose quality should be self-evident when seen in this light—we will not need to invent the sort of long-winded theories that are fabricated by materialistic thinkers, intended to guide sexually maturing adolescents in their first experiences of love. A whole literature has been written on the subject, all of which suffers from the simple fact that one no longer knows what to do with young people once they reach sexual maturity. The reason for this failure is that children were not prepared properly, because people did not know how to handle the previous stages of childhood. If adolescents have been guided correctly up to this incisive time in their lives, we do not have such difficulties with them. In children’s life of will, we must guide the developing soul so that feelings flow freely into the will in the right way. Children must naturally express many different will impulses outwardly, but what asserts itself now? If we were unable to use our physical powers to express our will impulses, we would not be human in the physical sense, especially when our actions are seen in the light of morality and religion. By engendering love, we pour ourselves out into the world. By willing, we return to ourselves, and because willing is essential to our lives, we enter the realm of instincts, drives, and emotions. At the moment we look for a path to morality and religion, we must realize that everything that makes us human must now flow into our instincts and desires. This path reveals itself to us when we knowingly contemplate the universe and find the human being there. Ancient tradition put this into words by telling us that human beings are images of the Godhead. Volition that has an ethical and religious character arises only when we can carry this kind of experience into our deliberate actions—when we can find the image of God even in our instinctive impulses. Thus we know that our true humanity remains alive in the domain of the will. What are we doing when we allow will impulses to enter the world so that, right down to the level of instincts, people recognize a true human being in us? By developing a feeling for our own humanity, which we pour into our will impulses and activities, we reveal the third of the three soul moods. There is no word in German for this third element. So, to make my meaning clear, I have to borrow a word from English—the word duty. There is no German word for duty. Those who can experience how words reveal the genius of language (as described a previous meeting) will be able to sense my meaning. It is true that anyone who, without further ado, translates simply according to what one finds in a dictionary, would translate the word duty into the German word Pflicht. But this word does not meet the need at all. As a noun, formed from the verb pflegen, it comes from a very different region of the soul. One would have to approach this matter very differently if we were to base it on Pflicht. This difficulty of finding the right word presents another example of how differently people are constituted in various parts of the earth. If we aim to be conscientious and correct in our use of language, we cannot translate duty with Pflicht to express the third mood of soul, because it would not reflect the truth. It would be a lie, even if only a technical one.
Again, it is characteristic that we can use the German words for gratitude (Dankbarkeit) and love (Liebe), but that there is no German word for expressing the third mood of soul. It is characteristic because we find ourselves entering a definite geographic locale as soon as we step from the area of cognition, which links us to humanity (since thought can be shared by all thinking people), and as soon as we leave the realm of love, which can unite people everywhere, and enter the sphere of individual volition. Here we are called on to form our lives and become aware of the individuality being developed in us by our having been placed into a definite location on earth. However, if we approach students through their life of feeling during their ninth or tenth year, when previous powers of imitation and the inborn sense of authority have gradually changed into new faculties, our teaching will, by its very nature, lead to a moral and religious experience on their part. And when human beings are permeated by the feeling that they want to be truly human, that they must conduct their lives so that, right down to the level of instincts, they themselves and others will recognize true humanity in them, they immediately become messengers, angels of the divine world. Moral life will be pervaded by a religious mood. If students have been guided properly up to the twelfth year, the introduction of new subjects will lead them into what lies beyond the human realm. This makes them realize that, by observing outer nature, they are entering another world, limited by the senses and obedient to the laws of a lifeless, inorganic world. (We have already described this period and indicated the right pedagogical approach.) At that moment, children feel, deep down, that they want to be truly human, even in their lower nature, at the level of instincts and drives. And then the third mood of soul arises, which is a sense of duty. Thus, through our education and in conformity with the children’s nature, we have guided them to experience the three moods of soul. Naturally, the ground had to be prepared during the previous school years. At the stage of development toward the twelfth year, a certain loss of inner harmony will manifest in our students’ religious experiences. I mean that, in their religious life, a most important moment has arrived. Naturally, students have to be prepared for this turning point so that they can pass through it in the right way. Educators must not simply accept the “fact” that certain conflicts caused by modern civilization are inevitable. In our time, people have their moral and ethical views, which are deeply rooted in the human soul and without which they cannot imagine human dignity and human values. On the other hand, they find themselves surrounded by the effects of natural laws that, in themselves, are completely amoral, laws that affect human lives regardless of any moral issues and can be dealt with only if questions of morality are left entirely out of consideration. In educational circles today, there is a widespread tendency to conveniently bypass this issue when children reach this critical point in their lives. In our present civilization, however, this conflict in the human soul is both deep-seated and tragic. This must be resolved one way or another before adulthood. Unless students can reconcile the moral and natural orders of the world so they are seen as part of a unity, they may suffer an inner conflict that has the strength to tear their lives apart. Today such a conflict exists in the lives of nearly all thinking people, but they remain unaware of it. People prefer to fall back on traditional religious creeds, trying to bridge what remains unbridgeable unless they can rise from the sensory world to the spiritual world, as anthroposophy endeavors to do. For adults, such a conflict is indeed tragic. If it arises in childhood before the eleventh year, it brings disturbances in its wake that are serious enough to ruin the soul life of a child. A child should never have to say, “I study zoology and find nothing about God. It’s true that I hear of God when I study religion, but this does not help explain zoology.” To allow children to be caught in such a dilemma would be awful, since this kind of questioning can completely throw them off their proper course in life. Of course, the education we have been considering during the last few days would never allow such a schism to develop in a child’s soul, because it fully considers the importance of the eleventh to twelfth years and all that follows. Only then (not before) is it time for the student to become aware of the disharmony between life as seen in terms of nature and life seen from the moral point of view. We should not overprotect children by glossing over certain facts of life—such as the fact that, apart from gratitude, love, and duty, the world is a duality seen with human eyes. However, if education is based on the principles elaborated here, students will be able to resolve this seeming disharmony in the world, especially at this particular age. Certain problems will deepen and enrich our students’ religious lives far more than if they were fed only the traditional sorts of religious instruction, which have to be accepted on faith. Such real meaning assures students that a bridge can be built across the abyss they have experienced for the first time, because it is a reality. Our civilization requires that we let our ethical and religious views play their proper role in life as it is. And in our religious teaching we must take our cue from the critical moments of the students’ developing life of feeling. The difficulties of finding the kind of bridge I have described are highlighted by a book published in London toward the end of the eighties. It is called Lux Mundi, and among its contributors are several authors who represent the official views of the High Church of England. It attempts to take what has crystallized in the Church and integrate it more into social life. Even members of the High Church are at pains to build such a bridge—needless to say, from their point of view. You find people discussing this everywhere, and it could well become the substance of our religious life. Can we really offer something that is being debated so much today as a subject for growing children? Are we in a position to lead young people into Christianity, while theologians increasingly argue about the reality of Christ? Should it not be our task to find ways to help each person relate to Christianity as a free individual? We must not teach accepted dogmas or fixed formulas as ethical and religious instruction; rather, we must learn to nurture the divine spiritual element that lives in the human soul. Only then shall we guide children correctly, without impinging on their inner freedom to eventually choose their own religious denomination. Only then will students be spared inner uncertainty on discovering that one adult is a member of the High Church while another may be a Puritan. We must succeed in enabling students to grasp the real essence of religion. Likewise, through the cultivation of the three moods of soul, we must succeed in allowing morality to develop freely in the souls of children instead of trying to inculcate them by means of set moral precepts. This problem is at the very heart of the social question, and all the talk or social work related to it will depend on whether we provide the right basis for the moral education of young people. A significant part of the whole social question is simply a question of education. It was possible to present only a few rough outlines of the moral and religious aspect of Waldorf education, which we have been studying during the last few days. If our educational aims are rooted in a true knowledge of the human being, and as long as we realize that we must refrain from introducing dogmas, theories, or moral obligations into our teaching, we will eventually succeed in laying the right foundation for the moral and religious life of our students. So we must continue to work toward a true art of education that conforms to the needs of our time. Perhaps I may hope that what I presented to you during the last few days will show that I an not at all against the achievements of general education. Broadly speaking, our present civilization is not lacking in good educational aims and principles, and during the nineteenth century, they were stated in abstract terms by the great educators of various countries around the world. Waldorf education has no intention of opposing or belittling their findings, but it believes it knows that these ideas can be implemented only through the appropriate measures, and that such measures can grow only from a real and deep experience of the human being and the world. Fundamentally, Waldorf education tries to bring about what most people are looking for, though their goals may be somewhat abstract or ill-defined. We are seeking ways to achieve something that everyone would really like to see in education, and if this is the feeling that has arisen among those who have shown genuine interest in an anthroposophically based education as practiced in the Waldorf school, then the right kind of response has been evoked here. Ladies and gentlemen, it has meant a great deal to me to be permitted to speak to you in this spirit. It is more important to me that you appreciate the spirit from which I have spoken than that you hear the details of what I brought. Details might have to be modified or adapted in one way or another. What matters are not the details but the spirit behind them. If I have succeeded in evoking some experience of the tolerant and humane, yet active spirit behind our education based on spiritual science, then perhaps just a little of what I wanted to bring in these lectures has been achieved. In conclusion, I wish to emphasize once more my firm conviction that it is of utmost importance to speak from this spirit during our time. I would like to thank you for the interest you have shown during these lectures. I would also like to thank you for spending your time at this conference, especially during this festive season, and I hope that, as you leave, you feel at least some justification for your journey to Dornach. If this is the case, I would like to give you my heartiest farewell in the hope that we may meet again, in the sense in which I spoke to you at the opening of this lecture course. |
| 332b. Current Social and Economic Issues: Address at the Staff Meeting of the “Zentrale” of the “Kommende Tag”
22 Sep 1921, Stuttgart |
|---|
| Molt could see the possibility of now having to lead Waldorf-Astoria alone under the current circumstances and to do without something that he could not have done without a short time ago - namely, the valuable cooperation of Mr. |
| The spirit of the Waldorf school is longed for in the widest circles. I would like to say that in the field of inner work, this spirit of the Waldorf School was also expressed at the congress. |
| There is something in the Waldorf School among the teaching staff that works out of the trust that one has in the other, and there is also something of the recognition of the value of the personality working alongside one. |
| 332b. Current Social and Economic Issues: Address at the Staff Meeting of the “Zentrale” of the “Kommende Tag”
22 Sep 1921, Stuttgart |
