The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Rudolf Steiner opens the meeting by saying that it was no longer possible for him to attend the works council meeting in person; however, he asks that everything that is deemed necessary be brought forward at this moment.

[The question of the rights and duties of the works councils within the “coming day” is raised and Rudolf Steiner is asked to clarify this.]

Rudolf Steiner remarks that it is indeed very important and very good to bring about such discussions, and it will always be very good. He would also be willing, as far as possible, to accept such invitations to discuss, only it would be necessary to be able to determine what the subject of the discussion actually is.

He says: I believe you are still suffering to a great extent from the assumption that the “Coming Day” could somehow be a realization of what was expressed as an idea in the lectures back then. I can only say that the idea that was expressed has, of course, not been realized in the slightest today. Just consider what would have been needed to realize this idea: in those days, it would have taken a united labor force – without that, nothing could have been done – and that did not materialize. And one can only say: the idea that was expressed has basically been dropped for the time being. And today, we must be particularly sorry about that, because in reality, we are now in a position in German economic life that we can say: what is present in German economic life today is actually only an illusion, a sham.

The world today can no longer exist as anything other than a unified economic entity. There must be unified economic entities that combine to form a distinct world economy. The artificial borders of national and state economies today make it all the more clear that it is no longer possible to manage without a world economy. In today's world economy, which nevertheless exists, the situation is such that basically the whole of economic life today is based on appearances. Take the following: we still have a wage economy today; it finds its opposite pole, as does the capitalist economy in general, in that idea which I tried to propagate at the time. As long as we have a pure wage economy, the whole economy is dependent on the wage economy. Wages are, so to speak, a barometer of what is happening in the economy as a whole.

You see, the working class is pretty much the largest number of people on earth, as far as economic life is concerned. If you convert today, for example – and somehow you have to convert – if you convert wages today according to the value of the Swedish krona, the American worker receives a daily wage of about 120 to 123 Swedish kronor, the German worker 19 to 21 Swedish kronor. This is roughly true, even though some small changes have occurred in recent weeks. The workers of all other countries or states fall between these two limits. Now, I ask you: the American worker receives a wage six times higher than the German worker, although it has been proven that he does not produce more than the German worker if he works accordingly.

In this way, it is impossible to speak of being within economic life; all this is conceived under the assumption that we have a world economy, because the fact that we still have a country or state economy should mean nothing at all, since a large part of the available values circulates throughout the world. It is clear that major disruptions must occur as a result.

We are living today in impossible economic conditions, in Central Europe in the most impossible of all. And one can feel sorry when one considers that our ideas were propagated at that time out of this realization. These ideas have actually fallen by the wayside to this day, because, as you will understand, the “Coming Day” cannot be much different from any other undertaking, as capitalist as all other undertakings are. We can only plan to be there for a future where something can perhaps be done, to intervene, so that a number of people are together who can intervene. As long as conditions remain as they are now, the economic principle itself will not allow the “Day to Come” to bring about many changes.

The whole world is curious to see how the “Day to Come” will cope with the very idea of how the working class can work in the “Day to Come”. Basically, no information can be given yet, nothing essential can be shown. And so I thought we could very well talk about what your individual complaints are, what could be different in detail. Realized what was propagated as ideas back then – I would not want this misunderstanding to arise, as if it were said of me that the “Coming Day” [had] realized something of the ideas of threefolding: That is nonsense! We should talk about what is bothering you, because there seem to be some pressing shoes that could cause discomfort. But if we talk about what is bothering you, then I also want everything to come out and nothing to remain closed. And so, before I say anything, I would like the gentlemen to speak freely.

[They do not want to raise complaints, but to discuss whether “statutory” works councils should be elected, since the existing works councils had been elected from the threefold social order movement before the Works Councils Act came into force. If these do not work to satisfaction, new ones would have to be elected.

Rudolf Steiner means the same. The question is whether the employees of Waldorf-Astoria at the time the law came into force agreed to the continued existence of the old, previously elected works council. But this was the case here.

[Further comments on this.]

Rudolf Steiner: Today it is certainly difficult to ask the question of whether statutory works councils should be introduced or not, because the Works Councils Act simply prescribes works councils that are elected in accordance with the law. As long as this law is not changed, no works councils as envisaged by the idea of threefolding can actually be considered, because this would then only be a corporate body that exists alongside a statutory corporate body. We would then have to resume the whole threefolding movement in the first place, because basically we no longer have an actual threefolding movement. If we want to elect works councils based on the idea of threefolding, then we also have to assign them a task, because in the current economic life these works councils have or would have no task to fulfill.

[Further discussion and expressions of dissatisfaction to the effect that the works councils are not taken seriously enough by the plant managers.

Rudolf Steiner points out that it depends on the degree to which the employees are convinced that things can go better with the “Coming Day” than with any other undertaking, and says: I myself am not an entrepreneur myself and therefore cannot take the entrepreneurial point of view in my personality, but on the other hand, when questions arise, I have to take a position on them so that what is said is really meaningful. What I mean is that if you are arguing, if you are arguing about something, then you have to know what you are arguing about, because for me it is not the argument that is important, but what we are arguing about. If I am to speak about the rights and duties of the workers' councils, I cannot do so in general terms, about any workers' councils that may be on the moon. I would have to do it for the workers' councils that are in the 'coming day'. And I can only do that based on very real circumstances. And here it is urgently necessary that we talk about it today, because you will have been informed about how you feel that the “dawning day” cannot do anything in the coming economic struggles and that the workers in our individual companies will therefore be forced to proceed with the rest of the working class. Then you will get a real character. Before that, it is of course something that cannot be said one way or the other – I will tell you later why I think so, one can look at it that way. We can talk about it today in such a way that none of the labor-friendly ideas of the “Coming Day” have been realized, even though the general attitude is benevolent. But as long as we don't go into individual things, nothing comes of it. And I would therefore like to see it as a condition for me to speak, that you present very specific, concrete complaints, which I will then address. Without knowing what your concerns are, I will not be able to say anything about them.

[Further comments to the effect that people wonder whether the “coming day” could give the working class a secure existence, that the works council is not trusted enough, that one is only seen as a worker, not as an equal human being.

Rudolf Steiner: Yes, my dear friends, that is the feeling I meant; I wanted to be aware of it before I go into the question raised in more detail.

[Further discussion about this and about trade union issues.]

Rudolf Steiner: So you meant that we should establish tangible, fixed sentences about the rights and duties of the works councils. This would certainly not be so difficult if we just had the good will to draft such a paragraph, in which we say that these are the rights and these are the duties of our works councils. Unfortunately, however, that is not the case. I believe that if we really managed to create such an ideal paragraph, all employees would agree with it – and not only that, they would also be highly satisfied with it. But in such a short time, conditions will not have changed and the mood will not have changed either. The point is not to take measures, one should have these and these rights and duties. But the point is to achieve something at such meetings that also corresponds to the conditions outside. To give you an idea of my way of thinking, I would like to share the following with you.

Since we last met here, I myself had to initiate a matter that arose from the needs in Dornach. I have also spoken here about lectures, and these have been given in Dornach [to the workers on the Goetheanum building site] by a prominent person. Not much has come of this, except that after we held works council meetings, we realized that the people in Dornach have a strong need to hear something about economic life. I then decided that I would give these myself. You have to bear in mind the circumstances, as I have already described them, at the Dornach building. The Dornach building is not what an economic-capitalist enterprise is. The Dornach building is a prime example of a non-capitalist enterprise and cannot be compared as such with the 'Kommenden Tag' or the 'Futurum AG' in Basel or with any other similar association. The Dornach Building belongs to no one; there is no entrepreneur there. Therefore, everything that is processed in it is transformed into wages for those who work there. Is it not the case that what still comes into consideration at the Dornach Building is that present-day economic life reaches into it from two sides; but there it is “refracted”. On the one hand, it is this: It has to be built with the capital that is made available. If the Dornach building exploits anyone, it is the capitalists, because they have to provide the capital. I would almost like to say that a large part of it goes 'perdu', as a large part of it never gets returned. In any case, the workers can see clearly there, and that is the one side where capital shines in and refracts: capital ceases to be capital as soon as it comes to Dornach.

Secondly, our workers belong to trade unions. And you will admit that, for example, if you yourself have the sense to give our workers 2/3 more wages by exploiting capital even more, it would make no sense in the economy as a whole and would be most strongly opposed by the trade unions. They would then say: There is the Dornach building, it does not want to be characterized as a capitalist enterprise, it wants to realize something of what is present in the idea of threefold social order. So you can see that this cannot be a question of wages or capital, but rather the question of price, as the conditions here protrude from two sides. People would think we were crazy if we paid wages that we were not forced to pay.

But what makes things easier, especially during the lectures, is something that is of course child's play to see: this is not a capitalist enterprise. This kind of mistrust that you have towards the “Kommenden Tag” – and that cannot be denied – cannot exist in the Dornach building. It makes no sense for the workers there to be mistrustful, and the workers there speak out in good faith. Some who are not entirely objective would like to think differently, but this trust is already there; it makes it possible to speak freely. That is why I have – the lectures have only been given recently, in the meantime I also had the trip to Norway, and something like that cannot be done very quickly if you want to achieve something – but the main emphasis is on the workers in Dornach learning about the reality of economic life. I must confess that it gives me the greatest satisfaction to see how more and more people are beginning to understand that we have all been misjudging economic life.

When faced with the task of educating laypeople, one is aware of the current situation. Let us assume, and it would be very interesting if later on a person would like to touch on this point by asking a question, let us assume we have the workers of some company, they draw up some guidelines about the rights and duties of the workers of this company, the management can approve the question or not. I say it is right, and I believe that any honest person must say this: Whatever the employers say, it has no value at all; they can say, 'We agree to everything', or 'We agree to nothing' – the way today's economic life is, the economic structure is nonsense. No entrepreneur today knows how profitable his business is or how it is doing; he does not know what he can promise and what not if he wants to be honest. That is the situation, and if economic struggles are imminent today, then an entrepreneur cannot say whether or not he can offer his workers a guarantee, because he cannot know, because economic life has been ridden into the dirt.

As soon as someone concretely tackles economic life as it is today and addresses such things, something comes out that is tremendously instructive. Imagine someone thinking about calculation and writing an essay about it, which in and of itself is extremely instructive. The content of this essay must, of course, be to assess economic life, but at the end of this essay, there is the very significant question, the conclusion to which he has come by thinking about calculation: Can we calculate or can we not? Does something come of it? — We cannot cope with today's conditions. That is what can be read in the essay, and it is the confirmation of what I have observed for ten years: that we have arrived at a complete deadlock in economic life. In this context, it seems to me to be of little importance whether one can say today that we must reach an agreement with the eight million organized workers if we do not want to be marginalized, or because we cannot reach an agreement and be left hanging in the air.

I tell you that when you understand the nonsense of today's economy, you can say: When the next economic struggles come and go as they will, the eight million organized workers are united, then nothing will happen but that our economic life will be led or pushed even further down its slippery slope and that all the bankrupt enterprises will collapse as a house of cards. The organizations, which comprise eight million people, cannot believe that under the present conditions they can achieve anything at all that needs to be achieved; there is no question of that. Economic life will be destroyed even more.

What is needed first today is to be able to do business at all, because in the business itself, one has really come to the “non-sense” today: There is really no sense to what is being done in economic life, because nothing is in context: we are faced with a brick wall. This can be seen, and the Dornach workers have also seen this; they have gained an appreciation that we have entered into 'non-sense' in economic life. If you look at a business enterprise today, do you think you will find anyone who has any sense of the word when you talk sensibly about economic life? If you take an economist with whom you want to talk about a company, he will point you to the bookkeeping, because everything is in there. In reality, however, nothing is in it; it is nonsense to believe that anything can be seen from the accounting about the course of a business.

These things have become very clear to me through my observations over the last few years, and it is not so easy to talk about them. Take a balance sheet, the result is nonsense. It is similar to that famous Prussian privy councillor who calculated that if you invested the actually small amount of 300,000 marks for three hundred years in interest and compound interest, you could then pay off the entire debt of the Prussian state. You can do the math if you want, but the reality is that after three hundred years you won't find a button made out of the money. Because it is not enough to believe that you can keep adding interest to the accumulated capital; after all, the money cannot come from anywhere other than from economic life, from production, from working with capital, and by then not only the banks that are entrusted with the safekeeping of the money, but also the money itself will have perished. Reality is therefore quite different from the calculation.

Today, the will to such nonsense is present in the whole of economic life; reality wears it down and shatters it. What goes on in a factory today is something completely different in economic life than what is written in the books. No one wants to go into it, no one wants to be bothered with a real insight into economic life, which is needed today. That was also why the idea of the works council had not been maintained at the time. You just have to start from the beginning, but I don't want to talk about how the matter was settled back then. I actually presented it as the most important question.

But now we should talk about the rights and duties of the workers' councils. The important thing here is the standpoint that arises from the circumstances. That is precisely the one that says: the way things are going now, they cannot go on like this anyway. The workers will therefore have to remain in the organizations; you cannot tell them to leave because you cannot help them if they leave; the circumstances are not there for that. You cannot look at the movement that has been there for about 25 years, because you won't get anywhere; but you have to look at it that way, and that is what I have to keep drawing your attention to.

Once, as a very young boy, I was standing at the window of our apartment in Neudörfl, near Wiener Neustadt, when a small group of Lassalleans, who at that time still held their meetings in relative secrecy, , because we have to bear in mind that this was at a time when there was nothing of the trade union life that exists today; so there were only a few people. Meanwhile, however, everything that is in this movement in Austria and Germany today has come about. We can say that it has progressed relatively slowly from this small group. We cannot say that the conditions were against our movement, as they were then. It was not that the conditions were against it; the conditions were in favor of it, in that large masses were open to the threefold order. What was against it was the slight deception practised by the labor leaders, and it is certain that the eight million will not do anything either – they cannot do anything. My opinion is this: Regardless of whether we are in the unions or not, it is not a matter of leaving the union, but rather of uniting, however small, in a reasonable way within all those who participate in the “Kommenden Tag”. It would set an example, and we must work towards such examples. I believe that there is something positive in this idea, and this can best be shown if, quite independently of the union principle, the workers of all the companies that belong to “The Coming Day” can do something sensible on their own initiative. But for that, unity is necessary, as well as a real insight into the “non-sense” of the current economic system. A reasonable economic life must be rebuilt, because nothing can be made out of today's economic life.

And so I think – no, I would like to say – you say: Rights and duties of the works councils should be established. If I now say: No, rights and duties can only be granted by someone who has rights and duties to do so. If you were to ask me what rights and duties I have in the “coming day,” I would have to say that I know nothing about it, any more than you do; it also depends entirely on the circumstances. Actually, everyone should have as many rights and duties as they can assert, and that would indeed come about. But if you want to set up paragraphs, if you want to have insights into the course of production, that doesn't have much content, and not much comes of it either. Isn't it true that the point of the course of production is that the person who regulates it also knows how the wind blows – not to keep some secret. First of all, it must be made possible for all those who want to work together to know something about economic life.

You see, if I disregard the “day after tomorrow”, where the most insightful people are – we cannot take our examples from the “day after tomorrow”, but you can take any other company. There you just have to have the insight to be able to have a say in production. I am convinced that if you wanted to ask questions in your way, the people concerned would not be able to provide any insight because they don't have any themselves. Today's economic life is a game of chance, and that is precisely what makes it difficult. Here we come to realize that it is much more important to discuss with the workers, so that we can understand what we are supposed to do in economic life, which is so dependent on the state.

I would also like to remind you of something: [the entrepreneur] Stinnes. When we started the threefold order, Stinnes was not yet there. I did not make light of the threefold order. Stinnes only came about because the threefold order fell through; the whole Stinnes movement is based on that. Stinnes is a really ingenious fellow. I wouldn't want to say that he is a crook; he is just a “seedling” of entrepreneurship, but in any case he has much greater insight than others. Stinnes once said: Yes, we can manage things that way. But if you want to do things the way German workers want to do them, you won't get anywhere. He knows that the workers cannot manage, and this should create insight. They debate all sorts of things, but not production. And so he continued: We can wait until the workers are at our doors begging for work. Stinnes is counting on the workers being at the doors begging for work.

