INTRODUCTION
CAN THERE BE such a discipline as the science of
philosophy? That might seem to be putting the cart before the horse,
but in these lectures Rudolf Steiner seems to be providing us with
just that. What convinces you of something? What constitutes your
ground of knowledge? I mean you, the reader! In geometry, for
example, some people are only convinced when the subject has been
expressed in algebraic form, while others are only inwardly sure of
the matter when it has been expressed synthetically. These two groups
rely on a different inner foundation for their knowledge.
Mathematically either approach is valid, and neither group has the
right to bully the other, although that does happen! The point is
that we all have a definite inner foundation upon which we stand,
which is perhaps most clearly experienced in an existential crisis,
for then we are forced to find an inner rock to support us. At first
we might imagine that there are as many foundations as knowers, but
in these lectures Rudolf Steiner shows that there are twelve main
philosophical standpoints, and that fruitful progress in philosophy
depends not upon ‘defending’ one and ‘refuting’
others, but in learning to experience the validity of them all.
Different engineering problems require different tools, and it is
senseless to say that a spanner should be used to refute a
screwdriver. Similarly, some philosophical problems require the use
of one standpoint, while others are best approached from a different
direction. Philosophical sophistication here requires a deeper
insight into all possible approaches.
Although twelve standpoints, with others as nuances of
them, are sufficient in one sense, Steiner goes on to show that in
addition there are seven principal soul moods with which one may
colour one's foundation. These are more concerned with the way one
actively pursues knowledge rather than the ground upon which one
stands, so that one person may act empirically while standing upon
the ground of materialism, while another may act in a gnostic way
while standing upon the ground of spiritism. Several philosophers are
mentioned whose works are characterised in this way, throwing a
remarkable light upon their contribution to philosophy. It is only a
pity that Steiner had to be so aphoristic here, although it does
leave a rich field of research for others to explore. Even more
challenging is the way a philosopher may evolve from one view to
another, as illustrated by the tragic example of Nietzsche in the
last lecture.
It should be emphasised that what is presented here is
not a theory spun out of intellectual effort, which may rightly rouse
our scepticism, but is based on Rudolf Steiner's research into the
soul and spiritual realities underlying our existence. The numbers
seven and twelve and their cosmic connections are not abstract
theories or analogies, but spiritually empirical facts. The
possibility that exact research into these realms can be conducted
needs to be recognised in our time, which is why these lectures
constitute a science of philosophy (rather than, say, a philosophy of
philosophy) based as they are upon spiritual research into human
nature. A valid judgement of their content is only possible in that
context.
Nick Thomas
|