|---|
on the occasion of the introduction of Emil Leinhas as general director Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! The development of conditions in the “Coming Day” makes changes necessary at this present moment in time, which, in my opinion, are of far-reaching significance. First of all, I will take the liberty of presenting these changes to you, so to speak, from their historical necessity, and then I will take the liberty of linking some remarks to them. The conditions in an association such as the “Coming Day” is supposed to be are, by their very nature, initially such that they can only gradually take on a permanent form, that is, a permanent form such that one can count on very firm conditions. And so it has become more and more apparent in recent days that changes are necessary at the present time. You are aware that some time ago the del Monte company joined the “Coming Day”. At the time, del Monte's affiliation with “Der Coming Day” was associated with extraordinary sacrifices on the part of that company. The previous general director of “Der Coming Day,” Mr. Benkendörfer, was one of the driving forces behind del Monte's undertaking at the time, and it was a huge sacrifice, both personally and professionally, for the remaining associates of the del Monte company and for Mr. Benkendörfer himself, to bring about the constellation that was necessary for the takeover of the general management of the “Coming Day” by Mr. Benkendörfer. Now, over time, it has become clear that the del Monte company, which of course is absolutely calculating – and of course this can only be in the interest of the “Coming Day” – is calculating with an extraordinary expansion. It has become necessary for the del Monte company to approach the supervisory board of the “day to come” and make it that Mr. Benkendörfer is absolutely necessary for the future expansion of the del Monte enterprise, which is of course now an integral part of the “Coming Day”; not only for today's circumstances, but because it is in the most vital interest of the “Coming Day” that the necessary and promising expansion of the former del Monte company can take place. The supervisory board of “The Coming Day” could not ignore the fact that this urgent request on the part of the del Monte company must be accommodated; and we found ourselves in the painful position of having to grant Mr. Benkendörfer, who We were painfully obliged to grant Mr. Benkendörfer his resignation as managing director of “Coming Day” and to continue to provide his valuable services to the del Monte company. Mr. Benkendörfer will therefore turn his labor toward del Monte within the framework of the “Coming Day,” in which the del Monte company will certainly remain. Thus, my dear friends, after a relatively short time, we were obliged to fill the post of managing director again, and it must be emphasized that this appointment was only possible under conditions that would have been unthinkable some time ago, for the post of general manager of “Kommender Tag” is one of the most difficult positions imaginable, given the position that “Coming Day” occupies in the world among supporters and opponents. It was only because Mr. Molt could see the possibility of now having to lead Waldorf-Astoria alone under the current circumstances and to do without something that he could not have done without a short time ago - namely, the valuable cooperation of Mr. Leinhas - that it was possible to fill the position of our managing director with an appropriate personality again. And I therefore expressly take this opportunity to emphasize that Mr. Molt, in a far-sighted recognition of the overall interests of “Coming Day”, decided to take on the responsibility of managing the Waldorf-Astoria, thereby giving the supervisory board of “Coming Day” the opportunity to make any progress at all under the current circumstances. So we had the necessity and therefore also the opportunity to fill the position of managing director, and at this moment I am able to introduce Mr. Emil Leinhas, who is well known to all of you, as the future managing director. Well, that is the first far-reaching change that is taking place here in the constitution of the “Day to Come”. And now allow me to tie a few remarks to this presentation of the historical circumstances. The first thing I have to say – and you will believe that it comes from the bottom of my heart – is that I also have to express to you how much all of us, the supervisory board, the board of directors and the entire staff of “The Coming Day” have reason to feel from the bottom of our hearts our sense of gratitude for what Mr. Benkendörfer has done for “The Coming Day” during the time of his general management, and at great personal sacrifice. Mr. Benkendörfer not only took over the “Coming Day” as general director at great sacrifice, but also took it over at an extraordinarily difficult time for the “Coming Day”, and his tasks were such that one can say of them, especially in these months in which Mr. Benkendörfer presided over the “Coming Day”, the tasks were such that they had to weigh heavily on the shoulders of a personality. My dear friends, the person who works in a company, especially one like “Kommender Tag”, often has no idea what worries live in the soul of the person who now has to pull the numerous strings from the inside out, who has to ensure the prosperity, the prosperity and the development of such an undertaking . Mr. Benkendörfer has taken on all these difficult tasks, and I can tell you with the utmost conviction that Mr. Benkendörfer has done something for the whole “Coming Day” that cannot be overestimated, and you will understand that this deeply felt gratitude, of which I have spoken, is also expressed here. I expressed it yesterday at the supervisory board of “The Coming Day”, and it was approved by the entire supervisory and management board of “The Coming Day” in the broadest, most undivided way. It is incumbent upon me to say, following on from this, that it was a matter of course that the connection that Mr. Benkendörfer had with the “Coming Day” through the general management developed a connection that must remain; therefore, the supervisory board of “The Coming Day” felt compelled to ask Mr. Benkendörfer to join the supervisory board – a matter that the next general assembly will have to consolidate. Mr. Benkendörfer will thus continue to work in the bosom of the supervisory board itself, also belong to the board of directors and, as a delegate of the board of directors, take care of the work at del Monte. Thus, to the greatest extent, Mr. Benkendörfer's valuable labor will continue to benefit the “Coming Day.” I have asked that, by decision of the Supervisory Board, all thanks and expressions of hope be incorporated into the minutes of the Supervisory Board of the “Coming Day” as a historical fact. And now, my dear friends, I come to the second part. This is the part that relates to the future. Allow me to make a few remarks about it. The point is that the last few weeks in particular have shown the importance that has been given in the world to that which has grown out of the anthroposophical movement in the most diverse ways. We held an anthroposophical congress in Stuttgart from the end of August to the beginning of September; this anthroposophical congress was attended by 1600 people and went in such a way that any unbiased person must say: Something has happened here that is not happening anywhere else in the world in the same way, and it is precisely one of the signs of the decline of our time that such a fact is not being pointed out to the greatest possible extent in a fitting and appropriate way, that people are not paying attention, that it is being taken for granted in our time, which so urgently needs the opposite. It may be said that, within the framework of this Anthroposophical Congress, what the Anthroposophical movement has been representing in a thoroughgoing way for decades has gone through a kind of fiery trial. At this congress, spiritual achievements were accomplished which, I am firmly convinced, are among those that cannot be found elsewhere at the present time. From the sum of these spiritual achievements, I would like to highlight two that are characteristic of what is happening within the framework of our Anthroposophical Movement – this movement that is so vilified in the world. I do not want to shy away from saying what I believe, because not speaking one's mind is something that many people today already consider their mission. But we will not make any progress if we do not speak the truth, express honest conviction, even where it takes a little courage to do so, and say it where it is needed. There is much that could be said about this conference, my dear friends. What I have emphasized as an example should not be taken as implying that nothing similar could be said about anything else. Perhaps others will do so. It seems to me appropriate to emphasize some examples from the whole range of spiritual achievements of our Anthroposophical Congress. We may say that what actually emerged from the underground of the Anthroposophical Movement is, first and foremost, the Waldorf School, founded years ago by Mr. Emil Molt. The outside world may think what it will of this school, but the fact remains that a large part of the world looks to this school and another part gasps at the impossibility of founding similar schools all over the world. The spirit of the Waldorf school is longed for in the widest circles. I would like to say that in the field of inner work, this spirit of the Waldorf School was also expressed at the congress. We experienced that a teacher at the Waldorf School, Miss Caroline von Heydebrand, gave a lecture on something that is extremely popular in our time and that plays an extraordinary role in today's school system with the well-known name “experimental psychology and pedagogy”. But for anyone who really understands schooling and teaching, the development of this method in the context of human development means nothing other than that it shows how alien the inner human being has actually become to the human being, the educator to the child. At the conference, Fräulein von Heydebrand provided a detailed critique of this modern education system – or, one might say, this modern aberration. She showed that from a higher perspective, it is possible to carry the essence and spirit of education and teaching out into the world from the very field of the Waldorf School. It was a pedagogical and didactic act of the very first order that happened as a result, and as I said, today we must find the courage to say what needs to be said, where judgments are not made about the value of human achievements, to say what must be said without reserve: that here something has been achieved that has a significance for our time and that can only arise from this spirit. It must be mentioned in this circle, because much depends on the progress of the “Coming Day”, that one realizes how human achievements that want to prepare themselves to produce rising forces in the face of the forces of decline must be valued. We must not pass by asleep, otherwise we will be trampled underfoot in world history, no matter how much we want to found. What matters is human judgment. We must be able to understand how to put people in the right place, then the right thing will also happen in social relationships. Now I would like to speak of the second thing. Today we are all obliged to develop a thorough sense of what is to become social. Everything connected with the name of the threefold social organism is based on such a feeling. Most of you will know, my dear friends, that from April 1919 onwards an attempt has been made to make it clear to the world that it is this threefold social organism that can really lead the great social questions of the present to a solution appropriate to our time. It has been tried. What we have experienced is among the most tragic imaginable; we have experienced that what was attempted at that time has reached into the very soul of the proletarian and the depths of the heart. It may have been as imperfect as possible in the beginning - the effect has penetrated into the hearts of the proletarians. We have been able to see that, even if it was imperfect in the beginning, effective forces could gradually develop if all people who are involved - and all people are involved - if all people would work together. In the past, the matter failed in the way it was propagated by us in the most diverse ways, and this word “it has failed” is what should be written in our hearts. In particular, the cause has failed in the proletarian world, and I cannot but mention it truthfully. Now some people come straight from proletarian circles and say: Yes, it was bound to fail because our school education was not such that we could fully grasp the matter. This is a great mistake; the school education would have been quite sufficient; it has also been shown that it was sufficient. What happened at the time was that the terribly domineering proletarian leaders, those who could not or would not understand what it was all about, broke the tip off the whole movement of threefolding. And it will not do to try to overlook, with our inadequate schooling, what is not there, to overlook what could not be broken, the sense of authority towards the established leaders. It is my profound conviction that much of what belongs to the forces of misfortune in the present has arisen from this. And it is likely that precisely those people who have already understood something about the matter will have to feel it deeply and painfully that certain insightful people did not approach the matter more energetically at the time. What is needed in social life today is not to be alone in the individual company, not only to be able to manage the individual company; what is needed is an overview of the economic situation of the whole world. In the last third of the nineteenth century, the idea of world trade was transformed into world economy, and today the world economy is what we need in economic terms, despite the fact that war has created such terrible, insurmountable boundaries that should not actually exist. Nevertheless, the world economy stands as a challenge that cannot be ignored. And basically, no one can work on a large scale – and it must be – on the smallest scale, who does not have an overview of what the world economy requires. Now, university science, often based on minds that are so far removed from life and can only theorize, and political economy, are trying to establish all kinds of things from social