With regard to the rights and duties of works councils, it is certainly true that they can have the most extensive rights; and as soon as something really positive can be put forward here, we can always express ourselves here when the opportunity arises; it can be discussed here. But to set a paragraph about this, in my opinion, is of no use at all, because we are doing it in an economic life in which we have arrived at “positive nonsense”. We live from hand to mouth today; after all, no one can do more than is already being done. But that will soon burst. What the employers are counting on today is the disunity of the workers, and the employers will always have ways and means to maintain the disunity of the workers and ensure its continued existence. Even if there were no economic chaos, the German labor force could only hope to achieve partial success by acting in unison, but something substantial could still be done. However, if things continue as they have done so far – strikes here and there – it will only weaken the labor force, not strengthen it. This non-uniform approach is something that significantly worsens the position of the workers. I don't think much of the fact that there could be fear of the eight million.

Something that could have prospects is if the workers of our companies in Stuttgart really came together, that they could come together and talk sensibly about economic life for once. In my opinion, this is the greatest task that needs to be accomplished. And it cannot be done by finding the lectures a little better or a little worse. Because anyone who wants to talk about economic life today really has to be an experienced person who can see into the circumstances. Today, this experience cannot be drawn from all kinds of writings, because of all the sciences that are practiced today, the one that is presented as political economy is the most “mindless”.

Mr. Leinhas, in his lecture at our anthroposophical congress, did an exemplary job of 'killing off' Robert Wilbrandt, at least in scientific terms. But Wilbrandt is still a perfectly decent guy. If we were to name just one of our other clients, however, we would come up with something much worse. And this is only because we have no economics, no knowledge, and today it must necessarily be formed out of experience. Almost nothing that is said in this field is useful; apart from the individual flashes of light that appear on the basis of the threefold social order. But the possibility should be created for a large number of people to see how things actually are in economic life.

When I gave my lectures here at the beginning, the wife of a socialist minister told me that she could not understand why so many people came to my lectures, that I did not promise people anything and only ever told them what they had to do. And that is how it is, dear attendees. You cannot define the rights and duties of the workers' councils if the circumstances are simply not right. If we really want to start from a center to determine what is worth doing, then this is it: that all of you can help to achieve something from here, how best to operate, by preparing the ground. We can promise ourselves that the matter may have an immense practical value in a year's time, if the working class unites in unity, independently of the trade union question, in order to achieve something. We have seen that in Dornach, for example, it is necessary to first agree on insights. If one were to examine the conditions of economic life independently of whether one is a worker or an entrepreneur, then one would be able to make progress. Then one might also be able to cut Stinnes off at the source. It will depend on whether you come to an agreement with 'Der Kommende Tag'; then perhaps the day will come for 'Der Kommende Tag' when Stinnes takes it over. Such are the circumstances. If you can create something positive by joining forces, then we can talk about the question, then there must be agreement. The managers of our operations are striving to make progress in social relations. The managers of the individual operations are also sighing. But if the workers of the individual operations join forces, then there is a core that can make progress.

[In the following comments, reference is made to the difficult situation that also makes it difficult for the plant managers to gain insight into production. Reference is made to the efforts to set up a company health insurance fund and a pension fund and to provide food from the agricultural enterprises of “The Coming Day” to the workers.

Rudolf Steiner: The question of setting up a pension fund and of utilizing the agricultural operations for the workforce is very interesting and can certainly be fruitfully discussed, but it must be ensured that the right people are put in charge.

[It is reported that the company health insurance fund is as good as certain thanks to the benevolent support of the government. With regard to the deliveries of agricultural produce, it should be borne in mind that such things can drive people apart.

Rudolf Steiner expresses his hope that these institutions, which are in preparation and have often been beneficial in other companies, will be well developed here as well. He also mentions, with regard to the company health insurance fund, that it is very desirable in our efforts to achieve a rational art of healing that something be done in this area in particular. With regard to agricultural enterprises and their utilization for the workforce, he points to an example that occurred in the Anthroposophical Society.

He was the owner of a mill and also a baker who baked excellent bread. The circumstances forced the man to make his bread more expensive, and it was clear that no one had the will to make just a small sacrifice to help the cause. On the contrary, they said, “Yes, the bread is so good, you eat so much of it.” And if I take the other bread, you don't use nearly as much.” Now, of course, precisely this bread distribution had to be stopped due to the war conditions; otherwise, however, the attitude would have been the same.

Rudolf Steiner continues by saying that an article had recently appeared in an English newspaper about a businessman who owned a large farm and wanted to prove that it was no longer possible to make a profit. He calculated all the profits that the business could bring him in a year and then came to the conclusion that only 17 pence would remain for him at the end of the year.

[Emil Leinhas adds another example. It is hoped that the works councils will now be able to work productively after these explanations, which Rudolf Steiner confirms.

Rudolf Steiner: You see, Mr. Biehler was right to speak of the tax issue, which the workers must oppose. But now, you have woven in a small sentence, to which I must actually attach a little significance. You said: If the workers unite, then the eight million organized people will achieve something from the government. I must say that today the government basically does not care what it taxes; it just wants to have taxes. Only through this senselessness has the entire economy come to where it is today, by simply caring about how something is done. As long as this government lasts, it is also out of the question that the working class will achieve even a fraction of what it really needs.

The most important question today is the question of unemployment, and a lot has been said about it, but ultimately no one has yet considered that unemployment as it exists today cannot exist at all in a regulated economic life. Isn't it true that people who work for each other, everyone works for the other. So if unemployment were justified, so many people would no longer need anything at once. On the other hand, there is no correction at all from the current circumstances; one cannot say that unemployment exists to the extent that it exists in Switzerland, at the Entente and so on for this and that reason. The atrocious conditions we are facing can only be appreciated when you consider that so many people have been killed by the terrible war. But unemployment cannot be a consequence of this war, because if so many people are dead, it should only lead to unemployment becoming less and less.

Recently there was an economic meeting; there was talk that there are a number of recipes for remedies that are available to us. Isn't it true that the utilization of these remedies will one day be productive, but today they are just a thought. And then someone came up with the idea that you could simply copy the recipes and include them in the assets of a company. This item would be honestly meant under certain circumstances, because you could really bring it out. On the other hand, however, if no one can be found to support the matter, it is of no value at all.

But there is a way in which it can be safely included in the books, and that is to take out patents for it and pay for them, and then you can put it in the books at that value. After all, that is not what happened here with the recipes for the remedies, and yet a way is provided to exploit the value of the recipes. When someone earns a lot or a little money, they don't want to distribute profits right away, so they make write-offs or set aside reserves. With us, what can be raised under certain circumstances goes into real reserves, which can then, at a time when many of the things being produced today will have collapsed, can then support many things again.

[Words of thanks to Rudolf Steiner for his remarks and emphasis on the will of the workers' council to penetrate the economy.

Rudolf Steiner once again briefly refers to the already mentioned desirable union of all workers in the “coming day” and that something truly valuable for economic life could certainly arise from it in the not too distant future, if everyone has the will to work together in the right way. We must always be mindful of the “non-sense” of our present economic life; this would provide the right incentive for the right work. He would be happy to accept the invitation of the workers again as soon as the opportunity arose, in order to support them with any advice.

Speeches by Rudolf Steiner at the preliminary meeting of the fourth ordinary general assembly of “Futurum A.G.”

Emil Leinhas greets the members of the Anthroposophical Society who are present and who represent about 80% of the share capital of “The Coming Day”, and asks Dr. Steiner to take the chair.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! Today we will probably have to hold the most sober and uninspiring meeting possible within the Anthroposophical Society, and therefore we may well ask that pure reason alone prevail in today's meeting, otherwise we will hardly be able to cope.

The point is that today we have to talk to each other in a certain way about the fate of the “Coming Day”, which is connected with many ideals that members of the Anthroposophical Society have embraced in recent years. We have in the “Coming Day” an institution that emerged, so to speak, as the last major institution from the once emerging threefold social order movement, and it is only with a certain pain that we can turn our attention to the fact that this “Coming Day” is now in a truly serious crisis that absolutely must be resolved. Above all, it is important to see things as soberly as possible.

The hopes have not been fulfilled that the things connected with the “Coming Day” could proceed as one had wanted, that the Central European economic crisis, so to speak, would pass by the “Coming Day”, but the “Coming Day” is now just as any other business, fully participating in what the declining economic life offers. The “Coming Day” is not doing better today, but also not worse than any other Central European business.

The crisis has come about in the following way: if, [after the currency was converted to gold marks], the “Coming Day” had cash today, the possibility of continuing its economic and intellectual operations with cash, if it could count on being able to take out loans, then it would be able to continue working, just as other businesses are truly not working under better conditions today. However, the “Coming Day” does not have any cash, and so it cannot continue its economic and spiritual activities as they have existed up to now. The material value of the “Coming Day” is - and this must be emphasized again and again - such that if cash were available or could be raised, there would be no objection to simply letting the leadership go. Of course, there may be other reasons why “The Coming Day” is unable to find cash at the moment, but the main reason is that German economic life has taken on forms that make it impossible for the “Coming Day” to continue as other commercial enterprises do, because to do so it would have been necessary for the “Coming Day” to be treated with the same goodwill from outside as other commercial enterprises have been. That did not happen. A large part of the reasons why the “Coming Day” is in this crisis due to the lack of any cash funds - soberly this cannot be put differently than this: a large part of the blame lies in the way the “Coming Day” was vilified in the world. A project that is presented to the world in this way could only continue to function if it had a core of people who would take financial responsibility for it. But if only what has happened so far within the Anthroposophical Society is continued, the only thing that can be counted on, this is not the case either, and so today we can do no other than objectively present the situation of the “Coming Day” as it is. Therefore, I will take the liberty of organizing today's agenda in such a way that I will first ask Mr. Leinhas to present the situation of the “Coming Day” objectively to you, and as the second point on the agenda, I will make the proposals that need to be made in view of the serious situation. So I ask Mr. Leinhas to give an objective presentation of the situation of the “Coming Day” as a prerequisite for our further negotiations.

[Emil Leinhas describes the situation on the basis of the balance sheet. The situation is such that the economic enterprises can no longer support the spiritual ones.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! You have listened to the description of the situation of the “Coming Day”, and I will now take the liberty, with a heavy heart but purely rationally, as I ask you to take it, of discussing the only way we can get over this crisis of the “Coming Day” in my opinion.

The essential thing here is that, in view of the description of the situation that has just been given to us, we now have to divide the “Coming Day” into two parts: one comprising purely economic enterprises and the other comprising spiritual enterprises. If we draw the conclusion from what has just been said, it is actually the case that we, who, as anthroposophists, have to reflect on the situation, have to say that The “Coming Day” is no longer able to provide any cash for the spiritual activities, which essentially include the Waldorf School, the Clinical Therapeutic Institute, the Research Institute and the publishing house. Therefore, the question is – since the prerequisite that I believed I had to make, that the purely economic operations had to be organized first, has failed due to the impossibility of somehow managing today with the sale of these operations or the like – how we manage to separate the spiritual operations of “Coming Day” in a certain way. But this can only be done through extremely difficult measures that require heavy sacrifices on the part of our anthroposophical friends. It is not possible in any other way. You must bear in mind that these spiritual enterprises are now in a situation in which they have no possibility of being continued in any way out of the situation of the “Coming Day”. They have, so to speak, been abandoned, not by any decision, but by the facts.

The question arises: how do we get out of this situation? We have to consider the following: the “Coming Day” has issued 109,000 shares. Let us do the math based on the number of shares. If we make an estimate, but probably a fairly accurate one, of the share capital underlying these 109,000 shares, and divide it between the purely economic and the spiritual enterprises, then 74,000 shares are accounted for by the economic and agricultural enterprises and 35,000 by the spiritual enterprises. So, we have possessions for the spiritual enterprises, which correspond to 35,000 shares of “Tomorrow”.

Now, my dear friends, how can these enterprises, these spiritual enterprises, be continued? That is the fundamental question. And however you may look at it, these spiritual enterprises cannot remain as they are in the face of the situation of the “Coming Day”. For what would then have to happen? Then the “Coming Day” would have to proceed in the same way as other enterprises have to proceed today. The holdings would have to be consolidated, and the total mass of shareholders of the “Coming Day” would be faced with exactly the same situation, only with a significantly reduced number of shares. Perhaps this would somewhat increase their creditworthiness, but it is something that cannot be done, given all the prospects that have to be considered.

But if this cannot be done, what can be done? There is nothing else to be done – and I am now saying what I have to say with the greatest reluctance, but it must be said because of the situation, and if I were to present the matter to you in a long-winded way, it would not be any better: the only thing that can be done is to get rid of the 35,000 shares that correspond to the ownership of the spiritual enterprises. But this is only possible if enough people of influence can be found within the Anthroposophical Society who are willing to simply renounce their shareholdings in favor of the most important spiritual enterprises, so that the spiritual enterprises receive the 35,000 shares as a gift. It is just as if spiritual enterprises were to be founded and if a number of self-sacrificing personalities could be found who would contribute the sum corresponding to these 35,000 shares.

So, my dear friends, is it possible that the owners of 35,000 “Kommenden-Tag” shares renounce ownership of their shares? Then the 35,000 shares of Coming Day stock that are being given away could be left to the German Goetheanum fund, which would then have to be at my free disposal. This would give me free rein to run the spiritual enterprises. I see no other possibility for any other solution to the problem we are facing now than for this measure to be taken. You will understand that it is extremely difficult for me, one year after I myself resigned from the supervisory board of “Kommender Tag”, to have to make this enormous demand on the shareholders of “Kommender Tag” today: Give me 35,000 shares so that the spiritual activities can be continued in the way I will explain in a moment.

So if today there are shareholders willing to make this donation, then the matter is such that the “Coming Day” as such will continue to exist as an association of purely economic enterprises. How this continuation is envisaged will be discussed later. This continuation would correspond to a shareholding of 74,000 shares. We can discuss the matter in this area later. At this moment, I consider it my task to explain what can happen to the spiritual enterprises if the 35,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum Fund. It would then be clear that this willingness to make a sacrifice would at least express an anthroposophical attitude. The donors would say to themselves: Of course we are making a sacrifice, but we are doing so out of the anthroposophical spirit. There are shareholders in the “Coming Day” who will be able to make such a donation. Since they can, of course, only be placed in a position to make such a gift voluntarily, one can only say: Those who will give will also be able to give. It will be a group of shareholders who can give. On the other hand, there are shareholders of the “Coming Day” who cannot renounce their shareholdings; they are referred to purely economic enterprises. They would be in no different a position than other shareholders. And in order to preserve the full ownership of the 74,000 shares, it would be necessary for the spiritual enterprises to have no influence whatsoever on the economic administration of the “Coming Day”. If this condition were to be fulfilled today, that 35,000 shares of stock be made available to the German Goetheanum fund, and the economic enterprises were to be thought of separately, then the following would emerge:

First of all, the Waldorf School has 300,000 German Marks booked in the “Coming Day”. What the Waldorf School needs cannot really be covered by any kind of equivalent value. As you all know, the Waldorf School is entirely dependent on school fees and voluntary donations for its cash resources. Therefore, if the situation is to be rectified, the Waldorf School cannot be provided with the equipment it needs unless it receives a gift of the full amount. What corresponds to the Waldorf School [in terms of land, buildings and facilities], which is therefore listed in the “Coming Day” with 300,000 marks, must be donated outright.

