Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Spiritual Science

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Hindes
    ... is ... angel ... record ... Daniel: Well, there you have hit the nail on the head: The _facts_ of contemporary work [modern science] fully confirm this
    Message 1 of 62 , Feb 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Christine:
      > ***********************
      > OK - so, if gravity is not sense perceptible, except by its effects, yet
      is
      > considered a scientific fact (or at least a justifiable theory), then an
      angel
      > can be considered a fit subject for scientific inquiry if, in spite of its
      > being supersensible (not able to be perceived) one can ascribe to it and
      record
      > phenomena that support its existence. Right?
      >
      > Someone's not LIKING the word "angel" is no more a reason to discount its
      > scientific validity or lack of validity than someone's not liking the word
      > "gravity."
      >
      > Remember those burned at the stake for the word "geocentric!"

      Daniel:
      Well, there you have hit the nail on the head:

      "The _facts_ of contemporary work [modern science] fully confirm this
      [anthroposophical] view. It is only misled opinions regarding these facts
      which deny this and presume that spiritual science and natural science
      contradict each other. This contradiction, however, does not really
      exist." - Rudolf Steiner, Lecture of January 11th, 1916, from GA 35. In
      English: Rudolf Steiner. "Approaches to Anthroposophy." Rudolf Steiner
      Press, Sussex, 1992.
    • dottie zold
      Was down to the Steiner book store in Pasadena and found a few lectures and a few books. Wanted to share something from the lecture Geographic Medicine / The
      Message 62 of 62 , Apr 9 9:06 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Was down to the Steiner book store in Pasadena and found a few
        lectures and a few books. Wanted to share something from the lecture
        Geographic Medicine / The Secret of the Double

        page: 2 - 3

        "These things must be considered if we are to speak today about an
        anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. Anyone speaking out of
        knowledge of this science knows the objections that must arise today
        by the hundreds and thousands. He already knows these objections,
        because doubt is felt today not only concerning the specific truths
        and results of this spiritual science; there is also doubt that
        knowledge of any kind can be aquired concerning the realm with which
        anthroposophy occupies itself. The possibility of developing
        conceptual beliefs in the soul, general conceptual beliefs about the
        realm of the eternal, is certainly still ackowledged as justified by
        many today; but it is generally considered something dreamy or
        sentimental; to believe that a really factual knowledge can be
        developed about the facts that can be drawn from the sense world
        concerning the immortal and eternal in the nature of the human being.
        This is particularly the case among those who believe themselves to
        be forming their judgements out of the presently recognized mode of
        scientific conception.

        (...)

        I would like to touch very briefly on the fact that this
        anthroposophically oriented spritual science has no wish to be
        sectarian. It is completley misunderstood by anyone who believes that
        it wishes to arise in the way some new kind of religious faith is
        founded. It has no such wish. It wishes to arise today as a necesary
        result of the world view brought by natural scientific developement,
        a general, publicly accepted conception among the widest circles of
        humanity. This natural scientific developement today supplies so many
        concepts, which are in their turn the source of feelings and
        sensations. It provides the concepts for the most widely held world
        view. This natural scientific mode of observation sets itself the
        task of examining and explaining what is yielded to the outer sense,
        of examining what is acessible to human understanding by way of the
        natural laws about facts given to the outer senses.

        (...)

        Spiritual science in the anthroposophical sense finds itself in
        another position. (other than looking at things from birth, dz)And by
        its point of departure it calls forth a vague opposition, opposition
        without people being conscious of it; one could say that it calls
        forth and unconscious oppositon, an instinctive oppostion. Such
        opposition is often much more effective than the opposition that is
        clearly recongized, clearly thought through. In order to arrive at
        conceptions at all, an anthroposophically oriented spiritual science
        must not begin now with the general hazy concepts of spirit: to
        arrive at spiritual facts, it must make death its starting point. It
        thereby stands from the outset, you could say, in fundamental
        opposition to what is preferred today, namely to procceeding from
        birth, youth, growth and the progress of developemeny. Death
        encroaches upon life. And if you keep in touch with contemporary
        scientific literature, you can find everywhere that the conscientious
        scientist holds the view that death as such cannot be inserted in the
        series of natural scientific concepts in the same sense as other
        concepts.

        The spiritual scientist must make death his actual starting point,
        death, the cessation, actually the opposite of birth. How death and
        all that is related to it encroaches upon life in the widest sense is
        the basic question. Death terminates what is perceptible to the
        senses; death dissolves what is becoming, what is developing before
        the senses. By the way that death encroaches on life, it can be
        concieved of as having no part in what is working and flourishing
        here in the sense world, springing forth and producing life. This is
        what yeilds the opinion that nothing can be known about what is
        concealed by death, as it were, cloaked by death. (within certain
        limits this opinion is perfectly comprehensible, though totally
        unjustifiable.) And it is actually from this corner of human feeling
        that the objections rear up their heads, objections that obviously
        can be broughy up against things that are results of a science esitll
        still in its youth today. For spiritual science is young and for
        precisely these reasons just referrred to, the spirtual scientist is
        in quite a different position from that of the natural scientist,
        even when speaking abouy things in the sphere of his own research.
        The spiritual scientist cannot proceed in exactly the same was as the
        natural scientist, who poses some fact and then proves it on grounds
        by which everyone is convinced: that it can be seen. The spiritual
        scientist however speaks about what cannot be percieved by the
        senses. Hence, in speaking about the results of his research he is
        always obliged to indicate how such results can be reached.

        (...)

        Those people who have not taken knowledge as something that falls
        into their laps from outide, those who have wrestled with knowledge,
        wrestled with truth , have always at least certain experiences at
        these limits of human congnition. Here it must be noted that times
        change, that the evolution of humanity undergoes changes. Not so very
        long ago, the most outstanding thinkers and those struggling for
        knowledge, when they stood before boundaries of this kind, thought
        that one must remain there. Those of you in the audience who have
        often heard me speak here know how little it is my habit to touch on
        personal matters. When the personal has a connection, however, one
        may venture to refer it briefly. I may say that what I have to say
        about experiences of this sort at the boundaries of cognition is the
        result of more than thirty years of spiritual research. And it was
        more than thirty years ago that these very problems, these tasks,
        these riddles that arise at the boundaries of cognition, made a
        significant impression on me."


        Dottie:

        Well, that is a pretty good description of what it is like to think
        past what has been given to us: instead of starting with what we can
        see and know, we start at the dying point. How amazing this man was.
        It is really clear from all the books that he has written and all the
        lectures in print what a genius he was in the regular everyday field
        of man let alone in the everyday spiritual fields undiscovered by
        man. Wow.

        Best,
        Dottie
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.