events, from which one can know what one should actually do in economic practice. And the work of university professors and their followers over long periods in this field has also given rise to the popular theories — you can check this in my “Key Points” — with which people want to reform the world today and which are nothing more than unworldly theories that have grown out of the ivory towers of professors. Now, at our anthroposophical congress, the following also happened: Mr. Leinhas gave a lecture that ties in with the recently published book of an extremely amiable and, among his colleagues, extremely outstanding university professor of economics. It can be said that the book, in addition to having the various computational and other speculative properties of economics, is one of the most appealing phenomena in the social sphere today because it also has a certain human character. It was therefore extraordinarily fortunate that Mr. Leinhas took this book as his starting point and showed in a very thorough way during his lecture how this book, which has grown out of academic scientific thinking, makes it clear that the whole of university science is of no use in economic life. It can also be of no use if the various party secretaries distill their knowledge from the books of university professors. This does not make the theories applicable to life, so that individual party secretaries can write them down and color them somewhat party-wise, which thrives in the unworldly university rooms of the economists, because that is how things are in this field. Mr. Leinhas' lecture, based on a thorough knowledge of the economic conditions of the present, has torn the mask off the face of all this hustle and bustle, and the achievement of the lecture is that university science with all its offshoots will have to lie on the ground precisely because of the further expansion of what is given in the lecture, and we have shown that in this field one will have to work from a completely different angle. My dear friends, if today, out of unprejudiced human judgment, one were to carry out that which is carried out from the oldest prejudices that still remain today, then the judgments that go out into the world today would be different. Dr. von Heydebrand's lecture on experimental pedagogy and psychology would have to be discussed for a long time in all teachers' circles and at all teachers' conferences as the one that addresses the burning question of the present. What Mr. Leinhas presented would be discussed for weeks in all the most important newspapers, filling entire columns with what was shown. It would be discussed back and forth, pro and contra, in order to evaluate the spiritual results of our time. A different tone must be adopted if one is to characterize the untruthfulness of the world today on the basis of truth. And one would like to hope that among you, my dear friends, there are receptive hearts and minds that are not in a position to have to take out the oldest grist and grain from those people who are supposed to drive the various carts forward. We have indeed had to learn from yesterday to today how, in order to fill one of the most important posts, one of the oldest personalities, who had long since been “dealt with”, had to be resorted to. These are only symptomatic phenomena, because people do not want to form their own judgment about things that are originally created out of life, and then they seek the corresponding positions because they cannot come to any other judgment, out of the oldest prejudices. We must get away from these things if we want to understand how to evaluate things today; and we evaluate them correctly if we say at this moment: It is one of the greatest blessings that the “Coming Day” can have, that in the personality of Mr. Emil Leinhas, who has shown so extraordinarily what he is capable of, that he gets a corresponding leadership in this personality. And I believe it is the duty of everyone who lives and works in the “Coming Day” to be aware of this fact. That is what matters, that we are able to measure true human value. If we are not able to do so, then we will not escape the forces of decline. Mr. Leinhas is not a scholar; he knows the practice of life in all its ramifications, he knows it from reality. And such a personality was needed to criticize what grows out of the party leaders' theories, which are divorced from reality. What is close to my heart today is to tell you that all those who understand something of the tasks of “The Coming Day” must consider it a very special piece of luck that a personality who must now be considered an authority in the field of economics thanks to her achievements during the congress is being placed at the head of the board of directors of “The Coming Day”. In saying this, I am hinting at something, and what I am hinting at is based on my heartfelt feeling that I have to say that the “Day to Come” still has a long way to go before it can achieve the level it needs to reach if it is to emulate the success of the congress held from the end of August to the beginning of September. It is absolutely a matter of discovering a kind of “Columbus' Egg” for the “Coming Day”. Today we are in a position where it is our task to ensure that the whole spirit of our movement can really be brought directly into practical life; and of course we do not achieve that - you must not hold it against me - not by the fact that after all, serious concerns could arise from the inner life of 17 Champignystraße. What is really at issue here is that each and every one of us here be imbued with the new spirit to the very depths of our hearts; and for that we need one thing above all, and I have to say it three times, because these days we have to say things three times: we all need trust, trust, trust among ourselves! And now I ask you, my dear friends, all of you who are present, whether this trust has been present in the necessary way from each person to each person. I ask you most sincerely to develop this out of a full sense of responsibility: Ask a little less whether this trust is present in the right way in the other person or whether you can place it in the other. Try to approach it from the opposite pole; try to ask yourself more often whether trust can be placed in you, whether it can be justified for each individual, but then as he really is, and whether each person is endeavoring to translate this trust into life in the appropriate way. There is no other way of doing it, my dear friends. You can't always see life's circumstances so clearly when you're caught up in today's judgments, which are so superficial. Circumstances are very interrelated and very complicated, and if you really want to develop the trust that is so necessary in business and economic life, then the other thing that I have been talking to you about for a few minutes is also important: the envious recognition of human value, not in order to show it to others, but because you are interested in things moving forward. That this spirit may truly take hold at 17 Champignystraße, that a pure, honest, humane spirit of trust may truly prevail here, which seeks to learn to perceive the value of the human being, depends on whether we can continue to work fruitfully with the “Kommenden Tag” at all, my dear friends. We cannot work today as we are accustomed to working in external matters; we must make progress, even if it is slow. To do that, we need to develop two things: trust and envious recognition of the human value of the person who works alongside us. This can be said to you by someone who was willing to study the circumstances and who knows that we have entered into great social need because, on a large scale throughout the world, trust has gradually been lost. Today we have to say to ourselves: I want, I want, I want to join in trust with the person whom I know can do this or that. I would not speak to you sincerely and honestly if I had not also given you this speech, which some may feel is an epistle; it is meant to be nothing more than truly heartfelt, friendly advice that, if you consider what I have outlined, can be of great significance for the progress of the “Coming Day”. I am convinced that it contains something of the spirit we need and that it was not superfluous to talk about the most fundamental things during this important, most important change in the “Coming Day”. If we try to develop this trust, if we try to recognize the value of the people living beside us, then the “Coming Day” will gradually become something that can be placed in a healthy way next to what has not yet been achieved to perfection, but at least in its beginnings; we have achieved something after all : we have achieved in the general anthroposophical movement that we were able to organize this substantial congress with 1600 visitors, and we have achieved something in the Waldorf school, where after only two years of activity, something of what I just wanted to express with the two main spiritual forces in human nature has been established. There is something in the Waldorf School among the teaching staff that works out of the trust that one has in the other, and there is also something of the recognition of the value of the personality working alongside one. And for this reason it can be said that especially in the Waldorf school, this extraordinarily commendable creation that Mr. Emil Molt has brought into the world, we can see something of what we need in all areas of our lives, my dear friends. At this solemn moment, one would like to express the heartfelt wish that the “day to come” could gradually become what was achieved at the congress from the end of August to the beginning of September, what was achieved in the Waldorf school and what is noticeable there to a certain extent. It is difficult to achieve something like this in economic life, but I can say one thing: we must achieve it through human cooperation. Those who work here, and especially Mr. Leinhas, who has a thorough knowledge of the conditions of economic and business and the people associated with it, you will always find a friend who has an open ear for everything that legitimately comes from the bosom of any part of “The Coming Day” in general or from any individual part of “The Coming Day”. We just need the right feeling in working together, then it will work. For myself, the personality of Mr. Leinhas guarantees that. But I also have something else to say: even the most valuable personality cannot achieve anything if it does not find the appropriate collaborators in the world. One must be able to judge human value, but one must also know that the most valuable personality cannot achieve anything if it does not find the appropriate collaborators. Let me also express the heartfelt wish that all of you may find Mr. Leinha's right co-workers at 17 Champignystraße! The latter is a basic condition; then, at Champignystraße, one will at least be able to try everything that is necessary for prosperity and further development – otherwise not, my dear friends. Otherwise, if this condition is not met by the energetic and willing staff, Champignystraße will gradually degenerate into some backwater that only “quacks” about associative life without being able to carry out the story. I have only given you a rough outline of the conditions necessary for the prosperity of the “Day to Come”. I would like to entrust this to you, now in this solemn moment, when I stand before you as Chairman of the Supervisory Board not only out of duty but also out of the innermost desire of my heart to express my heartfelt thanks to the outgoing General Director, which those who know Mr. Benkendörfer will certainly want to join in. Thank you very much for everything you have done for the “Coming Day”, and rest assured that we hope to see your efforts bear fruit for us in a different field in the future. And you, my dear friend Emil Leinhas, I hereby transfer the office of General Director of “The Coming Day” to you in front of the assembled staff of “The Coming Day”. I have said how I rely on you, and I believe that I can rely on you with the utmost conviction. I am convinced that if you find the appropriate support here from the staff, we will have in you the personalities that we so urgently need for the management of the “day to come”. So, good luck to you and all your staff! May the most blessed things within the “day to come” arise from your work! And so, my dear friends, I have come to the end of my remarks, which were intended to inform you of the changes that have become necessary for the “coming day”.
Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks for the expression of trust that the second chairman of the supervisory board has just expressed, and I may well take this opportunity to say that I am deeply convinced that I can only achieve everything I do with my limited strength if I truly have the trust of each and every colleague. In view of this, please allow me to say a few more words. I would now like to address the members of the Supervisory Board, the co-chairman Mr. Emil Molt, and thank you in particular for the trust you have shown me in so many ways, but most of all I would like to address my dear friend Mr. Uehli, who is so closely connected with all that happens here at Champignystraße 17 in his work. Mr. Uehli, my dear friends, also took over his position here in a leading role at a time when the most difficult tasks imaginable had to be placed on his shoulders. It is only thanks to his subtle and at the same time energetic zeal for everything that the anthroposophical movement stands for – a zeal that, precisely because of its nature, it is so easy for colleagues to join and all that is striven for by this zeal —, my dear friends, it is precisely this zeal that must be attributed in the first place to a large extent to the fact that the Anthroposophical Congress in Stuttgart took the course that I have indicated. Therefore, at this moment, I may still say that it is my most heartfelt wish, but also my hope, that the most beautiful collegial relationship will develop between friend Leinhas and friend Uehli here in these rooms. But that will develop, because it has the very best foundations; it will develop, it has been developing for a long time and we can build on it. This cooperative relationship is there, but such things also bear fruit when they are understood. May it be well understood what can develop from the interaction of two such personalities here at 17 Champignystraße, and therefore let me also say my greeting at last to what fills me with very special joy and satisfaction: the prospect of the cooperative interaction of the two friends!