The following then remains: the Clinical Therapeutic Institute, which is currently linked to the sale of remedies, that is, to the pharmaceutical laboratory. I will discuss the Clinical-Therapeutic Institute later. Regarding the sale of remedies, the balance sheet shows that it can be said that there is every prospect of it no longer requiring any significant sacrifices from today onwards. It is self-financing. However, cash will still be needed in the near future. And because it is a solid economic asset, it will be taken into account as such, and it must also be possible to buy it. Now it occurs to me that the Internationale Laboratorien A.G. in Arlesheim also handles the sale of remedies for all those countries in the world that have not even been ceded to the Stuttgart laboratory in a treaty, that this Internationale Laboratorien A.G. Arlesheim handles the sale of these remedies for the world. It is a joint-stock company. And in view of the balance of the local sales of remedies and in view of the general circumstances relating to our sales of remedies, which are extremely favorable in ideal terms, the International Laboratories A.G. Arlesheim will be persuaded to take over the sale of remedies and carry out the purchase of the laboratory. But again, given the circumstances there in Arlesheim, I cannot imagine that the purchase price could exceed 50,000 francs. These 50,000 francs will of course have to be added to the Goetheanum fund, since if the spiritual enterprises are now independent, if they are given as a gift, but the donation does not receive any cash, so that there could actually be no question of this purchase having the consequence that compensation - which would in any case be quite minimal - could be paid to the donating shareholders.

Regarding the publishing house, I would like to say the following: I can only feel an obligation to the publishing house to save from it the anthroposophical books that I have written myself, the books that are the result of the extraordinary and meritorious research of Dr. and Mrs. Kolisko, the two brochures and another book by Dr. Wachsmuth, a member of the Executive Council at the Goetheanum, which is currently being published. That would make a total of books that could be worth between 25,000 and 30,000 francs. This is something that should be acquired and the income from it should go to the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Press. The other mass of books is such that, speaking purely financially and from the point of view of the Coming Day, I not only cannot feel any obligation towards it, but must not feel any obligation towards it. In the case of this mass of books in particular, it occurs to me that despite all the objections I raised at the time when this book publishing house was founded, this publishing house has only behaved over time in such a way that it has essentially counted on the consumers of the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing House within the Anthroposophical Society; that basically those who at the time created a competing company for the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag with the “Coming Day” publishing house with an alleged enthusiasm that was actually foolishness, could easily be taken to task for this. Therefore, I do not feel morally obliged in any way to take care of the remaining book stock of the “Coming Day” publishing house.

This remaining book stock brings me to another thought. In the future, I will have to work hard to ensure that no anthroposophical funds flow into economic enterprises that have nothing to do with the Anthroposophical Society as such. In this regard, there was a time when we gave in, but today it is imperative that no economic enterprises be fed anthroposophical funds in the future. Therefore, it was also necessary for me to ensure that in the future, the entire sale of remedies worldwide would not be based on capital that comes from anthroposophical pockets, but on capital from people who want to manage their own assets with these things, in other words, only by people who do not give the money for anthroposophical reasons, but only out of consideration for those who consider the sale of remedies profitable, without taking into account that this has anything to do with anthroposophy. In the future, these matters can only be dealt with from this point of view. The sale of remedies can be organized in such a way that, if it is also managed commercially in the future, it can become a profitable business in a purely commercial sense, given the great recognition that even those remedies find in the world that I myself have only, I would say, half-hoped for. But it can only be managed with funds that are given for the risk involved in selling the remedies. So I can also recommend to the Internationale Laboratorien A.G. Arlesheim, which will be based on the above principles in the future, the purchase of the sale of remedies here.

That leaves the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart, my dear friends. Although its finances are quite healthy at present, it cannot be thought of as needing any other kind of leadership than that provided by cash. In accordance with the intentions that emerged from the Christmas Conference in Dornach, the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Arlesheim can no longer be a member of the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim, but only the local laboratory and the sale of remedies. In the future, a spiritual institute cannot be associated with purely economic enterprises. For this reason, the Clinical-Therapeutic Institute in Arlesheim has also been separated from the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim and has become an integral part of the Goetheanum. The same cannot be said for the ClinicalTherapeutic Institute in Stuttgart, because the Goetheanum could not guarantee or take on the risk of a penny subsidy. So the situation of the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart is such that it cannot be connected to the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim, nor can it be connected to the Goetheanum for the simple reason that the Goetheanum cannot take on any risk. The only way to set up the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart is to make it a financially independent enterprise that can be taken over by a doctor or non-doctor who, if subsidies are needed, will take them on at their own risk. On the other hand, if subsidies are not needed, anyone with a little business sense can take them on at their own risk. But if subsidies are necessary, then the Goetheanum certainly cannot take them on. So there is no other option for the clinic than to make it an independent enterprise. As for Gmünd, I do not count it among the enterprises for which I am responsible; the “Coming Day” will have to continue to take care of it and find a way to make it profitable.

What remains, my dear friends, is the scientific research institute, which is almost heartbreaking when you have to talk about it in this situation. But as things stand, the fact is, on the one hand, that the “Coming Day” has no cash for this institute, that the Goetheanum in Dornach is in no position to take on any obligation for this scientific research institute, not even a single penny , so that there is no other possibility — not out of any wish or anything like that, but purely out of the economic situation — than, if no enthusiast can be found to take over and finance the scientific research institute, to dissolve it, to dissolve it completely. We may be burying the idea that we had in mind as one of the most sacred, I would say, to establish economic enterprises to serve the spiritual life. But the possibility of continuing this does not exist.

So the following situation would arise for the spiritual enterprises: the Waldorf School will be supported by donations. The Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart will become independent and will be made into a separate enterprise; Gmünd will remain in the care of the “Coming Day”. The scientific research institute will have to be dissolved if no individual or consortium can be found to maintain it. My books and the others mentioned will be removed from the publishing house and it will be ensured that these books fall to the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing House for further distribution. The rest of the book inventory must be sold on the open market to outside publishers. I would consider it inadmissible if any steps were taken within the Anthroposophical Society itself to sell the rest of this book stock and to found anything further on what lies within the Anthroposophical Society, because that would create competition for the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag, and no one can demand that what the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag is doing should also be undermined by further competition.

That, my dear friends, is the stark and sober truth, which is the only thing that is necessary in the current situation. If we succeed in appealing to the willingness to make sacrifices of so many shareholders in the “Coming Day” today, so that 35,000 shares of stock for the spiritual enterprises are freely available and allocated to the Goetheanum fund, then we can undertake the reorganization of these spiritual enterprises in the way I have described. I would advocate for the order itself and then the remaining 74,000 shares would have to be dealt with for the further operation of the purely economic enterprises that are part of the “coming day”.

Do you believe, my dear friends, that what I have just presented to you briefly, soberly and dryly has really caused me the most serious concerns for weeks, has led to the most difficult struggles. But when Mr. Leinhas came to me at the Goetheanum in Dornach a few weeks ago and told me that the last of the economic enterprises with which the “Coming Day” still had to reckon, which, in a spirit of complete sacrifice, had actually raised the lion's share of the subsidies up to that point, it was clear that this enterprise would no longer be able to raise these subsidies either. Then it was clear: this would mean the end of the possibility of continuing the “Coming Day” in its old form. Then, despite its material assets, the “Coming Day” would be without the possibility of creating cash; then a reorganization would have to take place at all costs. Since that time, the whole matter has been a great concern to me. As long as there was hope that the economic enterprises could be sold first, and the spiritual enterprises would remain as a kind of rump of the “Coming Day”, one could think that what remains could be organized in some way. But now that things have progressed so far that we are standing before the General Assembly and have asked you to come together beforehand in confidence, it is not possible for me to put anything other than what I have just said before you as a proposal.

That is the point at which I would like to open the discussion. I therefore ask friends who want to participate to speak up. We can then, after the things that have been presented have been discussed, move on to discussing what possibilities can be considered for the continuation of the purely economic enterprises. I should also mention that one shareholder, who owns the corresponding number of shares, has made available to me the amount that the Waldorf School in “Kommender Tag” is currently worth. It can also be assumed that a number of others will definitely give it. So it will be possible for the shareholders who are willing to transfer their shares in the way described to add their number of shares to a list that is being passed around.

During the discussion, Emil Kühn asks whether it would not be possible for the shareholders who are donating today to participate in some way in the real values of the spiritual institutions.

Rudolf Steiner: As far as the economic enterprises are concerned, I myself would certainly be open to discussing the question that Dr. Kühn has just touched on. But as far as the spiritual enterprises are concerned, I would like to say the following: If the experiences that have been made in the economic management within the Anthroposophical Society in recent years are taken as a basis, then I can only say that I myself would not participate in the reorganization of the spiritual enterprises differently than if, in every respect, such conditions were created that would only make possible an administration in the spiritual sense for these enterprises.

As far as the Waldorf School is concerned, I would not be able to participate in a reorganization if, in any way, an economic administration were to be associated with this reorganization; and that would be the case if, in some way, the current shareholders of the Waldorf School were to participate. The Waldorf School can only obtain its operating funds from school fees and voluntary contributions, as I said before. And even if the property were there to begin with, it would always have to mean something quite imaginary for those who participate in it. The only healthy relationship is when the Waldorf School itself has this property, when it is given to it. On this condition alone, the spiritual enterprises of “Coming Day” can be detached from my proposal. I can say that I would only participate if a sufficient number of people were to give up their shares as a free gift - and this can only be done of their own free will - in order to find a solution. I myself would not participate in this solution if it were tied to the condition that gifts be made on condition that there should still be a participation. For that, financial administration would be necessary again, and I do not want to be associated with that. So I ask only those friends to sign up who are able to make their donations unconditionally, who want to place these spiritual enterprises on purely spiritual ground.

As you have seen, I have only made the proposals with a heavy heart. The proposal that has now been made is the most obvious one and has also been well considered. Otherwise it would be a matter of issuing bonds that would only represent an imaginary ownership. I want to keep away from anything imaginary. If the Waldorf School is not detached from an economic connection with the “Coming Day”, then I also don't know how the question can be solved, that I could remain the spiritual director of the Waldorf School. So I can't say what influence it would have on my own decisions if such a reorganization, as it has been suggested, were to take place. I have not appealed to a decision by you, but to the willingness of individual anthroposophical friends to make sacrifices. We do not have to bring about a decision if 35,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum fund as a gift – if Gmünd is dropped, it is only 29,000 shares – if 29,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum fund as a gift. I am not appealing to a decision, but only to the willingness to sacrifice in order to finance the spiritual enterprises in a certain way à fond perdu.

[Further discussion of the donation of shares to save the spiritual enterprises, which would also relieve the economic enterprises. These should become independent and, if possible, be taken over again by their former owners.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! The words contained in my proposal have, I am deeply moved to say, fallen on extraordinarily fertile ground. I do not wish to miss this opportunity to emphasize what seems to me to be important and significant, namely that despite the unfortunate circumstances that have arisen within the Anthroposophical Society as a result of various foundations - I have often spoken about this over the past few years - it has become apparent that the trust in the general anthroposophical movement is so great that we can only look on with the deepest satisfaction that this trust is so great that it has hardly been weakened at all in recent years, despite all the unfortunate measures that have been taken and that were intended to accommodate those who had the faith that such measures could do anything for the anthroposophical cause. I have already emphasized in various places how the reliance on purely anthroposophical ground since the Christmas Conference has been shown everywhere in the most energetic way, that trust in the actual anthroposophical cause has not diminished in recent months, but has become much greater. So that within Anthroposophy we can look with the deepest satisfaction at what is alive among us in this direction.

I must say that today, with an extraordinarily sad and worried heart, I set about making the proposal that I once had to make to you, my dear friends, after becoming aware of the situation of “Kommendes Tag”. And I could have well understood if this proposal had been rejected in the broadest sense. I must say that it is deeply touching and heart-warming that this did not happen, but that we can see that right from the outset, in the first hour, friends have agreed to donate 20,700 shares to the Goetheanum Fund. I cannot tell you how grateful I am for this very beautiful result, that we can look at this result, that the indicated number of 20,700 shares has been made available, so that in the very near future we will be able to achieve full financial recovery of the spiritual enterprises in this direction, as far as possible, and thus also be able to contribute indirectly to the recovery of the “Coming Day”.

This is an extraordinarily distressing result, and we can only look back on the proceedings of this meeting with the deepest emotion. I thank all those who were able to donate and did so, truly from the bottom of my heart for what you have done, which means an extraordinarily significant deed not only for the “Coming Day”, but especially for our anthroposophical movement. For if this willingness to make sacrifices is now being shown in spite of the failures of recent years within anthroposophical circles in such a way, we will nevertheless be able to achieve what needs to be achieved on our main path in the near future. And what needs to be achieved is what can be done through anthroposophy in spiritual terms for humanity and for modern civilization. Even if our material undertakings have not had the desired success, even if everything that has emerged from the threefold social order movement has basically fallen through today, we still have the opportunity – and this is solely due to the unlimited trust that our anthroposophists have in anthroposophy – to make further progress in the spiritual realm.

This, however, also imposes an obligation on me to continue in the way I have tried to make the Christmas Conference fruitful so far, by making the Anthroposophical Society ever more esoteric and esoteric, in an active way. It is precisely from what our friends have done today that I feel how strong the obligation is to continue in this direction in the most energetic way. If we stick together in this way, each doing what he can do, we will make progress on the appropriate path.

You see, my dear friends, there is still work to be done: the threefolding movement was founded here years ago. Individual enterprises have emerged from it. The part of the threefolding movement that should have been carried out in a purely practical way, for which practical collaboration would have been necessary, did not initially prove itself. On the other hand, far beyond the borders of Europe, especially in America, there is a great deal of interest in these impulses. Let me use this word, which has been so much maligned: These are realities of the threefold social order. It is becoming apparent that these impulses are nevertheless being taken up with a certain understanding more and more. And perhaps it will be good for these impulses in particular if we do not try to translate them into unsuitable practice in a hasty manner, but instead follow what I have often said at the beginning of our explanations of our magazine Anthroposophie: Threefolding can only take effect when it has entered as many minds as possible. We have seen the failure of applying threefolding to the outer practice of people's lives, but it will make its way into the world as something that is, after all, on anthroposophical ground. All indications show that our strength must be applied in the anthroposophical-spiritual field. And in this sense, I would like to tell you that I feel it is my duty and my gratitude to do everything in my power to further and advance the esoteric-spiritual character of our anthroposophical movement. If we succeed, and we must succeed, because the spiritual does not encounter obstacles in the same way as external material things, then the friends who have shown this willingness to make sacrifices will feel even more closely connected to our life in the Anthroposophical Movement in a renewed way.

Since it is already late, we may perhaps close today's meeting with this.

Fragment of an essay, 1920

The obvious objection is that a relatively small company like “Der Kommende Tag” is not only unable to do anything positive in the face of a general economic collapse, but must also collapse itself. But this objection is not valid. The economic system which is being aimed at here should show, on the one hand, how enterprises can maintain themselves through their inner life if they break with the practices of the present economic way of thinking, which has led to destruction.

In the exemplary way of cooperation between all employees striven for by the “Kommenden Tag”, it will be possible to guide the companies through severe crises. If the workers are kept in such a way that they feel bound to the entire company in terms of their interests, they will have justified goals to achieve not through disruption but precisely through the maintenance of operations.

On the other hand, this type of economy should enable the managed companies to produce goods that, in terms of quality and quantity, secure us the foreign market.

In our case, all of this guarantees that the investors will see their assets preserved even beyond the catastrophic period until the reconstruction, in which companies like ours must play a significant role.

Flyer, late May 1919

For centuries, our cultural life (schools, science, art and religion) served the state and the economy. Legal paragraphs and regulations turned us into uninspired, dependent beings. Tied into the one-sided economic life, there was high and low. A politically untrained people - that's how the world war catastrophe hit us. The result was collapse. The lack of social insight on the part of the ruling class overlooked the needs of the proletariat, which had no property of its own and only received the crumbs of cultural achievements, while otherwise wasting itself in the struggle for existence. The proletariat hoped that the revolution would liberate it from the soul-destroying effects of capitalism. Within the economic sphere, it sought its salvation only in economic betterment.

In reality, however, the urge for human dignity is striving to break through.

