Foreword
Suppose that a
browser, knowing nothing about Rudolf Steiner, comes across
this cycle of his lectures. From the place or the way the
book is found, there may be no great surprise about
references and statements which sound
“mystical”— that word our age uses to
pigeonhole anything appearing now to be factual. Yet
complicating that impression would be Steiner's frequent use
of the term “science of the spirit.” Spirit and
science together? That sounds like mixing two totally
different spheres and then trading on the term science, which
our age — at least until recently — has venerated
as the supreme human achievement and unassailable touchstone
of all decisions. How is the casual reader to know that
Steiner himself was trained as a philosopher and had a
profound interest in and respect for the triumphs of
contemporary science?
Yet by no means
all casual readers would raise a question about that. There
are some who in their depths feel affronted by the
excision—if not denial—of all spiritual factors
practiced by the modern natural sciences—a viewpoint
sheepishly followed by the humanities and even the arts. Such
people really yearn for genuine experiences of the spiritual
realms that all mankind prior to our era had as a precious,
if not entirely understood, gift. These people, though often
without the benefit of technical knowledge, can in varying
degrees see through the pretentions and unwarranted
assumption of a science that has debased its own ideals and
brought the world to the brink of destruction. This situation
did not escape Steiner's penetrating observation and he
discusses in chapters one and seven of this series how even
well-meaning politicians (of his day but nothing has changed
in this regard since then) became tragically involved in this
process. And again in chapter five he shows how even an
honest and decent philosopher could not find a way out of the
intellectual trap into which our age has fallen.
So who was this
man who already in the teens of this century dared to suggest
that the way out of our difficulties — and the only
way, demanded by world evolution — is to begin dealing
with science spiritually and with the spirit scientifically?
To be sure, such a program was more daring and more radical
during World War I than it sounds now. At the end of the 20th
century there are certainly more people than there were then
who can see the possibility, and understand the necessity,
for such an attitude. Generally, however, they have no clear
idea of how it could be brought about. And the great majority
of our contemporaries are undoubtedly still shut off from
efforts in this direction by the very circumstances of the
industrial age, with its all-pervading secularity. At least
one segment of the American public has rebelled against this
so-called secular humanism by demanding that science be
bridled — a quite different solution from that proposed
by Steiner. The basic situation is this: the public that
Steiner had in mind in these lectures during World War I not
only did not take hold of his solution but it has been
succeeded by descendants who on the whole keep slipping
farther and faster in the wrong direction: a passive, almost
bemused attitude toward the excesses of a one-sided
scientific mind-set that now, in combination with equally
one-sided politics and one-sided economics threatens to bring
disaster one way or another to the whole of mankind. Steiner
already put this very succinctly in chapter seven by saying
that “healthy human common sense ... is simply not
there. This is the great secret of our time.” Indeed,
through its lack we see humanity plunge from one unnecessary
crisis to another almost day by day.
Who was this
man? The idea that any one person could be wise enough to
know what to do about all this often raises hackles,
especially among sophisticated academics. Do they take time
to realize that Steiner expressly declines to offer
pre-packaged concepts for instant satisfaction (chapter
seven)? He can offer something only to those willing to put
aside routine contemporary ideas and make an unprejudiced
effort to reach his multi-dimensional level. This is not
easy, even though his remarks are sometimes quite
entertaining on the ordinary level, as in this cycle when he
discusses dowsing. And the wide range of his interests and
contacts can be grasped simply by using as a roster the
footnotes prepared for this publication. Nevertheless,
reading one of his lectures is, on the whole, rather like
being inside a piece of sculpture and from there
attempting to locate oneself in space: one would have to
become aware of many different factors at once and combine
them in a creative way. Whereas standing outside the same
piece we could depend on our automatic internal spatial
orientation, of which we hardly take any notice, to
accomplish the same thing. In other words, we are led by him,
or can be, to view not a new world, but the same world from
totally new angles we did not know existed. But it takes some
effort to try these out ourselves.
In this sense
we can perhaps approach the basic thesis of this series, that
the chronological age of mankind (as a whole) corresponds to
the scale of years in an individual human being, but to
establish it we have to work backwards and
down from old age to youth. So humanity as such is
actually becoming younger, that is, over the millennia it
reacts to the world collectively the way individuals do first
at 56, then at 55, then 54 and so on. It may be an
instinctive reaction to dismiss this as idle speculation but
to do so is, in the long run, to stay put in the intellectual
trap mentioned above. So far from being speculative fancy,
this concept is a necessary facet of the complex philosophy
and cosmology worked out in Steiner's literary books (as
opposed to lecture cycles like this one which he never
intended to be published). And it can acquire enormous
significance in explaining, for example, how we got into our
intellectual trap. For the basic reason why the world is
moving faster and faster in the wrong direction is that too
few people ever mature spiritually, that is, move beyond the
attitude of the average person of age 27 (presently; next it
will be 26, etc.), which they would have to do, if at all, by
their own aroused, inner efforts to grasp the science of the
spirit (in whatever form). In practical American terms this
might mean looking beyond the prevailing extreme alternatives
of agnostic secular humanism and fulminating fundamentalism
in search of a true balance that retains what is valid in
each and with that moving on to new tasks already being
undertaken by the spiritually sane of our times — by
definition those who exercise healthy common sense. To insist
on the reality of both the spiritual realm and the scientific
realm and their interweaving is actually the most practical
idea of our troubled times.
J. LEONARD BENSON
South Egremont, Massachusetts
|