|
| 300a. Faculty Meetings with Rudolf Steiner I: Twenth-Fourth Meeting
26 May 1921, Stuttgart Translated by Ruth Pusch, Gertrude Teutsch |
|---|
| The group would not be the children of the Waldorf School, so we could no longer present that to the public as an achievement of the Waldorf School. |
| Either we give performances with children from the Waldorf School, in which case we cannot form a special troupe, or we form a special department for eurythmy at the Waldorf School that operates in parallel. |
| There are a large number of capable eurythmists we can use in that way, but we can no longer claim it is a performance of the Waldorf School. A teacher: We could form a group from the older girls. Dr. Steiner: We may well be able to do that if we give performances from the Waldorf School, but the littlest kids have the greatest success. |
| 300a. Faculty Meetings with Rudolf Steiner I: Twenth-Fourth Meeting
26 May 1921, Stuttgart Translated by Ruth Pusch, Gertrude Teutsch |
|---|
Dr. Steiner: We need to discuss the ending of school. You have a number of questions. The following are discussed: A question about how to handle promoting the students this year. General questions about the tenth and following grades. A request for a course about educating children over fourteen years of age and also the instruction of religion. Questions about “bourgeois methods” in the school and how to eliminate them. A question about teaching instrumental music. A question of whether third graders should write foreign language or only speak it. A question about social studies and social understanding. A question about a special course for eurythmy. Questions about a teachers’ meeting, pedagogical conferences, and a newsletter. Dr. Steiner: I think we could handle the individual questions more easily if the teachers first discuss promoting the children and the end of the school year. We can then more easily discuss the question of promoting the children. I think we should begin with the ninth grade. I would ask the teachers to present the experiences they had at the end of the school year. Each class is discussed, beginning with the ninth grade. Dr. Steiner: I was present during the Jean Paul discussion. Were you satisfied with the way the children participated? What is there to say about eurythmy? That lethargic child, U.A., is not really lethargic. He only makes a lethargic impression. In the event we create a tenth grade, all the children would have to move on to it. Now we come to the eighth grade. Are there any students so weak we should hold them back? A teacher: We should consider H.K. and whether it would be better to keep him in a lower grade so that he will progress better. Dr. Steiner: My impression is that he does not need to be held back. Is he one of those who is more behind in particular subjects? A teacher: He literally falls asleep. Dr. Steiner: He is physically weak. He took part in the Quaker meals. A teacher: The situation at home is very bad. Dr. Steiner: The question is whether you think he will be a disturbance next year in the ninth grade, or whether you will be able to carry him along. With such situations, a shock like that is not exactly desirable. A teacher: I do not think he will be a disturbance. Dr. Steiner: Can you achieve something with him in eurythmy? A eurythmy teacher: He is trying. P.R. is deformed. Should we have a look at him specifically? Dr. Steiner: Do we have a number of such children in the different classes? You need to do the best you can to come to grips with the children in the same groups. We can’t put P.R. aside. Is there anything to say regarding languages? We should think about H.K. I think there is some doubt we can take him into the ninth grade. Perhaps I will come by the class tomorrow morning or the morning after. We need to have a remedial class. We need to think about that. In a lower grade, such a student would be just as disturbing. A teacher: The children in my sixth grade class have a poor memory. There must be an error in my teaching. Dr. Steiner: You can’t say every child’s memory is weak. A teacher: The children cannot retain things. They don’t have any clear pictures of Egypt, for example. Dr. Steiner: How do you attempt to teach them a pictorial idea? A report about teaching geography is given. Dr. Steiner: The children remember the pyramids and the obelisks. You need to ask yourself whether you did everything in detail. Did you give the children a picture of the true situation in Egypt, so that they do not have holes in their pictures of Egypt? If you simply emphasize Egypt and do not give a picture of how the children get from here to Egypt, if they don’t have a living picture, then it is very possible that they cannot remember. Perhaps you need to pay more attention to going into all the details so that the children have a completely living picture, one with no holes in it, about the location of Egypt in relationship to their own. The child would know something about pyramids and obelisks, but not that they are in Egypt. You should really think about whether you did all of these things that come together as a complete picture. Have you had the children draw only Africa? Perhaps you should make a special map, including Europe, which would give them an overview of the connections. A teacher: I asked in which direction of the compass they would look for Egypt. Dr. Steiner: Perhaps you should have them find the cities they would pass through if they went from here to Egypt. This kind of memory problem arises from some kind of holes in what they have otherwise learned. Without doubt, the memory would be better if the children had a complete picture. That was not the situation in Mr. O’s class. The children were interested, they understood everything and were enthusiastic. They remembered nothing, though, because he emphasized specific things and did not give them the overall connections. A good way of improving memory is to create the large overview. That is true in various ways for other areas of instruction. It is particularly true for such things as geography, but also for certain things in natural history. It is, of course, particularly true for history. In history, it is important that you find every possible way of giving the children concrete images. When you discuss things like the Persian Wars, never neglect to emphasize some person, at least where there are important connections. Today, you did the Athenian runners. I would never have neglected creating a real picture for the children of how these people lived long ago. You could, for example, go back through the generations, grandfather, son, and so forth. I would construct the series right back to the Athenian runner. The result would be fifty-five or fifty-six people lined up in a row. In that way the children would have an idea of how far back the timeline reaches. I would ask, for instance, which one was a contemporary of the Mystery of Golgotha. Use such pictures and let the children think about them. Speak about Egypt and then show them how they can get from Stuttgart to Egypt. You could stop in Venice, and then try to lighten things a little with a joke about Venice. There should be some humor in the instruction since otherwise memory will suffer. A teacher speaks about some of the weaker children in the 6a class, particularly W.G. He is so sanguine that he is nearly an idiot. He doesn’t write the letters together nor complete words. He says whatever occurs to him. Dr. Steiner: In his soul, this is a young child. He is at the age of seven or eight in the development of his soul. The situation is that he would not care very much if you held him back. The question is, how do we handle the whole question of promoting children in principle? This child, W.G., is one who would come under consideration. It would be good for him to go through the material a second time. We should discuss the principles of the question. A teacher: I would be unhappy to give him up. Dr. Steiner: He would be the only one of those you have mentioned. We could put E.W. into the extra class. A teacher: Many of the children cannot write properly yet. Dr. Steiner: They would all come into the remedial class. W.E. is a clear candidate for that class. He cannot properly collect his thoughts. How is he in music? Most of them will be musical. He will also not be particularly diligent in handwork class. W.E. would be hypnotized by vibrant colors. We need to give some consideration to forming a class for remedial instruction. There is some discussion about some of the children in the fifth grade, particularly about E.E. A teacher: He is not keeping up, but he is gifted in languages. He is clever and sly. Dr. Steiner: You will need to pay attention to him, to speak with him with particular attention to his individuality. You need to vary that, but give particular attention to him. A teacher: Shouldn’t he go into the remedial class? Dr. Steiner: What would he do there? He loves being different. It would affect him deeply if you had him make a pair of shoes. We should do something like make shoes so that he can nail things together. They should be real boots for someone else. We should have him make shoes in the handwork class, that would be something good. He would have fun putting on the soles. He could even double-sole the shoes. Discussion of the fourth grade. Dr. Steiner: I was in the class, and I have to say it is going well, with the exception of three or four who will quickly catch up on what they cannot do. Some are weak in arithmetic, but others are quite good. I think it is a class that has suffered very little from having had three different teachers. We can promote the whole class to the fifth grade. The previous teacher was extremely good in discipline. She was what people in bourgeois schools refer to as strict. The children liked her a lot. Then you came. Today, their discipline was exemplary. A teacher: I made myself strict. Dr. Steiner: You will see the result only after you have been with them for a longer time. L.H. certainly has weak eyes and the axes of the eyes need to become more parallel. They converge too much. Try to get him used to holding his book a little further away, just a half finger’s length more than what he is used to now. Move the location of where his vision crosses a little further from his face. I noticed B.E. He awoke for a day. The children were all very surprised that he said something. A teacher: M.I.’s mother is quite concerned that he inherited something from his father. Dr. Steiner: He has a touch of childishness. He is apparently a Prussian, a little one. He is not actually disturbed, but if you wanted, you could call him weakly disturbed. He was born in Berlin and has something sweet about him through the language. With good guidance, he can become quite normal. A teacher: He is gathering statistics about electrical trains. He keeps himself apart. Dr. Steiner: You need to guide him lovingly. The only concern is the statistics about railways. You need to try to get him interested in something else and to break him of that. He should learn German writing. In the second grade, you have several children who are quite good. Your problem is that the class is so large. The disturbed children, G., H.N., and M.H., should also go into the remedial class. B.R. is not quite normal. He should receive particular help in the afternoon. That is difficult with some of your children. His brain is too small. You need only look at him. He is smaller than he should be. We should try to counteract that characteristic. It is not possible for him to completely pay attention. You should call upon him more often and discuss things with him in the corridor or on the street so that he has to think while he listens. His mother is just like him. A teacher: Many children in the first grade already have new teeth, but some do not. Dr. Steiner: None of the children in the first grade can have finished teething. That happens only at the age of eight. What is important in connection with school age is only that they have begun to change their teeth. O.Nr. should also be considered for the remedial class. He transposes words. We could have him for a time in the remedial class where we can work with each child individually. A teacher mentions T.M. Dr. Steiner: The problem with T.M. has diminished. He is already healthier. A teacher: He has asthma attacks at night. Dr. Steiner: You should treat him with moderate amounts of arsenic in the form of Levico Water. The boy has an irregularity in the astral body that we could cure physically. Give it to him twice a week diluted in a quarter glass of water. You will then be taking all of your students into the second grade. A teacher asks about F.O. in the present 1a class. Dr. Steiner: The remedial class should help him so that he can come into the present second grade and the future third grade. Now we are all done with the individual classes. A report is given about foreign languages. Dr. Steiner: You can try to achieve something by dividing into groups. We can put them into groups so that we have all those with the same knowledge and capabilities together. A teacher: I think it would be good if we gave the sixth grade something printed to read. Dr. Steiner: How old are they? You would have to look for a moderately long story. You would need to find a short story, something that has some substance and is not superficial. They could read something historical from Mignet. They would also learn quite a bit from it. We will need to divide the foreign languages differently. It is so difficult to satisfy the children there. You need to ask the children questions often in foreign languages. There is a prevalent opinion that the children are unhappy. They learn the most from the lectures. It is helpful when they find their way themselves into a good lecture. Rote learning is only a crutch. You should proceed sentence by sentence and with the younger ones, only speak. A teacher: Should the children also write in the third grade foreign languages? Dr. Steiner: You can begin writing short, easy sentences that express some simple thought. A teacher asks whether three songs from Dr. Steiner could be printed. Dr. Steiner: You can certainly give these choruses to the publisher in Dornach. They will sell well. A teacher: Can we count upon having texts for the children? Dr. Steiner: There is already something for the youngest children. The “Springtime Song.” The instrumental music class is only a substitute, but we will have to leave that for now. A teacher: I have used some things from curative eurythmy. Should I continue with that? Dr. Steiner: I was very satisfied with what I saw today. In the fifth grade there are a number of boys who could have a class in gymnastics. Our school program already should include one hour of that. We will make it more spiritually expressive as soon as we can. A teacher: We have already begun modeling in the ninth grade. Dr. Steiner: I was satisfied with what I saw. Now I would like to ask you if we should prepare the reports as we did last year. Doing the reports that way is good, just as we did last year. A teacher: We kept them