The great goal can only be achieved in the cultural sphere through schooling and education of the mind. There is a looming and frightening danger that cultural life will be enslaved again, with intellectual products being stamped as commodities.

This must not be allowed to happen if human culture is not to perish.

The entire spiritual life must become independent and self-governing. Only in this way can it beneficially stimulate economic and political life. Only in this way will it be possible to truly educate the truly capable.

Just as economic life is administered by the works council, so intellectual life must be administered by a cultural council. This council must bring together all those who are seriously willing, each in his own position, to renew intellectual life and to work towards it, free from the influences of the state and the interests of the economy, so that it can follow its own laws.

A spiritual worker is anyone who strives for true humanity.

Their workplace is in the cultural council. Whether they were active in the old order in the political, economic or cultural field, whether they were proletarians or non-proletarians, everyone should join immediately before it is too late! The time is serious!

The League for

Threefolding the Social Organism

Office: Champignystraße 17

Leaflet, second edition, June 1919

Printed matter

Last version, June 1920

The appeal “To the German People and to the Cultural World” written by Dr. Rudolf Steiner proposes the threefold social order. He calls for:

1. The complete independence of spiritual life, including the education and school system. He points out the spiritual inability of our time, insofar as it has its causes in the state's exploitation of spiritual culture. He demands the complete self-administration of this culture from a purely objective and general human point of view.

2. The restriction of state life to all those circumstances in which all people are equal before each other. On this basis, and with the strictest democracy, the current privately capitalist ownership and wage labor conditions can be transformed, especially to achieve such a general human right that the worker can stand as a completely free personality in relation to the labor manager, who is only a spiritual worker.

3. An economic life in which the worker confronts the labor manager in such a way that a free social relationship can come about between the two through a contract for services, so that the wage relationship ceases altogether. For this, the complete socialization of economic life is necessary. Only from the appropriate formation of corresponding cooperatives, which arise from the professions on the one hand and the needs of consumers and producers on the other, can a value regulation of goods emerge that ensures a dignified existence for all people.

Large sections of the German people, who have taken up the proposals of Dr. Rudolf Steiner, are imbued with the realization that at the present time of deepest need, the world-historical task of the German people is, by taking up this impulse, not only to save themselves from the fall into the abyss from which the leading circles, through their lack of understanding of the demands of modern times, have brought it to the brink, but that it can also lay the foundation for the liberation of all people from the oppression of the all-devouring economic policy and the imperialist states that serve it.

The broad masses of the working people have been plunged into physical and mental hardship as a result of being completely absorbed into the economic life of soul-destroying capitalism. They therefore expect a betterment of their situation from a purely economic revolution. They are raising the demand for the socialization of economic life. However, a one-sided socialization of economic life would only be a sham socialization. In it, the previous dictatorship of capitalism would be replaced by a bureaucracy that levels everything and inhibits all free human development, which would lead to a complete mechanization of all human activity and thus to a dehumanization of the human being. This danger can only be counteracted by simultaneously liberating intellectual life from state paternalism and economic dependence. An independent intellectual life, through the cultivation of all human talents and abilities, will be able to constantly supply new constructive forces to economic life, which would otherwise have to consume itself.

Until the outbreak of the world war catastrophe, the German people were proud of their intellectual life. And yet, despite all its much-vaunted achievements, this intellectual life was neither able to provide the ideas for a social order at home that could have met the newer demands of humanity, nor could it fulfill its task abroad. The fact that Germany has not been able to set herself a world-historical mission in the last five decades has driven her into the catastrophe of the World War; the lack of consciousness of such a mission during the World War was bound to result in her defeat in it. The Russian East could have received form and expression for its spiritual yearning from German intellectual life. Instead, it received the “peace” of Brest-Litovsk, which emerged from completely different than intellectual foundations. Germany could not counter the imperialist capitalism that was advancing from the West with its own political will - it capitulated to Wilson's abstract Fourteen Points.

Through the threefold social organism, the German people could have offered the West the example of a healthy socialization of economic life, and the East a strong spiritual life, independent and free from mystical obscurity.

In our time of deepest distress, the German people should finally awaken to the realization of their spiritual task. They should find their way to the pioneers of a free German intellectual life, to Herder, Lessing, Schiller, Goethe, to the great creator of the plan of the ideal university, Fichte, to the glorifier of the true academic essence, Schelling, and to Hegel. It would have to show understanding for the demands of humanity in modern times and recognize that, even if the demands of the revolution are initially asserted in the consciousness of the broad masses in a one-sided way in the economic sphere, their driving forces in the depths of the soul are nevertheless aimed at recognition of human rights and human dignity. It would have to recognize that the soul impulse for freedom lives in them. Then it would realize that true human welfare can only arise when the spiritual life is based on individual human freedom in the most comprehensive sense, and that it is the task of the German spirit to realize the freedom of the spiritual life.^{1The philosophical basis for this demand is given in Rudolf Steiner's “Philosophy of Freedom», which appeared in a new edition in 1918, Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag, Berlin W, Motzstraße [note in the appeal]} Therefore, it must now be demanded that the state release spiritual culture and that the entire spiritual life create its free self-government from a purely objective and general human point of view. This applies first and foremost to the education and school system. One will only educate properly when the question, “How do you educate all people to become true, capable human beings?” is no longer open to anyone except those who, only from human nature itself, set their goals for education and teaching. Then schools will no longer see their task as training young people for specific, externally prescribed purposes, but rather as forming fully developed, free human beings. These will then naturally develop a lively relationship to their duties in the service of the community. In an independent intellectual life, all schools will be free institutions of the spiritual member of the social organism, whose members will be supported by the trust of the general public. The funds for education and teaching will no longer be raised indirectly through the state; rather, the spiritual organism will itself be a member of the economic system, as far as its economic circumstances are concerned, and will draw its means of existence directly from it, without the spiritual organism becoming dependent on economic interests as a result.

The first result in the field of education will be the emergence of a primary school that will be a unified school built from the same point of view for all people, a true psychological anthropology. In the sense of a pedagogical economy, this school will be built on a true understanding of the developing human being. It will educate the thinking, feeling and willing faculties in such a way that a strong personality develops, whose soul unfolds a sustaining power for the whole of life. In this free school, truly human arts and skills will also be cultivated that the state does not cultivate because it has no interest in them. All artistic exercises will have an outstanding effect on the development of the will. Such a primary school will provide a useful educational foundation for all physical and mental workers. The secondary modern school will build on the primary school, on the one hand, and the intermediate technical schools, on the other. These will develop a living relationship with the professions for which they prepare, through a constant back and forth of teachers between their work in the subject taught and the practice of a practical profession. Such a practice will also become established for the universities.

The liberation of intellectual life will have a decisive impact on the university system. The autonomy of the universities will be restored. The state system of qualifications and all state examinations will be discontinued. Instead, in future the certificates of the free schools and colleges will be statements of the abilities and knowledge that students have acquired by graduating from them. Independently of intellectual life, the state will be able to test those it wishes to employ within state political life on its own soil for their suitability for the positions it awards.

All state or economic influence on the teaching content of the individual sciences themselves will cease. Science and its teaching will be truly free.

The following basic requirements arise from what has been said, and their fulfillment is possible in the threefold social organism:

1. The liberation of teaching from all state supervision. The organization of primary education according to pedagogical and didactic principles, and its administration only by personalities who are part of the self-governing cultural community.

2. The abolition of state authorization for middle and vocational schools.

3. The autonomy of universities.

We hereby put these questions up for public discussion. We appeal to all those who care about culture in the broadest sense of the word, especially to the representatives of science and art, of education and teaching, and in particular to parents and, not least, to the academic youth. We also appeal to Germans living abroad, who, in their advanced positions, have always found the unhealthy mixing of cultural life with state and economic interests particularly painful. We call on all those who are willing to work towards the emancipation of intellectual life to join us in

formation of a community whose task it will be to restructure the entire teaching and education system in the sense of the above characterization. We are filled with the hope that through the joint work of such a free association of people, who are active in the most diverse

fields of intellectual life and who are imbued with the realization that the liberation of intellectual culture is the highest necessity of life, it will be possible to lay the foundation stone for the organization of a free, self-reliant spiritual life.

Stuttgart, Whitsun 1919
Champignystraße 17
The Working Committee of the Federation for
Threefolding of the Social Organism.

[179 signatures follow]

A kind of nightmare-like oppression can weigh on the soul of anyone observing the current cultural life of humanity, a kind of contraction of the tortured heart, when one realizes that there are still relatively few people who want to see with an unbiased eye how we are on a slippery slope with regard to the most important branches of our cultural life. This downward slide has become sufficiently apparent through the events of recent years, through everything that has befallen people. But we still often find today that people are of the opinion that, unless drastic action is taken, things must remain at least as chaotic as they have become, and that we can continue to work from what is already there; the rest will take care of itself. Over the years, I have repeatedly had to speak out against these feelings of temporariness and point out the necessity of relearning and rethinking in order to find the inclination to think about a real renewal of our public affairs and public life from the deepest foundations of our intellectual and cultural life. And even though there are already a small number of people today who have become aware of this, and all signs indicate that without such decisive action the downward spiral will have to be continued and continued, even these few people will find little understanding for what is necessary for a new metamorphosis of the human spirit to emerge from the ice, in order to lead to a recovery, to a healing of many an ill, who are living out their lives on the slippery slope of our cultural life.

Three phenomena stand out, from which the most important for understanding our time and what is necessary in it can be seen. The first I would call the main defect of our time. For decades, the lectures on spiritual science have endeavored to point out this main defect and also to point out the many things that must follow from this main defect of insufficient knowledge and insight into spiritual life itself for the development of humanity in the present and the near future. The second thing that speaks loudly and clearly from the facts of the present, I would call the main demand. And this main demand has been sounding in many hearts for more than a century, since Schiller, in his “Don Carlos”, had the words spoken: “Give freedom of thought!” Those who look more deeply into the social and spiritual life of our time will be able to see how, behind many of today's consciously formulated social demands, the demand for free activity of the innermost human being, of human thought, is actually hidden. Many people sigh under the compulsion of their thought life, which comes either from old existing institutions or from the new economic conditions. They find themselves either officially existing beliefs or the constraints of economic life in their free development of thought inhibited. What actually lives in the soul, remains largely unconscious, but what rises to consciousness, comes in the fact that one can not be satisfied with anything, there is something that does not let people openly and freely confess before himself: I may lead a dignified human existence. And so the most diverse programs arise, which contain very beautiful things, but do not reach down to the bottom of the soul to see what is actually living there. If one searches for what is living there: it is the longing for the freest activity of the innermost human being, for what could be summarized with the expression of the time's demand for freedom of thought. And one need only utter the words “social forces” – and it can be felt how this indicates that modern intellectual, modern legal and political, and modern economic conditions have brought us to an age in which the productive forces of life operate in a complicated way, and how we are not able are unable, from what we have intellectually mastered, from what we want to process programmatically, to organize these social forces, in which human beings are interwoven, in such a way that within this organization the individual human being, who has come to the awareness of his humanity, can satisfactorily answer the question: Do I lead a dignified existence?

I may assume that the majority of the listeners gathered here today have been able to gather from the lectures and the writings, which further elaborate on the content of these lectures and which I have published, over the course of many years, what the inner meaning and spirit of the spiritual science referred to here is. This spiritual science believes that it must, out of a sense of the necessity of the times, place itself in the present-day cultural life. Today, since I can refer to the numerous lectures already given here, I will only need to touch on some fundamental points. Above all, however, I would like to touch on one introductory point again, which has already been discussed in the most diverse forms.

When spiritual science is mentioned, the outside world often associates it with all kinds of complicated mysticism, complicated theosophy, and so on. Although spiritual science does what it can to educate people about its true meaning, it is still spoken of in such a way in the broadest circles that it represents the exact opposite of what this spiritual science actually wants to be. First and foremost, the representatives of this spiritual science feel that for three to four centuries a way of thinking has emerged within humanity that dominates our entire lives and that has found its most significant expression in the way of thinking of modern natural science. Please do not misunderstand me on this point. I do not want to awaken the belief that I assume that only those people who have undergone some kind of scientific education are imbued with that school of thought. It is not like that. People from the widest circles, right down to those with a very primitive culture and education, who today want to be enlightened about the nature of man, about the nature of social life, and about the nature of the universe, think in such a way, they present in such a direction as it has been expressed mainly by natural science. And it is no wonder that this is so, because our whole life, which surrounds us and in which we are interwoven throughout the day, is basically a result of this scientific way of thinking.

Those who have heard me speak often know that I do not underestimate this scientific way of thinking, and that I recognize its great triumphs. But it has achieved these triumphs precisely because it has been able to take hold of part of our practical life in such a magnificent way, because over the last three to four centuries it has become magnificently one-sided. Everything that people think in this direction is based on an understanding of inanimate nature, of the physical and chemical, which then passes into technology, into everything that underlies our life institutions, and which, for example, is also incorporated into our healing methods, that is, into those insights that are intended to help human life from a certain point of view. But anyone who recognizes, without prejudice, the tremendous progress that has been made in the biological, physical and chemical aspects of the natural sciences, and who is able to appreciate the significance of what conscientious methodology has achieved in this respect, is precisely the person who, at the same time, is also able to fully grasp the limitations of this natural scientific way of thinking. I have explained this countless times here, and I would now like to summarize it in the words: Those who penetrate more deeply into what we today call genuine natural science will find that this natural science provides excellent insights into inanimate nature and into that in the living that, I might say, consists of inclusions in this inanimate nature. But there is one thing that we must stop at when we survey the scope of knowledge of the natural scientific way of thinking: We must stop before the actual essence of man. There is no way, if one does not want to indulge in self-deception, to believe that these views, which have led us so deeply into the inanimate, which have “brought us so gloriously far” in our technical achievements, that these views can provide any insight into the essence of man. This knowledge of the human being – that can be known by the one who does not cling to that fable convenue, which is not history but is called history – this knowledge of the human being was something instinctive for man up to three to four centuries ago. A certain knowledge of the human being lived out of an original, elementary instinct of humanity. However, just as the individual human being undergoes a development, so does all of humanity. And no matter how much we are deceived into claiming the opposite, humanity has now reached a point in its development where it can no longer judge the human essence from mere instinct. It is necessary for man to penetrate consciously into the essence of man himself, just as he must consciously penetrate into the phenomena of the outer life of nature, as Copernicus and Galileo did. When we come to the decisive point, where science and research must stop short before the insight into the human being, there is nothing left but to turn to what I have often mentioned: the intellectual modesty that is necessary for the human being, which can only provide the basis for the pursuit of true human development.

Those who cannot develop this intellectual modesty out of a genuine desire for knowledge will not be able to arrive at a true understanding of the human being. You have to be able to say to yourself: I see a five-year-old child, and I give him a volume of Goethe's lyrical poems. He looks at it and may well tear the book apart. He is going through the same process that an adult who has undergone development also goes through, so that he can really find what is meant to speak to him from this volume of poems. But just as one must admit that the child must first develop in order to relate to what is happening to him in the right way, so today one must also say: just as the human being is placed in existence by nature, he stands before human life itself like a five-year-old child before a volume of Goethe's poetry, if he does not have the will to guide his development beyond what is usually considered the only possible method today. One must take one's development into one's own hands. But then it becomes apparent that there are hidden forces in the human being that can be awakened and that give an equally rigorous scientific insight as only a natural science can give, but which go beyond the knowledge of the external world, the world of the senses, and lead into the supersensible, and only then lead to a true understanding of the human being. We must be able to admit: we cannot approach the human being with the ordinary powers that are sufficient for the knowledge of nature. We can only do so if we bring out the powers of knowledge that otherwise lie dormant in us, as the powers of understanding do in a five-year-old child, from the depths of the human soul.