positive. Dr. Steiner: It is important to phrase the sentences properly. If you are not individual enough, something that is difficult, if you phrase the sentences too harshly, they will put people off. If someone is dawdling, you should write that it would be desirable for him to pull himself together next year. The way you say it is important. You should express deficiencies positively, but be careful about how you say it. Then we agree that we will do the reports as we did last year. Give as true a picture as possible. At the bottom of each report, write a verse for each child that expresses the child’s individuality, that can act as a leitmotif for the future. I would also like to see, since the child will keep the report, that all of the teachers who worked with the child sign it. I would like each child to have all the signatures. It is important that the children have all the signatures of the teachers who worked with him or her. The class teacher’s name should be first, along with “Class Teacher,” so that the child knows to whom it belongs. The others should be below. It would be good if each teacher wrote some text. The class teacher should write the most and the others should write short remarks. Concerning the question of promotion. Dr. Steiner: We actually only have these two P. children, and then there would be almost no one else except F. H.M. could go into the remedial class, all the others would move ahead. Now we come to the question of the remedial class. The question is whether we need another teacher. Dr. Schubert should take it. A list of teachers who are to teach the main subjects is created. Dr. Steiner: How would it be if we had Dr. Schwebsch from Berlin come by? He is supposed to be coming here on June 11. In the fall, we will have Dr. Röschl for Latin and Greek. That will certainly be a very good addition. We also need help, a new teacher, for modern languages. Perhaps young Englert. He is still quite young. He should come here on June 11 or perhaps before to Dornach. A report is given about the independent religious instruction. A class teacher mentions he had attended the religion class of his class to see that they behaved. He felt like a barking dog. Dr. Steiner: In a certain sense, a kind of exception is possible. We should keep to what is included in our pedagogy. We must assume that the class and the teacher belong together. Since different classes are together in the religion class, I certainly think it is possible that the class teacher be in the classroom while another teacher gives the instruction. We can hardly get around trying to form smaller classes. A teacher: There is not always an inner participation. There are too many children. Dr. Steiner: The groups are too large. That is something that should not be if the children are to take in the instruction. We need to awaken a feeling for the seasons in the children. We also need to pay more attention that the children have a living picture of Christ. That should be the center of their thoughts at all levels. We should always return to that and see that the earthly life of Christ is the center. We must care for the personal relationship to Christ, even at the lowest grades, so that it becomes a kind of inner religion. Care for the personal relationship of the children to Christ. We must create an ideal religion in the period. Symbolism and pictures should play a role so that they strongly carry the feeling along. As a religion teacher, you are not a part of the school. You give it as though you were a minister in an anthroposophical church outside the school and only came here. Concerning education from the age of fourteen, that is, the pedagogy for those over fourteen years of age, we will have to see that we have some time when I return on June 10. That relates to what you referred to as “bourgeois methods.” A teacher: Last year we included social understanding as a part of technology. Dr. Steiner: That is connected with the academics for the upper grades. We can best teach social studies, but then we would have to drop languages. The older teachers, those who have been here at this school for two years, would have to take on such things. Concerning a special class for eurythmy. A eurythmy teacher: The performance was extraordinarily fruitful. It did a great deal to make the Waldorf School known. It appears we will form an extra group. Dr. Steiner: We can do two different things. Either we can give performances with the children of the Waldorf School, in which case we simply select some from the regular group of children, or we can forego that and form a group. The group would not be the children of the Waldorf School, so we could no longer present that to the public as an achievement of the Waldorf School. We can do those two things. Either we give performances with children from the Waldorf School, in which case we cannot form a special troupe, or we form a special department for eurythmy at the Waldorf School that operates in parallel. That is something we can do quite officially, but then we would say, “Performances with children of the special class at the Waldorf School.” A teacher: If the children were to sing in a chorus, they would also need to be selected. Dr. Steiner: It would hardly be positive if we formed a chorus of individual students. Either we accept the achievements as they are or we create a special department for eurythmy. We can do either, perhaps depending only upon sympathy or antipathy. There are a large number of capable eurythmists we can use in that way, but we can no longer claim it is a performance of the Waldorf School. A teacher: We could form a group from the older girls. Dr. Steiner: We may well be able to do that if we give performances from the Waldorf School, but the littlest kids have the greatest success. There could be a special group of the more advanced eurythmists. We would, however, excuse those who are also professional eurythmists from normal eurythmy practice. We could do such things. You would have to create something separate from the school. I think there are some who have a burning desire to do eurythmy. However, I think it would be nice if at least some of the boys were included. In Dornach, we only have S., and he needs half a year to prepare for a performance, so we never see male eurythmists on stage. You can see what eurythmy really is in Munich. There, the men performed. We debuted with four men. But then masculinity moved more and more into the background. The women are more agile. Here, the students are very capable. It is quite curious that women are much better doctors than men. A teacher: The children in the upper grades who want to develop themselves musically need to begin practicing. Could we excuse them from those classes that inhibit their dexterity with difficult physical work? Dr. Steiner: We could change the curriculum for individuals. That is certainly possible. We should also think about having special practice rooms. What provides human education should remain, otherwise you can specialize. A teacher: The children have asked about a student library, and whether they could read Dr. Steiner’s books. Should the older children get something socially directed? Dr. Steiner: When we have the tenth grade, we can use reading to educate. In general, it is too early to give them such things. On the other hand, perhaps you could give them some cycles if they are appropriately printed. Christianity as Mystical Fact, perhaps. Or, maybe Theosophy. We would have to work out the preliminaries. A teacher asks whether students could attend Dr. Steiner’s lectures. Dr. Steiner: Do you think that such a lecture would be helpful? We will probably not be able to get around leaving such things up to the parents. We cannot make any rule about it. The parents need to do that themselves and also be responsible for it. A question is asked about publishing a newsletter and also about putting on pedagogical conferences for teachers. The discussions with the teachers were quite favorable. Dr. Steiner: What did you discuss there? A teacher: We talked about the relationship of the school to the state and also a number of pedagogical things. Dr. Steiner: I think it would be superfluous. People misunderstand the most important points. If you want to progress in the movement, you have to approach the consumers, not the factory owners. You can do that as a pleasant chat, but nothing comes of it. I have never resisted that. If you think you should do it, then go ahead. We have already wasted so much strength by always beginning new things that have no real possibility of success. In Switzerland you can enjoy the luxury of working with teachers. During the Easter course, I had the experience that the Swiss said their schools are independent. But, the Swiss schools are really only slaves. I don’t think that we need to hurry. We can make the Waldorf School principle only a model. We will not be able to create a second school. It will remain a model, so we need do nothing more than maintain this school as a model until people get angry enough. The only thing that would make sense would be to oppose the school laws through a worldwide movement. It is high time for the World School Association to do something. It is important to bring the World School Association to life so that a gigantic movement for the independence of education and for the freeing of the school system arises throughout the world. For that reason, I think we should make this school with its students inwardly as complete as possible and extend it upward. Add a class each year and extend it upward. Due to a lack of help, the newsletter will not be possible. Pedagogical conferences are a luxury. Is there something else? A question is asked about the closing ceremony. Dr. Steiner: We can hold the closing ceremony in the main hall of the art building. If it gives the children a closing point and they receive a few thoughts, then it would be good. It is a part of their soul experiences, for otherwise the children would simply leave and then begin a new school year. In the end, they would become indifferent. The closing ceremony is the conclusion of the entire school year. The fact that the holiday is only a week is an exception. Each class will begin a new year. That should not be prosaic. Why have we not had any more monthly festivals? That is too bad. I think we should have them. |
| 307. Education: Science, Art, Religion and Morality
05 Aug 1923, Ilkley Translated by Harry Collison |
|---|
| Pedagogy is, indeed, no longer an apt term to-day, for it is an a priori expression of the one-sidedness of its ideals, and those who visited the Waldorf School will have realized this from the first. It is not, of course, unusual to-day to find boys and girls educated together, in the same classes and taught in the same way, and I merely mention this to show you that in this respect, too, the methods of the Waldorf School are in line with recent developments. |
| To-day we must first seek understanding of the human being in his pure, undifferentiated essence. The Waldorf School was founded with this aim in view. The first idea was the education of children whose parents were working in the Waldorf-Astoria Factory, and as the Director was a member of the Anthroposophical Society, he asked me to supervise the undertaking. I myself could only give the principles of education on the basis of Anthroposophy. And so, in the first place, the Waldorf School arose as a general school for the workers' children. It was only ‘anthroposophical’ in the sense that the man who started it happened to be an Anthroposophist. |
| 307. Education: Science, Art, Religion and Morality
05 Aug 1923, Ilkley Translated by Harry Collison |
|---|
The Chair was taken by Miss Margaret McMillan, who gave a stirring address, and Dr. Steiner followed on. My first words must be a reply to the kind greeting given by Miss Beverley to Frau Doctor Steiner and myself, and I can assure you that we deeply appreciate the invitation to give this course of lectures. I shall try to show what Anthroposophy has to say on the subject of education and to describe the attempt already made in the Waldorf School at Stuttgart to apply the educational principles arising out of Anthroposophy. It is a pleasure to come to the North of England to speak on a subject which I consider so important, and it gives me all the greater joy to think that I am speaking not only to those who have actually arranged this course but to many who are listening for the first time to lectures on education in the light of Anthroposophy. I hope, therefore, that more lies behind this Conference than the resolve of those who organized it, for I think it may be taken as evidence that our previous activities are bearing fruit in current world-strivings. English friends of Anthroposophy were with us at a Conference held at Christmas, last year, when the Goetheanum (at Dornach, Switzerland)—since taken from us by fire—was still standing. The Conference was brought about by Mrs. Mackenzie, the author of a fine book on the educational principles laid down by Hegel, and the sympathetic appreciation expressed there justifies the hope that it is not, after all, so very difficult to find understanding that transcends the limits of nationality. What I myself said about education at the Conference did not, of course, emanate from the more intellectualistic philosophy of Hegel, but from Anthroposophy, the nature of which is wholly spiritual. And indeed Mrs. Mackenzie, too, has seen how, while fully reckoning with Hegel, something yet more fruitful for education can be drawn where intellectuality is led over into the spiritual forces of Anthroposophy. Then I was able to speak of our educational principles and their practical application a second time last year, in the ancient university of Oxford. And perhaps I am justified in thinking that those lectures, which dealt with the relation of education to social life, may have induced a number of English educationists to visit our Waldorf School at Stuttgart. It was a great joy to welcome them there, and we were delighted to hear that they were impressed with our work and were following it with interest. During the visit the idea of holding this Summer Course on education seems to have arisen. Its roots, therefore, may be said to lie in previous activities and this very fact gives one the right confidence and courage as we embark on the lectures. Courage and confidence are necessary when one has to speak of matters so unfamiliar to the spiritual life of to-day and in face of such strong opposition. More especially are they necessary when one attempts to explain principles that seek to approach, in a creative sense, the greatest artistic achievement of the Cosmos—man himself. Those who visited us this year at Stuttgart will have realized how essentially Waldorf School education gets to grips with the deepest fibres of modern life. The educational methods applied there can really no longer be described by the word ‘Pedagogy’ a treasured word which the Greeks learnt from Plato and the Platonists who had devoted themselves so sincerely to all educational questions. Pedagogy is, indeed, no longer an apt term to-day, for it is an a priori expression of the one-sidedness of its ideals, and those who visited the Waldorf School will have realized this from the first. It is not, of course, unusual to-day to find boys and girls educated together, in the same classes and taught in the same way, and I merely mention this to show you that in this respect, too, the methods of the Waldorf School are in line with recent developments. What does the word ‘Pedagogy’ suggest? The ‘Pedagogue’ is a teacher of boys. This shows us at once that in ancient Greece education was very one-sided. One half of humanity was excluded from serious education. To the Greek, the boy alone was man and the girl must stay in the background when it was a question of serious education. The pedagogue was a teacher of boys, concerned only with that sex. In our time, the presence of girl-pupils in the schools is no longer unusual, although indeed it involved a radical change from customs by no means very ancient. Another feature at the Waldorf School is that in the teaching staff no distinction of sex is made—none, at least, until we come to the very highest classes. Having as our aim a system of education in accord with the needs of the present day, we had first of all to modify much that was included in the old term ‘Pedagogy.’ So far I have only mentioned one of its limitations, but speaking in the broadest sense it must be admitted that for some time now there has been no real knowledge of man in regard to education and teaching. Indeed, many one-sided views have been held in the educational world, not only that of the separation of the sexes. Can it truly be said that a man could develop in the fullest sense of the term when educated according to the old principles? Certainly not! To-day we must first seek understanding of the human being in his pure, undifferentiated essence. The Waldorf School was founded with this aim in view. The first idea was the education of children whose parents were working in the Waldorf-Astoria Factory, and as the Director was a member of the Anthroposophical Society, he asked me to supervise the undertaking. I myself could only give the principles of education on the basis of Anthroposophy. And so, in the first place, the Waldorf School arose as a general school for the workers' children. It was only ‘anthroposophical’ in the sense that the man who started it happened to be an Anthroposophist. Here then, we have an educational institution arising on a social basis, seeking to found the whole spirit and method of its teaching upon Anthroposophy. It was not a question of founding an ‘anthroposophical’ school. On the contrary, we hold that because Anthroposophy can at all times efface itself, it is able to institute a school on universal-human principles instead of upon the basis of social rank, philosophical conceptions of any other specialised line of thought. This may well have occurred to those who visited the Waldorf School and it may also have led to the invitation to give these present lectures. And in this introductory lecture, when I am not yet speaking of education, let me cordially thank all those who have arranged this Summer Course. I would also thank them for having arranged performances of Eurhythmy which has already become an integral part of Anthroposophy. At the very beginning let me express this hope: A Summer Course has brought us together. We have assembled in a beautiful spot in the North of England, far away from the busy life of the winter months. You have given up your time of summer recreation to listen to subjects that will play an important part in the life of the future and the time must come when the spirit uniting us now for a fortnight during the summer holidays will inspire all our winter work. I cannot adequately express my gratitude for the fact that you have dedicated your holidays to the study of ideas for the good of the future. Just as sincerely as I thank you for this now, so do I trust that the spirit of our Summer Course may be carried on into the winter months—for only so can this Course bear real fruit. I should like to proceed from what Miss McMillan said so impressively yesterday in words that bore witness to the great need of our time for moral impulses to be sought after if the progress of civilization is to be advanced through Education. When we admit the great need that exists to-day for moral and spiritual impulses in educational methods and allow the significance of such impulses to work deeply in our hearts, we are led to the most fundamental problems in modern spiritual life—problems connected with the forms assumed by our culture and civilization in the course of human history. We are living in an age when certain spheres of culture, though standing in a measure side by side, are yet separated from one another. In the first place we have all that man can learn of the world through knowledge—communicated, for the most part, by the intellect alone. Then there is the sphere of art, where man tries to give expression to profound inner experiences, imitating with his human powers, a divine creative activity. Again we have the religious strivings of man, wherein he seeks to unite his own existence with the life of the universe. Lastly, we try to bring forth from our inner being impulses which place us as moral beings in the civilized life of the world. In effect we confront these four branches of culture: knowledge, art, religion, morality. But the course of human evolution has brought it about that these four branches are developing separately and we no longer realize their common origin. It is of no value to criticize these conditions; rather should we learn to understand the necessities of human progress. To-day, therefore, we will remind ourselves of the beginnings of civilization. There was an ancient period in human evolution when science, art, religion and the moral life were one. It was an age when the intellect had not yet developed its present abstract nature and when man could solve the riddles of existence by a kind of picture-consciousness. Mighty pictures stood there before his soul—pictures which in the traditional forms of myth and saga have since come down to us. Originally they proceeded from actual experience and a knowledge of the spiritual content of the universe. There was indeed an age when in this direct, inner life of imaginative vision man could perceive the spiritual foundations of the world of sense. And what his instinctive imagination thus gleaned from the universe, he made substantial, using earthly matter and evolving architecture, sculpture, painting, music and other arts. He embodied with rapture the fruits of his knowledge in outer material forms. With his human faculties man copied divine creation, giving visible form to all that had first flowed into him as science and knowledge. In short, his art mirrored before the senses all that his forces of knowledge had first assimilated. In weakened form we find this faculty once again in Goethe, when out of inner conviction he spoke these significant words: “Beauty is a manifestation of the secret laws of Nature, without which they would remain for ever hidden.” And again: “He before whom Nature begins to unveil her mysteries is conscious of an irresistible yearning for art—Nature's worthiest expression.” Such a conception shows that man is fundamentally predisposed to view both science and art as two aspects of one and the same truth. This he could do in primeval ages, when knowledge brought him inner satisfaction as it arose in the forms of ideas before his soul and when the beauty that enchanted him could be made visible to his senses in the arts—for experiences such as these were the essence of earlier civilizations. What is our position to-day? As a result of all that intellectual abstractions have brought in their train we build up scientific systems of knowledge from which, as far as possible, art is eliminated. It is really almost a crime to introduce the faintest suggestion of art into science, and anyone who is found guilty of this in a scientific book is at once condemned as a dilettante. Our knowledge claims to be strictly dispassionate and objective; art is said to have nothing in common with objectivity and is purely arbitrary. A deep abyss thus opens between knowledge and art, and man no longer finds any means of crossing it. When he applies the science that is valued because of its freedom from art, he is led indeed to a marvellous knowledge of Nature—but of Nature devoid of life. The wonderful achievements of science are fully acknowledged by us, yet science is dumb before the mystery of man. Look where you will in science to-day, you will find wonderful answers to the problems of outer Nature, but no answers to the riddle of man. The laws of science cannot grasp him. Why is this? Heretical as it sounds to modern ears, this is the reason. The moment we draw near to the human being with the laws of Nature, we must pass over into the realm of art. A heresy indeed, for people will certainly say: “That is no longer science. If you try to understand the human being by the artistic sense, you are not following the laws of observation and strict logic to which you must always adhere.” However emphatically it may be held that this approach to man is unscientific because it makes use of the artistic sense—man is none the less an artistic creation of Nature. All kinds of arguments may be advanced to the effect that this way of artistic understanding is thoroughly unscientific, but the fact remains that man cannot be grasped by purely scientific modes of cognition. And so—in spite of all our science—we come to a halt before the human being. Only if we are sufficiently unbiased can we realize that scientific intellectuality must here be allowed to pass over into the domain of art. Science itself must become art if we would approach the secrets of man's being. Now if we follow this path with all our inner forces of soul, not only observing in an outwardly artistic sense, but taking the true path, we can allow scientific intellectuality to flow over into what I have described as ‘Imaginative Knowledge’ in my book, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment. This ‘Imaginative Knowledge’—to-day an object of such suspicion and opposition—is indeed possible when the kind of thinking that otherwise gives itself up passively, and increasingly so, to the outer world is roused to a living and positive activity. The difficulty of speaking of these things to-day is not that one is either criticizing or upholding scientific habits of thought which are peculiar to our age; rather does the difficulty consist in the fact that fundamentally one must touch upon matters which concern the very roots of our present civilization. There is an increasing tendency to-day to give oneself up to the mere, observation of outer events, to allow thoughts passively to follow their succession, avoiding all conscious inner activity. This state of things began with the demand for material proofs of spiritual matters. Take the case of a lecture on spiritual subjects. Visible evidence is out of the question, because words are the only available media—one cannot summon the invisible by some magical process. All that can be done is to stimulate and assume that the audience will inwardly energize their thinking into following the indications given by the words. Yet nowadays it will frequently happen that many of the listeners—I do not, of course, refer to those who are sitting in this hall—begin to yawn, because they imagine that thinking ought to be passive, and then they fall asleep because they are not following the subject actively. People like everything to be demonstrated to the eye, illustrated by means of lantern-slides or the like, for then it is not necessary to think at all. Indeed, they cannot think. That was the beginning, and it has gone still further. In a performance of “Hamlet,” for instance, one must follow the plot, and also the spoken word, in order to understand it. But to-day the drama is deserted for the cinema, where one need not exert oneself in any way; the pictures roll off the machine and can be watched quite inertly. And so man's inner activity of thought has gradually waned. But it is precisely this which must be retained. Yet when once the nature of this inner activity is understood, it will be realized that thinking is not merely a matter of stimulus from outside, but a force living in the very being of man. The kind of thinking current in our modern civilization is only one aspect of this force of thought. If we inwardly observe it, from the outer side as it were, it is revealed as the force that builds up the human being from childhood. Before this can be understood, an inner, plastic force that transforms abstract thought into pictures must come into play. Then, after the necessary efforts have been made, we reach the stage I have Called in my book, the beginning of meditation. At this point we not only begin to lead mere cleverness over into art, but thought is raised into Imagination. We stand in a world of Imagination, knowing that it is not a creation of our own fancy, but an actual, objective world. We are fully conscious that although we do not as yet possess this objective world itself in Imagination, we have indeed a true picture of it. And now the point is to realize that we must get beyond the picture. Strenuous efforts are necessary if we would master this inner creative thinking that does not merely contain pictures of fantasy, but pictures bearing their own reality within them. Then, however, we must next be able to eliminate the whole of this creative activity and thus accomplish an inwardly moral act. For this indeed constitutes an act of inner morality: when all the efforts described in my book to reach this active thinking in pictures have been made, when all the forces of soul have been applied and the powers of Self strained to their very utmost, we then must be able to eliminate all we have thus attained. In his own being man must have developed the highest fruits of this thinking that has been raised to the level of meditation and then be capable of selflessness. He must be able to eliminate all that has been thus acquired. For to have nothing is not the same as to have gained nothing. If he has made every effort to strengthen the Self by his own will so that finally his consciousness can be emptied-a spiritual world surges into his consciousness and being and he realizes that spiritual forces of cognition are needed for knowledge of the spiritual world. Active picture-thinking may be called Imagination. When the spiritual world pours into the consciousness that has in turn been emptied by dint of tremendous effort, man is approaching the mode of mode of knowledge known as true Inspiration. Having experienced Imagination, we may through an inner denial of self come to comprehend the spiritual world lying behind the two veils of outer Nature and of man. I will now endeavour to show you how from this point we are led over to the spiritual life of religion. Let me draw your attention to the following.