And so the spiritual science referred to here represents the view that it is possible, from the standpoint that is sufficient to recognize external inanimate nature, to lead people to points of view of knowledge from which one can penetrate into the human being. This spiritual science does not want to be an idle brooding in inner mysticism; this spiritual science also does not want to handle any outer machinations to advance to the spirit, but wants to be something that builds so strictly on that for which the human being is really capable of developing, as, for example, the mathematician builds on the development of those abilities that are also brought forth entirely from within the human being. This spiritual science does not want to be as strictly logical as any other branch of science, but it does want to apply this logic only to what arises as a spiritual vision when what lies dormant within the human being is truly awakened in a natural way. In my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” I have pointed out that it is entirely through inward, soul-spiritual methods that this development of inner, spiritual-soul forces is brought about in man, and how, through this, , to use Goethe's words, a spiritual eye, a soul ear, a spirit ear, so that he can see and hear the spiritual and soul realm, for which we basically only have words today. It is pointed out that it is important to cultivate a certain strengthening of our thinking life. I have emphasized the necessity of a certain self-discipline, of taking our development into our own hands, for otherwise we simply abandon ourselves to life, so that the spiritual eye and the spiritual ear are closed.

Most people today are still quite hostile to anything that comes from this side. And yet, one need only point out how, in our time, when social demands are springing up everywhere, the most anti-social instincts prevail. Where do these come from? They come from the fact that people actually pass each other by without understanding and that they do not comprehend one another. And why do they not understand one another? Because their knowledge, what they call knowledge, does not engage the whole person, because it remains in the head, because it is limited to the mere intellect. The peculiar thing about the spiritual science meant here is that the knowledge it provides through the developed forces engages the whole person, that it not only speaks to the intellect, not only to the intellect, but that they imbue feeling and will, that they infuse understanding of human nature, understanding of all that lives and moves beside and beyond us, that they pulsate with ethics, with morals, with a social attitude that simultaneously impacts directly on practical life.

This spiritual science does not know the unfortunate division that is discussed on every street corner today, the division into mental and manual labor. After all, what is our manual labor? It is nothing more than the use of the bodily tools at our disposal in the service of our will. But when we are clear about the fact - and I have often spoken of it - that this will, as a spiritual force, pulses through everything we do as a whole human being, and in turn radiates back to the intellect in our head, - when we really have the whole human being in mind, only then will we understand the innermost impulse of this spiritual science.

Please excuse me for mentioning something personal on this occasion. But in this case, the personal will serve to clarify the matter. The spiritual science that is being discussed here is to be served on the Dornach hill in northwestern Switzerland, a piece of Jura, the Goetheanum built there, which is intended as a university for spiritual science. When the time came to found this School of Spiritual Science and to dedicate the outer structure to it, it was not a matter of going to someone who, based on old architectural or artistic ideas, would have built a structure into which one would then have moved in order to pursue this spiritual science. No, it had to be something else. From the very beginning, this spiritual science was conceived in such a fruitful way that it can intervene in the whole of external cultural life, that it can truly infuse anew that which has become old in our art, in our architecture, in our life, in our work. So one could not simply give someone the commission: Build me a building in the Greek, Romanesque, Gothic or some other architectural style. Rather, out of this spiritual science itself, just as out of the other thoughts of life, just as out of the other impulses of life, so too did the architectural thoughts arise, which suggested: this is how this building must be in every line, in every single form. And so the building was undertaken that in every single form, even the smallest, it will indeed be the external crystallization of what underlies this spiritual science as a way of thinking, as an attitude.

And so perhaps I may say the following about myself: It was in the fall of 1913 and in the winter of 1914 that I myself worked out the model of this building, the whole building in miniature. Now that I have worked out the model, I ask about which even the architectural drawings are made: Was what I worked out in manual labor, was it manual labor or mental work? It was something where both came together and worked as one. I know this because I just did the thing. Then again, there is hardly anything about this building where I, like every single worker, did not lend a hand here and there. And for anyone who might be interested, I would like to say: we are working as the central figure of this building, a nine-and-a-half-meter-high wooden group, which is supposed to represent the human enigma of our time, but in an artistic way. The task was to create a sculpted woodwork. Although the work is artistic, it is, if I may use the expression, a wood-chopping, and I could show the calluses on my fingers, which provide evidence that here mental work in direct manual labor from morning to evening itself is executed.

Recently, we had to decide on a certain financial matter; we needed to make the chairs. We got the cost estimate. The price was outrageous. So we made the model of a chair ourselves in our artistic studio, working together with a worker who is indeed extraordinarily skilled. When the model was finished – the chair will cost only two-fifths of what it would have cost according to the other proposal – again, one could not tell where the intellectual work ended and the manual labor began.

One may even say: in the way we work together in social life with our co-workers, who are made up of friends of our movement on the one hand and workers on the other, there is actually only one obstacle without which it would become apparent that mental work and manual work flow together everywhere. For example, we have a lady who is a certified medical assistant and who sharpens knives for our sculptors from morning till evening. And we can ask: What prevents what the wit, who are called spiritual workers, do, from simply flowing into what the workers do, to the complete satisfaction of both sides, to the most completely satisfying social collaboration? Yes, I do understand everything that has come about as social phenomena. Nevertheless, I must say that if I am to speak of the only obstacle that makes it impossible to hand over both manual labor and mental work to the manual laborer, it is the fact that the workers are organized and view everything that comes from the intellectual workers with mistrust, even though they are actually doing the same thing.

Why is it that today there is such a deep abyss between what lies in our art, in our science, in short, in our spiritual life and also in the spiritual direction of our social life, and in the external work that the proletarian movement in particular is dealing with today? This gulf has come about because what concerns the whole human being has fled from our way of thinking. A recovery for this lies only in spiritual science, not in a one-sided, complicated mysticism or theosophy, which idle people may pursue in their little rooms, without any momentum. The healing power of this spiritual science lies in the fact that it engages the whole human being. And I have said this now in order to make the following comment: I know that the insights that I am presenting to the world today with full responsibility would not have come to me if I had only worked with my head, if I had not had to devote my whole life to something that is usually called manual labor; because this also has a certain effect on a person. What is only the so-called brainwork, what only engages the intellect, does not reach to the spirit. And something that will seem highly paradoxical to many people today, I would like to mention here. Today, out there in practical life, we say: manual labor, practice; inside, from the intellect: intellectual work! Oh no, it is not at all as these words would lead us to believe. We have the separation between outer life practice and the so-called spiritual life because the spirit has fled from both, because today we are caught in the mechanical treadmill of technology, because the worker stands at the machine and merely performs mechanical tasks according to the instructions of the intellect, and because, on the other hand, those who are educated for an intellectual life are not sufficiently involved in real practical work. Our practical life is spiritless, and so is our intellectualized spiritual life. Only when the full activity of the human being in the world flows back into our heads, into our thinking, which can only arise from the harmonious activity of the whole human being, only when we do not only think with our heads, but think as one thinks when one has once formed something with one's hand and felt how it radiates back into the head, only then will the thought be so fully saturated with reality that there is spirit in it. That which is merely thought out is just as spiritless as that which is spiritlessly worked on a machine.

The spiritual science referred to here should not practise mysticism that is alien to life. It should arise from full engagement with life and should be much more saturated with reality than what is usually meant by intellectual life today. Or is what is meant today as spiritual life saturated with reality? Do we not see how powerless science is to really grasp the spirit? People who are generally immersed in our modern culture believe that they are doing unprejudiced natural science. But how did this unprejudiced natural science actually come about? Through the fact that for many centuries everything that people longed to know about soul and spirit, about that which extends beyond birth and death, was dependent on what the confessions monopolized, due to social circumstances. When the spirit of modern science arose, what did social life actually look like? Everything that people were allowed to know about soul and spirit was monopolized in the dogmas of the confessional societies. One was not allowed to think about soul and spirit, one was only allowed to think about the external world of the senses. And in this, people who have pursued natural science have found themselves. They got into the habit of thinking and researching only about the external world of the senses because research into spirit and soul had been forbidden for centuries. They translated this into certain ideas, they only pursued external sensory science. Then, through a grandiose self-deception, this has become the belief that exact science can only decide something about the external world of the senses, and that research into soul and spirit lies beyond the boundaries of knowledge. But this is also rooted in the soul life of modern man and permeates all life. One can gain fruitful thoughts about nature with such a view. But as soon as one wants to penetrate into social life, this way of thinking is not enough. There it is necessary, for the foundation of a real people's science, a real social science, that we imbue ourselves with a view of the whole human being. And that is lacking because the influences I have characterized prevented it.

So it has come about that people have said: Spirit and soul is something that has been established by dogmas for centuries. It cannot be researched. It is something that only through human will moves like smoke and fog over real life, and there, as the real thing, one forms nothing other than the economic forces themselves. Unbelief arose: the spiritual reigns in what the external economic forces are. And out of unbelief arose what has fatally taken hold in the hearts and minds of men. The belief arose that spiritual life could develop out of economic forces by itself, if only these were organized in a certain way. There is no realization that everything that has arisen economically is originally the result of intellectual life, but that our intellectual life has become unworldly, that there is an abyss between it and the outer life, and that for a recovery of our life we need a real spiritual science that penetrates into the essence of man, that penetrates man just as outer natural science penetrates the machine, but that must be built on the developed powers of human nature. In short, it is extraordinarily difficult to realize that spiritual science must become the basis for the understanding and mastering of social life. That is what the representative of spiritual science believes he recognizes: that the human intellect does not have enough impact, not even where it pulsates in today's social life, to immerse itself in real life, and that the latter must increasingly end in chaos if the impulses that reach into feeling and will, that can place human being next to human being in such a way that social forces can be organized, are not enlivened. No matter what natural scientific methods you take from the exact natural science that has reached its zenith in our time, you cannot establish a social science with them. The ideas that one gains without spiritual science behave in relation to social science in the same way as a color that one wants to paint on an oily surface. Just as the oily surface rejects the color, so life rejects what merely rules among us as intellectual science.

Thus external life cries out for the kind of depth that spiritual science provides. Spiritual science will have to provide the foundations for what people unconsciously express in their social demands today, what they cannot formulate clearly because the power of thought is not available. It is therefore necessary to understand this spiritual science not as something that one could devote a few thoughts to on the side, but as something that is among the most necessary conditions for the recovery of our lives. I know full well — for I truly do not believe I am an impractical person — that people say: We have our professions, we cannot devote ourselves to this spiritual science, which is quite extensive after all. Should not a little more thought also enter into the hearts and souls of people: Doesn't the present downward path on which we are walking show us — however much we are still in our profession — that we are only helping to shape the path into chaos? And shouldn't we consider it necessary to devote every hour that we can spare to such views, which now really and radically raise the question of recovery?

And what is meant here as spiritual science is intimately connected with that call in our time, which, as I have explained, is far older than a century, with that call, which I would like to describe as the call for freedom of thought. But this call is actually the call for social freedom. It is remarkable that when one tries to see through to what is rising to the surface in the waves of the so-called social demands in our present time, one repeatedly encounters the necessity to recognize how it actually relates to human freedom, to that impulse that expresses itself in one form or another as the impulse of human freedom. That this is an important point was recognized even by the man whom I consider the most unfortunate among the so-called outstanding people of our time who have gained influence over the shaping of conditions – even Woodrow Wilson recognized this. Since I never spoke differently about Woodrow Wilson even in neutral foreign countries during the war, while he was so adored by all sides, I may also speak about Woodrow Wilson today as I always have. There are numerous passages in his writings in which he points out that a recovery of the situation - he is primarily familiar with the American situation - can only come about if people's striving for freedom is truly taken into account.

But what is human freedom for Woodrow Wilson?

This brings us to a very, very interesting chapter in contemporary human thought - for Woodrow Wilson is, after all, a kind of representative thinker - where you will find the following view in his writing about freedom: You can form the concept of freedom by looking at a machine and how a gear wheel is attached. If it is attached in such a way that the mechanical device can move without hindrance, then one says that the gear wheel runs freely. When he looks at a ship, he says that the ship must be constructed in such a way that the machinery engages with the swell, so that it is not hindered, so that it moves with the swell, so to speak, is adapted to it, runs freely in the swell. Woodrow Wilson compares what the impulse of human freedom should really be to what a cogwheel in a machine or a ship in the waves of the sea is. He says: A person is free when he functions more or less like a wheel in a machine, when he functions freely in his external circumstances, so that he moves within them, so that he engages with his powers in what is going on around him, so that he is not hindered.

Now, I think it is very interesting that this peculiar view of human freedom can arise from the present-day scientific way of thinking and attitude. For is it not the opposite of freedom when one is so adapted to circumstances that one can only move in their sense? Does not freedom demand that one be able to stand up to external circumstances if necessary? Would not what lives as freedom have to be compared to what could, if necessary, behave in such a way that the ship turns against the waves and stops?

Where does this strange view come from, from which a healthy, statesmanlike insight can never arise, but at most the 14 abstract points of Wilson's pronouncements, which unfortunately were also admired here to some extent at a certain time? Hence it is that in our time it is not realized how one must go back to the human idea itself, to that idea which is conceived as an idea and which, if one really speaks of freedom, can provide the only real free impulse for human life. This is what I tried to present more than thirty years ago in my Philosophy of Freedom, a new edition of which has recently been published with corresponding additions. There, however, I tried to understand this impulse for freedom in a different way than it is currently being done. I tried to show how the question about human freedom has been wrongly formulated. The question is: Is man free or is he not free? Is man a free being who can make decisions out of his soul with real responsibility, or is he harnessed into a natural or spiritual necessity like a natural being? This question has been asked for thousands of years, and it is still being asked. This question alone is the great error.

One cannot ask the question in this way. Rather, the question of freedom is a question of human development, of a human development such that in the course of his youth or perhaps his later life, man develops powers within himself that he does not simply have by nature. One cannot ask: Is man free? By nature he is not, but he can make himself more and more free by awakening forces that lie dormant in him and that nature does not awaken. Man can become more and more free. One cannot ask: Is man free or unfree, but only: Is there a way for man to achieve freedom? And this way exists. As I said, thirty years ago I tried to show that when man develops an inner life within himself, so that he grasps the moral impulses for his actions in pure thoughts, he can really base his actions on thought impulses, not just instinctive emotions – thoughts that merge into external reality as the lover into the beloved. Then man approaches his freedom. Freedom is just as much a child of the thought, which is grasped in spiritual clairvoyance - not under an external compulsion - as it is a child of

of true devoted love, love for the object of our activity. What German spiritual life strove for in Schiller, when he confronted Kant and sensed something of such a concept of freedom, befits us to further develop in the present. But then it became clear to me that one can only speak of that which underlies moral actions – even if it remains unconscious in people, it is still there – and that one must call it intuition. And so in my “Philosophy of Freedom” I spoke of a moral intuition.

But this also provided the starting point for everything I later attempted to achieve in the field of spiritual science. Do not think that I now have an immodest opinion of these things. I know very well that this 'Philosophy of Freedom', which I conceived more than thirty years ago as a young man, has, to a certain extent, all the teething troubles of the intellectual life that emerged during the 19th century. But I also know that out of this intellectual life has sprung what is a leading up of the intellectual life into the truly spiritual. So that I can say to myself: When man rises to the moral impulses in moral intuition and represents a truly free being, then he is already, if I may use the frowned-upon word, “clairvoyant” with regard to his moral intuitions. In that which lies beyond all sensuality lie the impulses of all morality. Fundamentally, the truly moral commandments are the results of human clairvoyance. Therefore, there was a straight path from that “philosophy of freedom” to what I mean today by spiritual science. Freedom arises in man only when man develops. But he can develop further so that what is already the basis of freedom also drives him to become independent of all sensuality and to rise freely into the realms of the spirit.

Thus, freedom is connected with the development of human thinking. Freedom is basically always freedom of thought, and especially when we look at such representative people as Woodrow Wilson, we have to say: because such people have never grasped what the thought of something truly spiritual is, how it must be rooted in the spiritual if it is not to be abstract, that is why they can invent such paradoxical definitions as Woodrow Wilson has invented for freedom. From such things we see the inadequacy of the present spiritual life, the main defect of which is that it does not recognize the spiritual nature of man. We see what the main demand is: freedom of thought, and what the main need is: the mastering of social forces, if this life is to develop into the basis for these three great demands in the present for the near future. Thus, what is a truly original impulse in man does not depend on what can be achieved in man through scientific thinking, but on what can only be achieved through spiritual contemplation.