—Inasmuch as Anthroposophy strives for true Imagination, it leads not only to knowledge or to art that in itself is of the nature of a picture, but to the spiritual reality contained in the picture. Anthroposophy bridges the gulf between knowledge and art in such a way that at a higher level, suited to modern life and the present age, the unity of science and art which humanity has abandoned can enter civilization once again. This unity must be re-attained, for the schism between science and art has disrupted the very being of man. To pass from the state of disruption to unity and inner harmony—it is for this above all that modern man must strive. Thus far I have spoken of the harmony between science and art. I will now develop the subject further, in connection with religion and morality. Knowledge that thus draws the creative activity of the universe into itself can flow directly into art, and this same path from knowledge to art can be extended and continued. It was so continued through the powers of the old imaginative knowledge of which I have spoken, which also found the way, without any intervening cleft, into the life of religion. He who applied himself to this kind of knowledge—primitive and instinctive though it was in early humanity—was aware that he acquired it by no external perceptions, for in his thinking and knowing he sensed divine life within him, he felt that spiritual powers were at work in his own creative activity enabling him to raise to greater holiness all that had been impressed into the particular medium of his art. The power born in his soul as he embodied the Divine-Spiritual in outer material substance could then extend into acts wherein he was fully conscious that he, as man, was expressing the will of divine ordnance. He felt himself pervaded by divine creative power, and as the path was found through the fashioning of material substance, art became—by way of ritual—a form of divine worship. Artistic creation was sanctified in the divine office. Art became ritual—the glorification of the Divine—and through the medium of material substance offered sacrifice to the Divine Being in ceremonial and ritual. And as man thus bridged the gulf between Art and Religion there arose a religion in full harmony with knowledge and with art. Albeit primitive and instinctive, this knowledge was none the less a true picture, and as such it could lead human deeds to become, in the acts of ritual, a direct portrayal of the Divine. In this way the transition from art to religion was made possible. Is it still possible with our present-day mode of knowledge? The ancient clairvoyant perception had revealed to man the spiritual in every creature and process of Nature, and by surrender and devotion to the spirit within the nature-processes, the spiritual laws of the Cosmos passed over and were embodied in ritual and cult. How do we “know” the world to-day? Once more, to describe is better than criticism, for as the following lectures will show, the development of our present mode of knowledge was a necessity in the history of mankind. To-day I am merely placing certain suggestive thoughts before you. We have gradually lost our spiritual insight into the being and processes of Nature. We take pride in eliminating the spirit in our observation of Nature and finally reach such hypothetical conceptions as attribute the origin of our planet to the movements of a primeval nebula. Mechanical stirrings in this nebula are said to be the origin of all the kingdoms of Nature, even so far as man. And according to these same laws—which govern our whole “objective” mode of thinking, this earth must finally end through a so-called extinction of warmth. All ideas achieved by man, having proceeded from a kind of Fata Morgana, will disappear, until at the end there will remain only the tomb of earthly existence. If the truth of this line of thought be recognized by science and men are honest and brave enough to face its inevitable consequences, they cannot but admit that all religious and moral life is also a Fata Morgana and must so remain! Yet the human being cannot endure this thought, and so must hold fast to the remnants of olden times, when religion and morality still lived in harmony with knowledge and with art. Religion and morality to-day are not direct creations of man's innermost being. They rest on tradition, and are a heritage from ages when the instinctive life of man was filled with revelation, when God—and the moral world in Him—were alike manifest. Our strivings for knowledge to-day can reveal neither God nor a moral world. Science comes to the end of the animal species and man is cast out. Honest inner thinking can find no bridge over the gulf fixed between knowledge and the religious life. All true religions have sprung from Inspiration. True, the early form of Inspiration was not so conscious as that to which we must now attain, yet it was there instinctively, and rightly do the religions trace their origin back to it. Such faiths as will no longer recognize living inspiration and revelation from the spirit in the immediate present have to be content with tradition. But such faiths lack all inner vitality, all direct motive-power of religious life. This motive-power and vitality must be re-won, for only so can our social organism be healed. I have shown how man must regain a knowledge that passes by way of art to Imagination, and thence to Inspiration. If he re-acquires all that flows down from the inspirations of a spiritual world into human consciousness, true religion will once again appear. And then intellectual discussion about the nature of Christ will cease, for through Inspiration it will be known in truth that the Christ was the human bearer of a Divine Being Who had descended from spiritual worlds into earthly existence. Without super-sensible knowledge there can be no understanding of the Christ. If Christianity is again to be deeply rooted in humanity, the path to super-sensible knowledge must be rediscovered. Inspiration must again impart a truly religious life to mankind in order that knowledge—derived no longer merely from the observation of natural laws—may find no abyss dividing it alike from art and religion. Knowledge, art, religion—these three will be in harmony. Primeval man was convinced of the presence of God in human deeds when he made his˃ art a divine office and when a consciousness of the fire glowing in his heart as Divine Will pervaded the acts of ritual. And when the path from outer objective knowledge to Inspiration is found once again, true religion will flow from Inspiration and modern man will be permeated—as was primeval man—with a God-given morality. In those ancient days man felt: “If I have my divine office, if I share in divine worship, my whole inner being is enriched; God lives not only in the temple but in the whole of my life.” To make the presence of God imminent in the world—this is true morality. Nature cannot lead man to morality. Only that which lifts him above Nature, filling him with the Divine-Spiritual—this alone can lead man to morality. Through the Intuition which comes to him when he finds his way to the spirit, he can fill his innermost being with a morality that is at once human and divine. The attainment of Inspiration thus rebuilds the bridge once existing instinctively in human civilization between religion and morality. As knowledge leads upwards through art to the heights of super-sensible life, so, through religious worship, spiritual heights are brought down to earthly existence, and we can permeate it with pure, deep-rooted morality—a morality that is an act of conscious experience. Thus will man himself become the individual expression of a moral activity that is an inner motive power. Morality will be a creation of the individual himself, and the last abyss between religion and morality will be bridged. The intuition pervading primitive man as he enacted his ritual will be re-created in a new form, and a morality truly corresponding with modern conditions will arise from the religious life of our day. We need this for the renewal of our civilization. We need it in order that what to-day is mere heritage, mere tradition may spring again into life. This pure, primordial impulse is necessary for our complicated social life that is threatening to spread chaos through the world. We need a harmony between knowledge, art, religion, and morality. The earth-born knowledge which has given us our science of to-day must take on a new form and lead us through Inspiration and the arts to a realization of the super-sensible in the life of religion. Then we shall indeed be able to bring down the super-sensible to the earth again, to experience it in religious life and to transform it into will in social existence. Only when we see the social question as one of morality and religion can we really grapple with it, and this we cannot do until the moral and religious life arises from spiritual knowledge. The revival of spiritual knowledge will enable man to accomplish what he needs—a link between later phases of evolution and its pure, instinctive origin. Then he will know what is needed for the healing of humanity—harmony between science, art, religion, and morality. |
| 262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 236. Letter to Rudolf Steiner
23 Mar 1925, Dornach |
|---|
| The Piper evening, which was supposed to take place on Saturday evening, as we decided at the board meeting here, has been postponed because the Waldorf School is having a concert that evening; now I have to see how I manage that, because Piper was already looking forward to it, and it is perhaps the best way to soften him after all. |
| Appointed by Rudolf Steiner in 1921 at the Free Waldorf School in Stuttgart. In 1945, he was actively involved in the reopening of the Stuttgart school, and then founded and chaired the “Association of Independent Waldorf Schools”. |
| Walter Johannes Stein (1891-1957), a member of the Anthroposophical Society since the summer of 1913, was appointed by Rudolf Steiner to the Free Waldorf School in Stuttgart in 1919. 1923-1928/29 on the board of the German national society. 1932 moved to England. |
| 262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 236. Letter to Rudolf Steiner
23 Mar 1925, Dornach |
|---|
236To Rudolf Steiner in Dornach March 1925, Stuttgart Dear E., a thousand thanks for your kind letter. We are all very much looking forward to tonight. Hopefully the noise of the children will not drown out the sound of the sunrise. Afterwards, the teachers have invited the eurythmists to a tea party. We have had a series of very successful evenings behind us. Heidenheim (full house), which earned us three hymns as reviews, - Karlsruhe, where the atmosphere was very warm and enthusiastic (- reviews have not yet been sent to us -), except for very few empty chairs in the last row of expensive seats, it was packed (1200 people) - Mannheim also went very well; even though it was confirmation morning in town, there were only a few empty rows at the very back of the long hall. Bernhard Klein 17 was confirmed, visited me (with roses) and asked to give you his best regards; the Leinhas, where Flossy lived, also had a confirmation celebration. Everything we have heard about the comments of the audience sounds very enthusiastic; there are even claims that people cried at the Faust scene in Mannheim. It is almost a shame that no further performances could take place between the pedagogical conference and today: Schuurmans, in particular, had to go to Dornach because of their house. With them, I then dismissed Savitch and de Jaager, since they could be dispensed with for the local school performance. It is striking how well things went in the end, and how much everyone has learned through the repetitions. The 'Urträume' (dreams of the origin of the soul),18 We were supposed to present them at the pedagogical conference, but they have of course been somewhat forgotten. These include the work of Frau Lewerenz,19 We have to do it on Saturday evening or Sunday in Dornach, and then we will go straight back to Stuttgart. Tomorrow I have to hold a lot of rehearsals; first with the Stuttgart group, who have to fill the second part of our program with the big group pieces. Then the students' performance, for which there is so much material that I certainly can't get through it all. For a poetry evening, I have also been talked into it by Schwebsch 20 still let myself be talked into it after I had initially declined: I want to venture into Pandora's 21 But . to my horror, I see that time is running out for everything again. I am almost wondering whether I will not have to stay here. I would have liked to travel on Wednesday and leave Dornach again on Sunday morning. If it were a three-hour drive, I would not have hesitated for a moment; but if it means spending eight hours in a closed car over snow-covered mountain roads, I am a little worried about my strength. I will probably make the decision tomorrow, after I have seen whether I can finish the preparations here. The Piper evening, which was supposed to take place on Saturday evening, as we decided at the board meeting here, has been postponed because the Waldorf School is having a concert that evening; now I have to see how I manage that, because Piper was already looking forward to it, and it is perhaps the best way to soften him after all. Schwebsch, who persuaded me to use Pandora and from whom I requested introductory music, has also not yet had the time or the head to suggest something. It will probably have to be Bruckner rather than Bach. The event is to take place in the school, so we won't have the organ harmonium. For the Piper evening, on the other hand, I have to arrange something with Arenson, on the harmonium, which also needs to be rehearsed. So I see with horror – as always in Stuttgart, hundreds of things that still need to be done. Mrs. Kolisko 22 has become so close to me. I didn't even know that she had had this longing for a long time. Now she wants me to be her mother, and I have to give such a prominent daughter the time she wants. And all the speakers and actors! But if you have experienced this terrible, ever-deepening decline again, as we did on the trip, you don't feel at all justified in depriving those people of the opportunity to be saved. The priests, on the other hand, are all making remarkable progress in speaking; this must come from the content of their ritual. I find it so regrettable with Unger; there is so much mass suggestion involved. What has been said by certain prominent people who have been so deceived by themselves is now circulating among young people like a dictum. Rath, for example, seems to explain to newcomers that Unger is a pest to society. Stein 23 always refers to you when he wants to condemn Unger to passivity. Maybe I should talk to the people. Or not? What do you think? I have to close. Warmest Marie Should a Piper evening here be announced as originating from the Section for the Arts of Eurythmy or from the board? What do you think? Postscript on page 1: The children at school were delighted, but thought the performance was too short.