So much has been argued about freedom because people want to decide on it without entering the ground on which the knowledge of the immortality of the human soul arises. And no one who does not approach the question of the realization of human immortality, of the eternal in man, in an unbiased way is able to understand the essence of human freedom. If one does not seek the essence of this freedom in the flashing forth of the thought that is not merely given by nature, then one does not find this essence of freedom. But only when it has been found does it permeate and pulsate through the human being in such a way that he can become a truly social being, for it carries him alongside other human beings into the social order in such a way that social forces can be released from within. And we need this sense of social forces.

I mentioned earlier that in Dornach, where we are building, we are able to place people who have even reached certain heights in spiritual training and who do the most ordinary, dirty work, which in fact is in no way inferior to that of those who are usually called manual laborers. In social terms, however, the construction of Dornach is based on foundations that are not necessarily the same as those of an enterprise geared towards material gain. But if you take on board what I have set out in my “Key Points of the Social Question” and in the lectures on threefolding, you will find that it is possible to create similar foundations for the whole of life as those that have been created in Dornach for the building that is to represent our spiritual scientific movement. It is a pity that many people in other countries cannot visit this building today, because unfortunately we have come to a point where crossing national borders has become almost impossible.

But why is it possible, after all, to release social energies in such a way that the ideal of the proletarian movement is fulfilled, albeit differently than one dreams? Because everything that is done there is based on the conception of life, on this whole-hearted attack on life, which results from the impulses of spiritual science, because every single thing is done on the basis of spiritual science. What is done on a small scale on the basis of spiritual science can also be done on a large scale in social life on the basis of a spiritual-scientific understanding of life. Every factory, every bank, every external undertaking can be organized in a way that only someone who is able to think about practical life with a science that descends so deeply into the human being that it grasps not abstract thoughts and natural laws but living facts can organize. These living facts can be found if one only descends deeply enough into the human being through the indicated methods. It is not an abstract mysticism that is sought, but the facts of life through which the human being stands in reality. And by recognizing the human being, one finds at the same time through this spiritual science that which can bring the social forces into the corresponding organization, so that the people living in this organization can answer the question satisfactorily: Is human life worthy of a human being?

So the three things are connected: social forces, freedom of thought and spiritual science. Spiritual science is truly the opposite of what it is often portrayed as. A life of leisure, people think, the dream of idle people. No, spiritual science wants to be a way of life, precisely the way of life that our time lacks most. It wants to immerse itself in life, to master life in science and practice, because it wants to immerse itself in the reality of the human being, not just in the humanly conceived life. There are well-meaning people today who say: the mere mind, the mere intellect, which has developed over the past centuries and into our time, is no longer good for the recovery of our lives. But when asked what is useful, they give general answers: a re-fertilization of the soul through the 'spirit'. When it comes to true spiritual science, they reject it because they are still afraid of it, or use the strangest excuses. So you will always find people saying: Not everyone can become a spiritual researcher. Certainly, not everyone can do it, I have emphasized this again and again here. For although one can take those first steps into the spiritual worlds, into the supersensible existence, as I have described them in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” and in the second part of my “Secret Science” , anyone can do them at any time, but the advance to those questions that deal with the beings of the supersensible worlds in a deeper sense is indeed tied to a variety of experiences that not everyone is ready for today. Those who want to look into the spiritual world, who want to become spiritual researchers in the truest sense, must undergo many struggles. You need only consider that at the moment when you really enter into a realization that does not make use of the senses, at the moment when you enter into a body-free cognition and the familiar outer world is no longer there, - that you are then in a world that presents all sorts of unfamiliar things: All the things that usually support you, the secure external experience, the ordinary intellect, have to give way to other, inner powers of judgment. You are like over an abyss and have to hold on by the center of gravity of your own being. Many people have an unconscious or subconscious fear of this, which they then express in logic when it comes to spiritual science. You may hear the most beautiful arguments; but in truth it is only the fear of the unknown.

But then you must also bear in mind that you, as you are as a human being, are not adapted to the spiritual world, that you are only adapted to the outer world of the senses. You enter into a completely different world for which you have not developed any habits of life. When one penetrates deeper, this causes those terribly painful experiences that must be overcome in real spiritual knowledge. Then, when they are overcome, insights follow from the innermost part of our being that provide information about what is eternal in human nature, what the spiritual is that underlies the world. Not all people can go through this path to such an extent. But I also had to assert time and again that it is not necessary to go through this path, but that all that is needed is common sense. For this common sense, if it is not misled by the prejudices of external views, can distinguish whether the one who presents himself as a spiritual researcher and speaks of initially unknown worlds speaks logically or like a spiritualist or otherwise. Logic is at hand, and one can judge whether the person in question is speaking logically and in such a way that the way he speaks indicates that the experiences he is talking about are being undergone in full mental health.

If one repeatedly objects: Yes, everyone can convince themselves of what external science says, that is correct. One need only discuss laboratory methods to be able to do so. But one can also say: Everyone can convince himself that what is described in my books “How to Know Higher Worlds” and “Theosophy” is correct; one can deduce the inner value of the knowledge from the nature of the spiritual researcher. Then these insights are as valuable for life as they are in the soul of the spiritual researcher himself. The researcher is checked in external science by the external facts; the insights are checked by the way of speaking, the way they are clothed, the way the spiritual researcher has to say. He can be checked by common sense.

Consider what social forces will be unleashed when more and more people emerge as witnesses for the spiritual forces that can only be found in the supersensible, and which other people who cannot be spiritual researchers themselves – not everyone can be a chemist or a physicist – accept out of their common sense and trust, which is based on common sense. What kind of social life arises from this evaluation of the human being is precisely one of the most important points for awakening social forces of trust. They are undermined in our time, when everyone, without taking their development into their own hands, wants to judge everything as soon as they come of age. And that this spiritual science can really provide practical impulses in social life, we have tried to do so here with the establishment of the Waldorf school, which we owe to our dear Mr. Molt, in which the school system is to be built on true knowledge. We want to solve a social question in the right way; because we want a human being to grow in every child, who receives that guiding force for later life, so that social forces are developed in a fruitful way from the human being, not from a dull, inadequate knowledge, as it often dominates social thinking in our time. We really want to develop social thinking that is built on human trust, on the secure foundations of the human soul. And by seeing the developing human being in every child who attends this school, by trying to develop him or her through insights that can enliven the pedagogical foundations, we see something that is necessary, as in everything we try to bring out of this spiritual science.

Of course, I can only describe this spiritual science as a necessary requirement for present and future development from a few points of view. Thus it happens that antagonisms arise from such one-sided allusions because one does not see the whole picture. But now, at the end, I would like to come back to the beginning and point out how heavy the heart can become when one sees how few people there are who appreciate the downward slide; how one does not look for the foundations for a new structure of our spiritual, moral and other cultural life.

This can be seen from many things. Let me give you a few examples in conclusion. Even people who are thought to be firmly established in the external life, what view have they come to based on the facts? The words written by the Austrian statesman Czernin in his latest book deserve to be heeded:

"The war continues, albeit in a different form. I believe that future generations will not call the great drama that has dominated the world for five years the World War at all, but the World Revolution, and will know that this World Revolution only began with the World War. Neither the Peace of Versailles nor St-Germain will create a lasting work. In this peace lies the disintegrating seed of death. The struggles that are shaking Europe are not yet diminishing. Like a violent earthquake, the subterranean rumblings continue. Soon the earth will open here and there, hurling fire against the sky. Again and again, events of elemental force will sweep devastatingly across the lands until everything that reminds us of the madness of this war is swept away. Slowly, with unspeakable sacrifice, a new world will be born. Future generations will look back on our time as if it were a long, evil dream. But day always follows the darkest night. Generations have sunk into the grave, murdered, starved, succumbed to disease. Millions have died in the pursuit of annihilation and destruction, hatred and murder in their hearts. But other generations will arise, and with them a new spirit. They will build up what war and revolution have destroyed. Every winter is followed by spring. That, too, is an eternal law in the cycle of life, that resurrection follows death. Blessed are those who will be called upon to help build the new world as soldiers of labor.

Now, here too there is talk of the new spirit; I know that if one were to speak to this Czernin about the new spirit, he would shrink back, would consider it a fantasy. In abstracto people speak of the new spirit, they know that it must come. But they run for dear life when faced with the concrete spirit. But it is a serious matter to look at the concrete path of this new spirit. There are many today, for example, who attack spiritual science from the standpoint of their supposed Christianity, who do not want to recognize how this spiritual science provides the most vital foundations for a revival of Christianity; how Christianity will live into the future precisely because spiritual science will again teach the living Christ and the event of Golgotha as a historical fact from spiritual scientific research. A large number of theologians have come to the point of no longer teaching this Christ as the actual meaning of the earth, but rather to make him the “simple man of Nazareth”. Spiritual Christianity will be re-established through spiritual science. But those who are afraid today, precisely because of the Christian foundations, should be told: Christianity is built on such firm foundations that there is no need to fear it in the face of spiritual science, any more than there is need to fear the discovery of the air pump and other things — and thus also not the teaching of repeated earthly lives or the doctrine of fate, as spiritual science presents them. Christianity is so strong that it can absorb everything that comes from spiritual science. But whether all of today's 'bearers of the Christian faiths are so strong is another question, but also a serious one.

We have to think in global terms, that's what this so-called world war has drummed into us. Many people think similarly about our Europe and its culture as a Japanese diplomat, whose words I would like to share with you. This Japanese diplomat, who is an educated man, said:

One may think of this content as one wants: This is how one thinks in the world, and we have every reason to look at these thoughts as at facts. It is truly most unfortunate when, on the part of those who ought to be familiar with the conditions of spiritual life – allow me to characterize them – the objections that have been so often and repeatedly described keep coming up, for example, the objection: You can't check what the spiritual researcher says. For example, a booklet was recently published by a gentleman who lives not far from here: 'Rudolf Steiner as Philosopher and Theosophist'. I would just like to point out one aspect of the spirit and logic that prevails there. There is a nice sentence: 'I may have to become a historian, physicist or chemist in order to be able to check things independently. But I cannot verify the theosophical truths unless I am clairvoyant'. That is, he says, historians, physicists and chemists claim all sorts of things; if you want to check these, you just have to become a historian, physicist or chemist. I say: if you want to check spiritual-scientific things, you have to become a spiritual scientist. What does the gentleman say? “I just might have to become a historian, physicist or chemist in order to be able to check things independently. But I cannot verify the theosophical truths unless I am a seer.” Of course! I cannot verify the results of chemical research either unless I become a chemist. But one can become a chemist. But one does not want to become a spiritual scientist. So one says something very strange: I must be able to test, but to be able to test without somehow getting involved in the methods of testing. The question for this gentleman, as he himself says, as you will soon hear, is not whether one can decide when one has appropriated the reasons for the decision, but: “The question is whether they have been or can be verified by me, and that, apart from the formal logical criticism, I must deny.” Well, I readily admit that he must deny it. But just as I admit that one must become a chemist in order to be able to verify the results of chemical research, so everyone must set out on the path of spiritual research in order to verify spiritual scientific truths. But that man rejects that. His whole writing is actually characterized by this logic. And much of the distorting influence brought to bear on spiritual science is based on this logic. There really are better things to do than to concern oneself with such objections.

But it would be particularly fitting for this German nation, this sorely tried German nation, to think about how it should relate to the very foundations of intellectual life. I can point to a few sentences that P. Terman Grimm, the brilliant art historian, wrote in 1858 in his essay on Schiller and Goethe. He wrote more than 60 years ago: “The true history of Germany is the history of the intellectual movements in the nation. Only where enthusiasm for a great idea has stirred the nation and set the frozen forces in motion, are deeds done that are great and luminous.” Should we not be able to take such words to heart today? Or the words that Herman Grimm - certainly no revolutionary - wrote in 1858: ”The names of German emperors and kings are... not milestones for the progress of the people.” He meant that the milestones for the progress of the people are the deeds in the field of thought, of thought that goes into the spiritual.

Never has the German been more in need of adhering to this than in this time of hardship and trial. And that is why we can ask our contemporaries today to look to their great ancestors so that we can become their worthy descendants. Should the beliefs of the German people's ancestors, which they expressed in their spiritual life, not apply to the present day? Should we not continue to develop this spiritual striving instead of stopping at mere words and quoting them? Those who merely quote Goethe today do not understand him; only those who develop him further understand him. Those who merely quote Johann Gottlieb Fichte are doing something nonsensical if they do not develop him further in the spiritual life. You have heard how the world speaks about European intellectual life. In the world, one must learn to recognize that the German, in turn, has the will to look at the actual milestones of the progress of his people. In this world our ancestors, the great pillars of German intellectual life, were often called dreamers. They were misunderstood, just as today what speaks of the spirit is described as fantasy or something else. But there were still people who knew how what was striven for in the spirit was based in reality. And at an important moment, Johann Gottlieb Fichte said to the people: What the others say, that ideas cannot directly intervene in practical life, we idealists know that as well, perhaps better than the others; but that life must be oriented towards them, we know that in advance. - He pointed to the practice of life and said: Those who do not understand this belong to those who are not included in the plan of the world. So may these people be granted sunshine and rain in due course and a good digestion and, if possible, some good thoughts.

It depends on the spirit in which one looks up to the spiritual life of the great bearers of the German spirit. Reality, not abstract judgment, will decide this. If the descendants of these German ancestors have a sense of the true practice of the spirit, then the people who preceded us in this practice of the spirit will not have been dreamers. But if we fail to penetrate into the realities of the practice of the spirit, then they will not become dreamers through themselves, but through us or through our descendants, who want to know nothing of the true German spirit. Let the German people beware lest they make their great ancestors, of whom the world has so often said that they were dreamers, into dreamers through our fault, through our lack of appreciation for the spirit that has been invoked and conjured up in German intellectual life! May he gain followers! This is the last word I wish to speak to you in the context of my current disputes.

When one looks today at the fact that individual countries and ethnic areas are isolated from one another, to the extent that it is sometimes quite impossible and extremely difficult, even within narrow limits, to travel from one ethnic area or country to another, one must say: One can, if one has participated to some extent in the intellectual life as it has developed in the modern world, one can only say that this fact is as little compatible as possible with what actually lives in the depths of human beings, in their deepest longings and in their mental and spiritual drives. For if we look into the human soul with an open mind, we cannot but perceive that the content of the soul, the sum of all the powers of the soul of a man who shares in our culture, is composed of the spiritual and cultural aspirations of all civilized peoples on our earth. no human being today is in a position – if I may use this commercial term – to draw up the balance sheet of his spiritual life without entering the individual items that have flowed into the totality of our soul and spiritual condition from all cultural areas of the world. But what about taking stock of our spiritual and intellectual life in our immediate present? It seems to me that it behooves the German people in particular to engage in these reflections. After all, the issues of our cultural life must be seriously addressed today. Perhaps we may be permitted to recall, without being misunderstood after all that we have experienced, how the brooderer and profound thinker Friedrich Nietzsche wrote his cultural book “The Birth of Tragedy out of the Spirit of Music” in the year of the rise of the newer German Reich. Regarding the moods that then passed through the soul of the youthfully striving Nietzsche, he himself writes that it seems to him, when he looks at the way the Reich was inaugurated at the time, that the extirpation of the German spirit in favor of the German Reich is imminent. There were years, and they are not far behind us, when such a statement would have seemed more or less frivolous to many people. But the facts have changed, and whether one agrees with or disagrees with the person who made such a statement today is less important. What is significant is that such a statement could be made during the dawn of the newer Reich era by someone who had truly suffered deeply enough from all that can be summarized in the words: the materialism of the 19th century. But perhaps one may continue the idea, the feeling that led to this saying. One could say: Could it not perhaps be precisely the plight of the German people that has re-inspired and re-animated that part of it of which Nietzsche thought that it had been extirpated at that time?

With these introductory words, I do not wish to say more than point out the seriousness that must prevail over any considerations that deal with a broader overview of the current spiritual and psychological life and its tasks. If only a kind of spotlight has fallen through Nietzsche in the year 187 on the balance of the spiritual and mental life of his time, we can say that many a spirit striving for thoroughness and seriousness in German development in the 19th century has dealt with the world balance of the spiritual life of its time. I could recall many personalities who thought in terms of such a world balance of spiritual and mental life. I would just like to point out David Friedrich Strauß, who, because of his materialism, is certainly not liked by many people today, and rightly so. Those of the honored listeners who have heard me speak over the past few decades will have an idea of how much I have against something like the book 'The Old and the New Faith' by David Friedrich Strauß; but it raises the big questions of the mid-19th century. Questions such as: Do we still have religion? Are we still Christians? David Friedrich Strauß raises them in a very forceful way. And again, I do not want to decide here how the yes or no stands in these things, nor how the yes or no stands in relation to David Friedrich Strauß himself. But I would like to point out that despite all of David Friedrich Strauß' materialism, despite the fact that he has everything that Nietzsche in particular perceived as such trivialities in his world view, honesty hangs over what David Friedrich Strauß wrote down back then.

What questions did David Friedrich Strauß want to answer, and from what point of view? He took in everything that the 19th century had brought in terms of scientific worldview and attitudes. David Friedrich Strauß attempted to construct a world view out of the most modern elements, and it must be said: with all that had been achieved in modern times up to Darwin and Haeckel, David Friedrich Strauß formed his world view, honestly formed it as his conviction and as the whole extent of his soul life, and then raised the question, unreservedly honestly: Can I still believe in religion in the old sense if I, in accordance with the spirit of modern times, profess this world view? Can I still be a Christian if I profess this world view? And both questions are answered by Strauß with an honest No. He draws the world balance of modern education, of modern intellectual and spiritual life in this sense.

As sharply as the spiritual scientist must speak out against this creed of David Friedrich Strauß, it must be said that at that time, through him, as through many others, an honest balance of the spiritual and mental life was drawn. If we look impartially at the similar endeavors that have emerged since that time, which has elapsed since about the middle of the 19th century, then we cannot speak of an honest stocktaking. Rather, we can only speak of the fact that many, many sides are endeavoring to obscure the world balance of the spiritual and soul life. This concealment of the world balance of the soul and spiritual life is something that confronts us at every turn today. We see it at every turn when we look at what is asserted by numerous representatives of this or that confession. On the one hand, such people often find words that seem self-evident as concessions to the scientific mind, and incidentally, unsuspecting of the honesty of a David Friedrich Strauß, they continue to speak in the old habits of thought of Christianity and religion, and it does not occur to them to draw a real balance between those items that enter our spiritual life from the most diverse sides. The veiling of the balance of the life of mind and soul is the mysterious signature of many cultural endeavors of the present.

But we cannot cope with it if we try to penetrate once again to an honest balance from a small circle. The endeavor to come from small circles to comprehensive views is precisely what has led us ad absurdum. Clinging to comfortable little thoughts is what has prevented us from developing a healthy relationship to the facts of the world, and that is what has ultimately brought about the terrible catastrophe of recent years. From the terrible experiences, from the terrible plight of this catastrophe, humanity should learn that it is truly time to turn our gaze upwards, to where the aspects of life arise that control life, so that we consciously learn to control it, while unconsciously we have allowed ourselves to be led by this or that.

We are truly not short of all kinds of programs and programmatic ideas today. One could say that associations, programs and programmatic ideas are growing like blackberries. They can grow, after all, because our intellectual life has come a long way, and from a well-developed intellectual life, one or two reasonable things can always be said, on which one can swear as if on a sacred word. And so then arise those numerous programs - whether they are political programs or programs of intellectual life, programs in some area of morality, of social activity, and so on - programs whose supporters always think: What I see as the right thing for humanity must be established as soon as possible in the whole of the present world, because I have devised it as the right thing, the right thing for the salvation of humanity, it must spread throughout the human sphere as it is considered today, throughout America, Europe and Asia. And then a program-maker very often adds: What I have devised must now apply, yes, more or less until the end of time; for it is absolutely for the whole earth and for all later times the salutary.

This way of thinking, this absolutizing of everything, is the source of the disaster and the real sin of the intellectual life of our time. Our time does not want to look at the concrete conditions that exist among people, does not want to look at how different the living conditions, let us say first, of the Orient and the Occident are. Today, I would like to speak briefly from this point of view about the world balance of spiritual and mental life, by drawing attention to how different everything is that wells up from the soul, as a picture of life and world view, on the one hand in the world of the Orient, and on the other in the world of the West. And we here in Central Europe, are we not actually intimately interwoven in our soul and spiritual life with that which flows, has flowed for centuries and millennia from the Orient on the one hand? And are we not, on the other hand, interwoven with everything that has been and is emerging as a special new element in the West for a long time? If we look at the basis of all cultural development in our region and our lives, if we look at Christianity, at this most powerful impulse of all earthly development, but above all at this impulse that has shaped Western culture in all its aspects, then we find that, quite apart from that the event of Golgotha took place in the Orient, the first current of Christianity flowed into Europe from the Oriental spirit; that we, in that we have the Christ impulse in our European soul life, basically have an Oriental influence in it. The whole configuration, the whole nature of the Oriental spiritual life points back to ancient times. And today - you need only read the forceful words of a figure like Rabindranath Tagore to confirm this.

When we look towards Asia, where once again everything is stirring among the educated, where everything is taking part in the formation of the balance of the spiritual and intellectual life, we see something that has emerged in a certain way as a straightforward development of the ancient spiritual life that is peculiar to the Orient. However much we partake in this oriental spiritual life, however much it has been instilled into our culture, we must always reflect on our deepest powers of understanding and knowledge if we want to understand what forces of aspiration are alive in the Orient today, and even more so if we want to grasp from which powerful spiritual sources in the Orient, centuries and millennia ago, today's oriental spiritual life has developed. If we look at this spiritual life, we still find in it today what might be called spirituality, spirituality. This spirituality is certainly in decline there, in decadence, and it is hardly possible to compare what comes from the best minds of the Orient with what was once absorbed into the profound, meaningful spiritual life of Asia. It has a basic character, and the further and further back we go, the more clearly we see this basic character. If we examine everything we know about the cultural and spiritual life of the Orient, we have to say that it did not arise from a state of soul and spiritual mood such as ours, that of the occurs in the soul life of the Occident in the life of the average person. It has come about that other soul powers are involved in the creation of this spiritual life than those which we ourselves apply in our advanced science and in the most advanced spiritual striving. In order to sense, to really feel the configuration, the whole nature of oriental spiritual life - as I said, today it is in decadence - one must ask oneself how often I have asked this question in these lectures and tried to give the answer from spiritual-scientific foundations , one must ask oneself: Can nothing speak out of man that is of a higher kind than that which only makes use of the outer sense and nerve tools or of bodily tools in order to become an expression of the soul and spiritual life?

It has often been shown here from spiritual scientific backgrounds how the spiritual researcher can penetrate, by remaining just as strictly scientific as today's natural science is strictly scientific, to what can be called the eternal, the immortal in man, to what enters the inherited body, what must be brought in from the spiritual world as that which is not inherited, what enters through birth or conception, and what in turn goes out into the spiritual world when the human being passes through the gate of death. When we listen to what speaks to us especially from the older elements of Oriental spiritual life, we must say: It is not the human being speaking who only makes use of the outer bodily tools, as in our science, poetry, art ; here, beyond what the bodily tools are capable of, the spiritual man speaks, who, as an eternal being, descends from spiritual worlds through birth or conception and who, in turn, returns through the gate of death into the spiritual world. The spiritual life of the Oriental is something like a revelation of what a person has brought with them into physical existence through birth or conception, something that, in a sense, cannot be applied here but must be carried through the gate of death. One could say that everything the Oriental intellectual regards as truly spiritual culture is an emanation of the higher man in man, if I may use this expression, which has become so hackneyed; it is something that goes far beyond the everyday human.

In our soul life, we basically have only something like a part of our being, from which we can really get a thorough, correct idea of the whole way in which the Oriental in his best prime stood in relation to his spiritual life. To form such an idea, we must look at the way in which, when we summon up the best forces of our humanity, that which we call our moral impulses arises within us, that by which we measure the morally good and morally bad in us. When these moral impulses announce themselves as intuitions in the innermost part of our being, when they are to become the guiding principle of our lives in the moral sphere, then we experience in these impulses something of the power of the soul, which we must now imagine extended over everything that the Oriental feels when he conjures his spiritual life into the physical world. Not the mood we have when we make up something about nature, not the mood that pervades our philosophies and worldviews and our trivial monisms, but that awareness in the soul of receiving something transcendental, something supersensible, that determined the Oriental in everything that gave content to what he could have called his worldview.

With this way of thinking, I do not want to say, about the supersensible world, but with this way of relating to the supersensible world, with this way of feeling about that which can reveal itself from the supersensible world into the sensual world, the member of Western civilization basically did not know what to do for a long time. What is called the higher human being in the human being has certainly appeared in the external moral life in the abstract. But that powerful, direct experience through which this higher human being brings a spiritual culture into this sensual-physical world, which is the direct expression of a supersensible one, has been largely lost to Western culture. Today, as an honest result of a world balance of the spiritual and soul life, one should actually admit this.

Let us now look at individual phenomena. On the one hand, we see how - as I have already pointed out - the Christ impulse has entered into all our cultural currents. It once entered Western life with tremendous momentum. It lost this momentum. If we go back to ancient Christian times, we find that people who seriously want to approach the Christian worldview want to grasp the figure of Christ through supersensible knowledge. In the 19th century, the most advanced theologians, the most advanced confessors of Christianity, were proud to remove the supersensible element from the figure of Christ Jesus, and there were and still are university teachers of Christian theology who are proud to see Christ Jesus only as the “simple man from Nazareth,” who are proud to bring as little as possible of the superhuman into this earthly life. We see how, little by little, the sense for the supersensible has evaporated, even in the face of the most sacred convictions of Western humanity, often precisely among leading minds. The people of the West could not even begin to understand what had been developed over the centuries out of the spirit of the Orient. They materialized it. The most significant manifestation is the materialization of the Christianity of theology, for it is a materialization when the Christ-being, which must be conceived as extra-worldly, united with the personality of Jesus of Nazareth, is obliterated, and when attention is paid only to the personal qualities of Jesus of Nazareth as to another historical phenomenon.

We can also see from other examples how strangely this Western spirit relates to the Oriental one. Our anthroposophically oriented spiritual science is confused by some people, some consciously, some unconsciously, some willingly, some maliciously, with what in English-speaking countries is called Theosophy. Today I do not want to talk about the relationship between our anthroposophically oriented spiritual science and what is called Theosophy in England under Blavatsky and Besant, but I want to point out that in the last third of the last century, England, the world conqueror nation, had a remarkable phenomenon, albeit small in relation to English culture as a whole, but still remarkable, which expressed itself in the Theosophical movement there. What did this theosophical movement want within the Western culture in the most eminent sense? It wanted to deepen spiritual life, wanted to search for the sources of spiritual experience. What did it do? The members of the conquering people strove for the sources of the spirit, they went to the conquered people of the Indians and took ancient oriental wisdom from there. The fact that we did not imitate this was precisely why we were so much hated by this theosophical side. And if we compare what lives within this English-Theosophical Society, what is borrowed entirely from Oriental India, with what once lived there as wisdom, then we must see in all that is handed down as, let us say, 'etheric body', 'astral body', a materialization of what in the Orient was spiritual, purely spiritual thought. But what I have just mentioned is characteristic of another fact. It is so impossible for the members of Western English culture to strive for the sources of a new spiritual life on their own that they turn to the decadent oriental spiritual life of the time to borrow from it and bring alien goods to the West. This example shows how little talent there is in this Occident to produce something like the productions of the one who lives as a higher man, as a spiritual man, as an eternal man, as an immortal man in the mortal, and whose expression is ultimately the oriental spiritual culture. The Oriental therefore understands very well what the higher man in man is, what the man is who does not live purely on earth, but lives in spiritual worlds beyond the earth.

What do we have as an analogue in Western intellectual life, and what do we have more and more as an analogue the further west we go, in relation to this higher human being, as I have now tried to characterize it in halting words for the Oriental intellectual life? What do we actually have in the everyday, ordinary, popular intellectual life of the West? We have to think long and hard to come up with what Western culture, which has set the tone to this day, has to offer as a counterpart to the higher spiritual man of the Orient. If you look in the usual handbooks about the population of our earth today, you will find the well-known information: About 1500 million people live on earth. This is basically correct if we look at those human beings who create for human culture by walking on two legs over the earth's surface, but it is no longer correct for our present time if we ask about the amount of work that, relatively speaking, not so long ago, people did almost single-handedly for human culture. Through the achievements of Western civilization, we have come to use machine labor in abundance in place of human labor, and we can say that over the last three to four centuries, what is fabricated and manufactured for our culture has become not only the result of what human labor achieves, but also of what machine labor achieves. If the machine did not exist, one would see how much work people would have to do to achieve what is achieved today with the help of the machine. One can now calculate how many more people would have to live on earth if what is achieved by machine work had to be achieved by human labor. I have endeavored to calculate this, and for an eight-hour working day – it can be calculated approximately from coal consumption and other factors – I find that about 700 to 750 million more people would have to work on earth than are now present in the form of carnal human beings. This means that it is only partially correct when we look at the amount of work done - that we have our earth inhabited by 1500 million people. We have had it inhabited by more, but by those who are not really human, but actually homunculi, machines, but who do the work that otherwise humans would have to do. In a certain way, the Oriental is quite uncomfortable with this thought of human homunculi, of 700 to 750 million people breaking into human culture, who are not human but machines.

These kinds of people, who work alongside, who are the bearers, the mechanical bearers of human strength, are the real analogues, the real equivalents in normal Western culture, these subhumans for the higher human, for the spiritual human of the Orient. And I do not believe that anyone today honestly takes stock of the world's spiritual and intellectual life who does not include in this accounting that in which, in the best of times, human culture has culminated in the higher human being, as opposed to what Western culture has ultimately produced: the subhuman, the machine that performs human labor.

Of course, in more recent times, the Orientals have certainly not remained idealists, but have appropriated what the machine of the West is supposed to achieve, but for the overall configuration of their intellectual life, I still find the fact that occurred about 45 years ago characteristic. The Japanese received their first warships from the English and were proud that they could now do what the English could do: command warships. And they thanked their English teacher and went out themselves. The people watched from the shore as a captain steered a warship around the sea. But then they felt somewhat uneasy: the steamer turned and turned and did not want to stop turning. For it had to turn, the Englishman had been dismissed, who would have known how to make the steam escape through the appropriate device. And so the Japanese captain had to turn and turn in the sea outside until the steam was completely used up. Now, of course, it is no longer so in external life, but in the inner soul and spiritual state it is so. The Oriental educated is basically in front of the Western intellectual culture as that Japanese captain on his warship, whose device for releasing the steam he did not understand. There is a huge abyss between the inner configuration of this Oriental and Occidental spiritual life. And as difficult as it is for the Westerner to truly and honestly find his way into the Oriental spiritual life, so difficult it is for the Oriental to find his way into the Western spiritual life.