|
| 260. The Christmas Conference : Rudolf Steiner's Contribution During The Meeting of the Swiss School Association
28 Dec 1923, Dornach Translated by Johanna Collis, Michael Wilson |
|---|
| It seems to me that things do in part indeed depend on how the educational movement connected with Anthroposophy is run here in Switzerland. The Waldorf School in Germany has remained essentially in a position of isolation. Though there have been one or two further foundations, in Hamburg, Cologne and so on, the Waldorf School in Germany, in other words in a relatively extensive area, has remained a solitary example. It will remain to be seen, therefore, whether what is to be started in England as a kind of Waldorf school, and also the school with three classes that already exists in Holland, will also to begin with remain as solitary examples. |
| They are perfectly true, and much damage has been done to us by the constant repetition of the view that Waldorf education can only be carried out in schools apart from the main stream, whereas I have constantly repeated that the methods can be applied in any school. |
| 260. The Christmas Conference : Rudolf Steiner's Contribution During The Meeting of the Swiss School Association
28 Dec 1923, Dornach Translated by Johanna Collis, Michael Wilson |
|---|
Towards56 the end of the meeting, Dr Steiner spoke the following words: In addition to what I took the liberty of saying at the close of the last course which I was able to hold for the Swiss teachers, I have perhaps only a few more remarks to make in connection with the difficulties of the Swiss school movement. It seems to me that things do in part indeed depend on how the educational movement connected with Anthroposophy is run here in Switzerland. The Waldorf School in Germany has remained essentially in a position of isolation. Though there have been one or two further foundations, in Hamburg, Cologne and so on, the Waldorf School in Germany, in other words in a relatively extensive area, has remained a solitary example. It will remain to be seen, therefore, whether what is to be started in England as a kind of Waldorf school, and also the school with three classes that already exists in Holland, will also to begin with remain as solitary examples. Apart from everything else it has to be said that the reason why these schools are still only isolated examples, and also why it can be expected that they will remain so for a long time, is simply that the present social circumstances really do make it impossible for an attitude to come about that could lead to the financing of a larger number of such schools. Experience over the years has shown this quite clearly. And this challenges us to think carefully about the whole direction we should take with our educational movement. This is especially necessary with regard to Switzerland. For Switzerland is pervaded by a very strong sense for everything represented by the state. And now that the Swiss school association for independent education has been founded, I do believe that the chief difficulties will arise from this Swiss sense of statehood. Even less than anywhere else will it be possible here in Switzerland to find an opening for the belief that a truly independent school could be an example for a model method of education, or that schools such as this could be founded on a larger scale. We should not allow ourselves to be under any illusion in this respect. Aversion to a system of education that is independent of the state is very great here. Of course what Herr Gnädiger has just said is right, namely that there will be interest in how things are done in a model school. Least of all here in Switzerland can you expect the president of the Schweizerischer Schulverein, of whom you have spoken, to have any interest in the school other than that pertaining to its status as a model. Perhaps his interest will turn out to be such that he would like to influence Swiss state schools to take up certain methodological aspects from this model school. But this seems to me to be the only aspect that can be counted on to attract interest here in Switzerland. That is why it seems to me to be important to take up these two things wherever educational associations of the kind you have mentioned are founded; and also that many such associations should be founded, more and more of them! Another aspect is that the crux of anthroposophical education is its method. The schools apply a certain method. It is not a question of any particular political direction but purely and simply of method. It is also not a question of any particular religious creed, or of seeing Anthroposophy somehow as a religious creed. It is simply a question of method. In the discussion that followed my lecture cycle57 my answer to questions on this was simply that the educational method represented here can be applied anywhere, wherever there is the good will to introduce it. If this is done on the one hand, and if on the other hand—in order to create an understanding in wider circles—it is clearly emphasized that this is the proper method and that it is being applied in a school that can serve as a model, if these two points are given the main emphasis in the programme, if it is stressed that every school could use these methods and that a model school could demonstrate how fruitful they are, and if things are worked out neatly, then I believe that something could be achieved even in Switzerland. And then on the basis of these two points educational associations ought to be founded everywhere. But it would have to be made clear to everyone that the aim was not to found as many private schools as possible to compete with the state schools. In Switzerland such a thing would be regarded as something very peculiar and it would never be understood. But there would be an understanding for a model school which could be a source of inspiration for a method of education. Progress cannot be made in any other way. It is important to present these things to people in principle again and again and wherever the opportunity arises. I believe it would be a good thing if you could always give the greatest prominence to these two aspects. They are perfectly true, and much damage has been done to us by the constant repetition of the view that Waldorf education can only be carried out in schools apart from the main stream, whereas I have constantly repeated that the methods can be applied in any school. This is what I wanted to say, for everything else is linked to this. I also believe that a financial basis will only be won when there can be an understanding of these things. There will be very little understanding in Switzerland for independent schools if they are not linked to what I have just been saying. But if this is done, I believe that our efforts could lead to a greater degree of success than has been the case hitherto. So far the existing financial situation is not sufficient basis for the founding of a school in Basel.
|
| 251. The History of the Anthroposophical Society 1913–1922: To all Working Groups of the Anthroposophical Society
13 Jul 1920, |
|---|
| This is already becoming clear. The newly founded Waldorf School Association has made the support of the school its special task, but it has also set itself further goals. The Waldorf School calls for its continuation up to the university level. It will connect with research institutes that have also been set up. Since eurythmy is used in a pedagogically hygienic way at the Waldorf School, the urgent necessity is already emerging for the school, as well as for our movement in general, to provide a place for the cultivation of this universal art as a 'Eurythmeum'. |
| 251. The History of the Anthroposophical Society 1913–1922: To all Working Groups of the Anthroposophical Society
13 Jul 1920, |
|---|
Circular letter from Carl Unger, Stuttgart, [July 13, 1920] Dear friends! A few weeks ago, you received a circular letter informing you of the plan to hold a General Assembly of the Anthroposophical Society. This was accompanied by a request to indicate the likely number of participants in a non-binding way and to make suggestions for the proceedings. Today, I regret to have to inform you that this plan has had to be abandoned because the circumstances do not allow it to be pursued at present. It cannot be the intention of the Anthroposophical Society to convene a meeting that consists of the few members who “can just come” under the current difficult circumstances; our cause is too serious for that. An effective meeting is not to be hoped for under the present conditions. However, it is very important to me to take this opportunity, and precisely in view of the current circumstances, to address the situation of the Anthroposophical Society, even if only briefly today, and I ask that the following be communicated to the members of your working group, and only to them. On various occasions during his presence in Stuttgart in June, Dr. Steiner pointed out that the work of our movement has entered a new phase of development for some time now, and that this is entirely in the closest connection with the present world situation. The Anthroposophical Society was founded on purely spiritual goals, encompassing a movement without a fixed organizational form, burdened with all kinds of legacies from the former Theosophical Society. In the period immediately following the founding of the Society, we found ourselves still in the midst of discussions about the aims and paths of the Anthroposophical Society for quite some time; even the two general assemblies that had so far been held had to serve these discussions,but they did not come to a conclusion, and indeed it was advisable to keep these matters in a certain fluidity. I myself was able to travel around a lot at the time and discuss the aims and ways, many of my lectures at that time dealt with the draft of the principles of an Anthroposophical Society written by Dr. Steiner, in which the indications of the ideal cohesion of the members are given. Unfortunately, I had to leave this preparatory work, which was intended to help prepare a healthy foundation for the Society, unfinished after the 1914 General Assembly for the sake of other work, and the affairs of the Society had to be suspended during the long war, if only for the reason that the Anthroposophical Society is only justified on an international basis. Since then, the world situation has changed fundamentally, and the fact that it is still not possible to hold an international general assembly of our society today, 20 months after the armistice, can be seen as a characterization of the situation in a certain direction. If Stuttgart were chosen as the venue for the General Assembly, a considerable number of our German members would come together, but the members from non-German countries would be underrepresented. If, however, Dornach were chosen as the venue for the meeting, where the spiritual center of our movement is located at the Goetheanum, then, with a few negligible exceptions, the German members would be excluded. The only remaining option would be to invite the German members to Stuttgart and to organize a corresponding event in Dornach. But there are very important reasons against such a plan, which are again related to the world situation. From the very beginning of our movement, Dr. Steiner repeatedly pointed out in his lectures that the time would come when it would be necessary to use anthroposophy to exert our full influence on practical life. The harrowing events of our time have precipitated this point in history more quickly than we could have imagined, and the circumstances are laden with such terrible tragedy that the responsibility is growing to gigantic proportions. From the real life of our movement, forms are beginning to emerge that are turning outward with all their might. Here, above all, the Goetheanum in Dornach must be mentioned, with its various societies: the “Verwaltungsgesellschaft des Goetheanum Dornach”, the “Treuhandgesellschaft des Goetheanum Dornach, Sitz Stuttgart” , the “Verein Goetheanismus Dornach”. The Goetheanum attracts the greatest attention of the thousands of visitors who come from all directions, and as the spiritual center of the movement it begins to radiate its strong forces; but it also has the effect of arousing bitter opposition, for which any means are justified in order to destroy the spiritual movement. Officially, however, the Goetheanum is not yet appreciated for its significance, and distressing evidence of this is coming from many sides. If this were different, many things could indeed be undertaken in Dornach that cannot be undertaken at present. Every effort would have to be directed towards completing the Goetheanum, which unfortunately the Mittelland members, who have largely supported the construction up to now, are no longer able to do; they are virtually excluded from visiting the construction site. The “Federation for the Threefold Social Organism” turns completely outward, and does so on an international basis, although for the time being it still has to work from different centers. The idea of the threefold social order, as presented by Dr. Steiner in his 'Key Points of the Social Question', is drawn entirely from the sources of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, and the members of our movement feel responsible for ensuring that the threefold movement is fed by the life of spiritual science. It is all the more surprising when one hears from time to time that individual members of the Anthroposophical Society want nothing to do with the threefold social order, although it should be clear that if the ideas of the threefold social order are not implemented in the spiritual, political and economic institutions in the near future, there will soon be no opportunity to pursue anthroposophy at one's own convenience. Conversely, there are also people who profess to appreciate the ideas of threefolding but want nothing to do with spiritual science. But of course you cannot expect to draw from a stream if you deny its source. We are fully open to public criticism regarding the threefolding, it must be propagandized so that a sufficiently large number of people are seized by this idea. The anthroposophical movement must supply it with strength, and everything must be avoided that could compromise this idea in public from within the Anthroposophical Society. The Waldorf School, an initiative of our friend Emil Molt, now offers the long-awaited opportunity for a larger number of teachers from among our members to apply the educational principles in the manner of an art under the direct guidance and instruction of Dr. Steiner. These principles are designed to educate people who can truly rise to the great challenges of the future. The Free Waldorf School has already gained a certain amount of respect from the public, but of course it will also face hostility, especially when it proves its spiritual significance. This is already becoming clear. The newly founded Waldorf School Association has made the support of the school its special task, but it has also set itself further goals. The Waldorf School calls for its continuation up to the university level. It will connect with research institutes that have also been set up. Since eurythmy is used in a pedagogically hygienic way at the Waldorf School, the urgent necessity is already emerging for the school, as well as for our movement in general, to provide a place for the cultivation of this universal art as a 'Eurythmeum'. The archives that are being set up in Dornach and Stuttgart are also part of our spiritual arsenal. It is hoped that spiritual impulses will be provided from such spiritual centers for humanity, which is rushing towards the abyss, and which it needs to bring about a possible future. The necessity to safeguard such spiritual centers and at the same time to show practical ways of implementing the threefold social order led to the decision to found the “Kommenden Tag, Aktiengesellschaft zur Förderung wirtschaftlicher und geistiger Werte” (a joint-stock company for the promotion of economic and spiritual values). With this, however, we are beginning to work from the spiritual science into the most practical of circumstances, which have their significance in everyday life. A prospectus to be published soon will provide more details about the current situation of this joint-stock company. Here, of course, any possibility of shyness in public must be completely abandoned, and we find ourselves in the most real relationships with our environment; indeed, we must strive to expand the influence of these enterprises as far as possible. The Anthroposophical Society has always been a purely spiritual movement and within such a movement many things can be tolerated because the purely spiritual has its own laws for enforcement. But now that we are going public in a wide variety of directions, we are not allowed to embarrass ourselves in any way or to be embarrassed by dilettantism and cliquishness, or by sectarian desires. Everything the Anthroposophical Society wants to undertake must be considered from the point of view of how it will be received by the public. But such actions must not fail or fizzle out. Even a general assembly of the Anthroposophical Society must be an action that commands respect, and therefore all possibilities must be carefully considered in advance. But such a success, as we absolutely need it, could not be safely anticipated for this time, so, quite apart from the reasons given above, the holding of a general assembly had to be postponed for the time being. However, every effort should be made to work towards the goal of holding such an assembly as soon as possible, one that can negotiate on a very serious basis. In view of the seriousness of the situation, I felt compelled to go into all these matters in some detail. Unfortunately, there is no possibility of visiting the working groups in the near future to discuss these matters; but I will try to establish a connection between the working groups through such reports. If this letter gives rise to any questions or comments, I will be happy to answer them after discussing them with a trusted group of colleagues. With warmest anthroposophical greetings, Dr.-Ing. Carl Unger. Correspondence to Dr.-Ing. Carl Unger, Stuttgart, Werastraße 13. |