This is why it has come about that this has now become particularly difficult for us in Central Europe, who, I would like to say, are wedged between oriental and occidental intellectual life. What I have just explained to you about oriental intellectual life is basically a characteristic of ancient oriental intellectual life. What can still be found of it today and which is already in a state of transition to a new metamorphosis is basically only a final offshoot. Only for those who understand something of these things does this offshoot point to what oriental spiritual life actually was. But we, insofar as we ourselves belong to the West, have long lived off what came to us from this oriental spiritual life. One should not say that the event of Golgotha itself came from oriental spiritual life. It took place in the Orient, but it is a fact that took place for all of humanity. But what has allowed the West to understand the mystery of Golgotha so far, out of the human soul and spiritual condition, came from oriental tradition. And our way of thinking about the mystery of Golgotha in a Christian way is, for those who can observe such things impartially, the final result of what we have inherited from the East.

Our normal culture, our everyday culture today, still draws on currents from the Orient and has not yet produced new approaches to understanding the event of Golgotha and other transcendental phenomena in a new way. But what has become of that which in the Orient is already in decline, but which there is still a corresponding element to today's Oriental, what has it become with us throughout Europe and as far as the European outposts, as far as America? It has become a mere phrase. We can show how what we still have in our soul veins for the purpose of understanding the supersensible, and what has been absorbed into these soul veins through ancient oriental spiritual currents, to which we have not yet added anything new from our ordinary everyday culture, has become a mere phrase at important points. Anyone who really follows our spiritual and soul life today will have to say to themselves: Much, infinitely much of this intellectual and spiritual life is nothing more than a phrase, has lost its content. We still think in words that have been handed down to us either directly from the oriental language element or that have been modeled on it. But it has become a phrase, and to a large extent our intellectual life has become a phrase. We utter words that once had a grandiose meaning in the ancient oriental spiritual culture, but in our mouths, in our minds, in our hearts they have become mere phrases.

People today do not feel this strongly enough, and that is the misfortune of our time. For although party programmes are born out of empty phrases, and worldviews of a phrase-like nature are also born out of phrases, out of phrases, however, fruitful deeds and ideas for the real further development of humanity will never arise. You can agitate with phrases, but you cannot create anything with phrases. We look to the oriental spiritual life with its heritage for us and say to ourselves: It has become a phrase, what was lived there as a spiritual world. And we now look to that which - we have been able to characterize it to some extent - is the most essential of Western spiritual life: the mechanistic element. How can this be sensed when it is no longer sensed with the same vitality of spiritual life as it once was, and when it is only sensed vaguely? Can we deny that what we have become accustomed to, that 700 to 750 million people on earth are replaced by machine power, can we deny that this dominates our social thoughts, our state thoughts, that it has entered into our heads - can we deny this?

There have, however, been exceptions: people within Western civilization who have felt this in a profound way, and again we may refer to a significant creation by the Austrian poet Robert Hamerling, to his “Homunculus”. In this book, written in the 1880s, he attempts to sketch the picture of a human being whose entire spiritual and mental life and nature is outgrowing modern mechanistic culture. He tried to characterize the way of thinking that arises from it, the peculiar form of selfish striving. All this Robert Hamerling tries to draw in his “Homunculus”. He draws the man who has no soul because the mechanistic way of thinking has driven out his entire soul; he draws a man who has outgrown the practices of this mechanistic culture. This man becomes a trillionaire. And Hamerling foresaw many things that were not yet an external reality at the time; he foresaw air travel and all the things that were not yet reality in this way. Like a homunculus, like an artificially mechanistic human being in his soul and spiritual life, so the Western man Robert Hamerling appeared. Not like someone who builds his life out of spiritual impulses, out of the supersensible that reveals itself in the innermost part of man, but rather someone who is built by the mechanistic powers of the outside world, this is how Robert Hamerling characterizes the type of normal Western man as a homunculus.

And one must say: Especially when one looks at something that vividly describes the feelings that today's educated Oriental has about the life of the Occident, one feels these Orientals oneself, for example Tagore, who with all the fervor of a spiritual worldview again he looks at everything he can observe in the Western world in terms of its view of nature, its view of the state, and its social ideas; he describes it in such a way that one says to oneself – only with the nuances of how an Oriental speaks –: this educated Oriental of today describes all this as the homunculus. The Westerner carries in his spiritual and intellectual life the echoes of what was once great in the Orient, as a phrase. The Oriental perceives what Western culture has produced as greatest so far as Homunculus culture.

I know very well that people who prefer comfort would say that these things are exaggerated. But that is only because they do not have the courage to call a spade a spade. It is, however, necessary to honestly take stock of the soul and spiritual life. And in doing so, we have pointed out what actually characterizes this Western culture, something that must be pointed out particularly in our day. Is it not palpable that conditions have developed out of the last world catastrophe that make it finally clear, even to those who are slow on the uptake, what the unbiased could see long before 1914? Is it not obvious that the Anglo-American essence, in the form of the English and Anglo-American empires, is spreading over the earth with its homunculus nature to a large extent?

I am not saying this because I am now speaking to you here in one part of Germany. I have said similar things in recent weeks and for a long time to the members of the Anglo-American population themselves. I have calmly told members of the Anglo-American population: Basically, the Germans living in Central Europe have it better than you do, because the fact that things have developed as they have is a great deal of the responsibility taken from the Germans - another is coming! that responsibility, which has now passed to the Anglo-American element. Today, people on this side are less concerned with whether that – yes, how should one put it? – an insightful Englishman recently called it “robbery together of the various areas of the world” to me; perhaps it is more appropriate to speak with this expression than to take a national German term – people are less concerned with this robbery together; they are more concerned with the fact that this is a fact that is taking its course, but that those who still have any human feeling left in their breasts in those countries must feel the huge responsibility for the further development of humanity that weighs on them because they are within this expansion of the Anglo-American world.

But how do we see what is actually the essence of this world culture represented by the Anglo-American world with its mechanistic character? Do you not think that a member of the spiritual science in particular would like to rail against this mechanistic culture in a reactionary way? Do you not think that I would like to express any reactionary thoughts about conjuring up old institutions, or something that would like to eliminate a single achievement of this newer culture, even for a moment? This is there with the same necessity as the spiritual culture once was. The necessities of world development must be duly observed. But what is the essential? Just as in the Orient there was once a great striving for the higher human being, for that which can reveal itself in man as the spiritual, as the divine human being, so as over there in the Orient this rising up to become a spiritual human being finally ended in decadence, so that today it is something that grows out of martyr-like impulses, something that even today, in many areas of the Orient, confuses the social life based on spiritual principles with the so-called social life introduced from Western Europe. We see that What was once great in the Orient is no more, has lost its true inner impulse; it is the past, and the breath of the past weighs heavily on the entire spiritual life and culture of the Orient. And it is the decadence of the Occident, the expression of all good spirits of Occidental humanity, when today many people are found who seek to aid their Occidental intellectual life by absorbing Oriental essence. Just as the past hovers over what is outwardly there in the present in the Orient - as grotesque as that may seem - so the future hovers over what Western mechanistic culture is.

I am not talking about Western culture as a reactionary; I am not talking as if all that is missing from Western culture is the icing on the cake. But the way it spreads through the mechanistic subhuman in 700 to 750 million copies, it is a fact that today we still do not have a spiritual and soul life that can fully engage with impact and momentum in a world that is mechanistic. And it is my belief, which I have often characterized here not as mere belief but as knowledge arising out of spiritual science. It is my belief that what is called anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, what has been presented as this spiritual science for two decades, arises from the same spiritual power that, when it turns outward to the mere temporal and spatial and sensual, becomes external mechanics, which culminates in magnificent technology. Such a spiritual life, which creates our machines and mechanistic culture, would have destroyed the people who once created the spiritual culture of the Orient out of the spiritual life of the Orient. It would have been impossible to connect it to their way of spiritual life. It was not for them to have such an external mechanistic life around them; it is for us in the West to have such a life around us, to apply our intelligence, our entire human powers of mind and soul, in such a way that we have the inner strength to master all that appears in our mechanistic, electrical cultures.

From the same spiritual configuration, through elevation from the sensory to the supersensible, there must arise the power of the human soul that I have described in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” and in the second part of my “Occult Science” — the power that leads us into the supersensible worlds in a way that was never known in the Orient. But with this, the humanity of the West is only at the beginning; only the starting point exists for it, and still few people today realize that it is possible, indeed necessary, to ascend from the same spirit that permeates the laws of our machines, that works in our electrical engineering, from the same spirit, to ascend by inner spiritual development along such strict inner soul paths as only the strictest science ascends to its results, to that knowledge where one sees in the same way, only in a different way, as the oriental man once saw in supersensible worlds. We must arrive at a spiritual science that has grown through the whole nature of the inner human spirit and soul life, through every kind of scientific and cognitive striving of the modern era in the West. We must not go back to what has often become a cliché in the religions of belief, not back to that cheap use of old phrases to characterize the new spiritual science as well. This new spiritual science must be created with the same seriousness, with the same force — only in a spiritual way — as the external science.

This is what happens when we try to put together the assets and liabilities of our time in a reasonable way. If we continue to build even our social views only on the foundations that the external sensory natural science has given us, then we only get our items on the right side of our soul and spirit account book, then with such a sociological or historical view we only understand what is based in our social and historical life. For with external natural science we comprehend only the dead, and if we apply this natural science of the dead to what is contained in the social life or in the historical life, we also comprehend there only what is dying. That is why the new social theories, which are now also taking hold of reality, after having been merely critiques of the existing, are so stifling for real life, because they are modeled on the dead. We shall only have a real social outlook when we draw it from the same sources from which, as I have described, we must draw our supersensible life today. We see only as a passive item that which comes from the merely mechanistic view of nature. But we also see as mere passive items all that is reproduced in the centuries-old creeds that have lost their power, for present-day humanity needs the power of Christ more than any other. But it needs a new path to this Christ. Everything that leads openly or veiled, on old paths, that stands on the side of the passive items. We need the active items. These are the ones that will come out of a renewal of the spiritual view of the world. Today it is still too difficult for many, especially in Western countries, where that curious spiritual direction comes from, where the path into the spiritual world is not sought in the strong powers of the soul itself, but where, in the manner of an imitation of scientific experiments, the gods or spirits or even the souls of the dead are induced to make an occasional visit to the physical-sensual world and to show themselves in the costume of the physical-sensual world. Spiritism makes such an occasionally made theatrical visit. This is precisely the opposite of the real search for the spirit. If we really want to search for the spirit today, then it must not consist in our lives being outwardly materialistic and us not looking for spiritual beings anywhere in the outer world, but only occasionally, as if in a theater, suddenly receiving spiritual beings on a visit, so that they prove to us that there is a spiritual world that we do not have to worry about. What have even naturalists of the Lombroso variety done? Natural science remained spiritless to them; they were interested in finding something in a spiritualistic way outside of nature, so that they could then pursue all the more materialistically what human life and human environment is. But we need a spiritual deepening that can truly penetrate into all material things, that can accompany our lives at every turn.

To describe to you such a spiritual view of life, which is capable in its ideas of forming deeds that at the same time become morals out of the strength of your soul, and out of your soul strength can at the same time produce religious devotion, to show you that such a spiritual science exists in what I have now been allowed to present to you for two decades, that will continue to be my task. Today I wanted to point out how this spiritual striving must be seen as an active element in the present day, in contrast to the many passive elements in our spiritual and mental life. And should we not, as we are wedged in between the East and the West as members of the German people, the sorely tried and sorely afflicted German people, should we not be able to find the path to new spiritual seeking from what was present in the spirituality of our great spiritual ancestors? Whatever happens in the external political sphere, if we have the strength to turn to this spiritual path, we will be able to say something to the Orient in the future about a spiritual life that it once had in a different form but has lost. We will be able to say something to the West if it is possible for us to say to the West something of a spiritual life that will one day be able to respond to all those demands that are so depressing in a merely mechanistic culture, then we will fulfill a task in the heart of Europe if we seek such a path.

It seems as if the catastrophic events have revealed something strange about the Germans. Indeed, on the one hand the Germans have also participated in allowing themselves to be flooded with the still premature economic life of the West, have participated in the lameness of turning to the Orient when it comes to seeking spiritual renewal again. But it seems – I say it seems, for I could say what would be better for me: it is so – it seems that the Germans, even in the time when they strove in a materialistic way, have also proved that they have no talent for materialism. This talent must be sought elsewhere in the world. If we recognize out of our need that the Germans have no talent for materialism, then perhaps this realization will give us the impetus to enter into spirituality. But then, out of this necessity, the impulse will also come to us for our own spiritual striving, not for borrowing from the Orient, and perhaps, out of that purest, most filtered form of thought striving that we found in the Germans at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries, spiritual work will arise for the whole development of humanity in the future through correct recognition of the roots of German strength. Whatever else the destiny of the German people may be, we can say that for everything we can achieve by going back to the roots of our spiritual and soul forces, we can say that the German spirit has not finished, it wants to live into future deeds, into future concerns, and hopefully, from this spiritual point of view, it still has much, very much, to say to the future of humanity, in addition to many other things.

Two years ago, as the catastrophic events of recent times were approaching their decision, the circumstances revealed that the friends of our School of Spiritual Science in Dornach wanted to change the name of this School of Spiritual Science. The intention was to express how, out of an awareness of German intellectual life, they wanted to courageously oppose everything that might arise against this intellectual life in the present or in the future. In those days — and you will feel the significance of this naming — that building, which is also intended to reflect in its artistic design what lives in anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, was called the School of Spiritual Science at the Goetheanum. And so this Goetheanum stands on one of the most north-westerly hills in Switzerland as a symbol of a truly international spirit, but of a spirit that wants to have that significant element in itself that can be linked to the name Goethe. And so it will be allowed, in spiritual scientific considerations, as they are practiced here, to occasionally recall Goethe's.

Today I will apparently take something far-fetched as a starting point, but this apparent far-fetchedness may be suitable to point out a characteristic of the spiritual science meant here.

It may be known how Goethe, after taking up his duties in Weimar, devoted himself intensively to scientific observations out of certain contexts of his life there. And when, after having conducted the most diverse experiments and studies on plants and animals in Weimar and in the neighboring town of Jena, he had traveled to Italy in the mid-1880s and had occupied himself with all the natural sciences as he wandered from region to region, he once wrote about the ideas that he now had to form about the connection between plants and the earth. He wrote to his friends in Weimar that he had now fully grasped the idea of the primal plant, the plant that he was convinced was a concept that could only be grasped in the mind, that was something that all individual plant forms were based on, but that was only a spiritually grasped unified form. And he wrote a remarkable sentence to his friends in Weimar at the time: With this image in the soul, one must be able to recognize the plant world in such a way that, if one modifies this image - Goethe called it a sensual-supersensory image - in the appropriate way, by giving it a concrete form, one must inwardly create something in the spirit that has the possibility of becoming external reality. With this primal plant in one's soul, one must have grasped plant life so deeply that one could invent a fantasy plant that would have just as much justification for being an external reality as the plants that grow outside in the meadows and in the forests and on the mountains.

What did Goethe mean and how did he feel when he uttered such a thing at the moment when he believed himself to be at the pinnacle of his insight in a certain field of knowledge? Do we not see from this saying, especially when we consider everything that lived in Goethe's nature, that Goethe strove for a knowledge of nature that, as he puts it, is spiritual, that is, a knowledge in which not only the senses, not only the intelligence, are involved, but a knowledge in which the whole of the human being's spiritual nature is involved? But don't we also see how Goethe strives for such knowledge, which can delve into the essence of things, which knows itself so intimately with things that, by creating the idea of things within itself, it can be clear to itself that in this creative power, which lives and is productive in the soul, the same lives and moves as in the growth force of the plant outside? Goethe was clear about this: when the plant grows out there, when it develops leaf by leaf, node by node, blossom by blossom, growth force lives in it. But Goethe wanted to connect with this growth force that lives out there; he wanted to let it live in his own soul. Something should live in what he created as cognitive ideas about things, something that is the same as what lies out there in the things.

Such knowledge strives for an incredible intimacy of shared experience with external things. Today, we still underestimate the impact that Goethe's ascent to such ideas had on the quest for knowledge in humanity; for, basically, we live in a completely different era of knowledge. However, the anthroposophically oriented spiritual science referred to here wants to be Goetheanism, that is, not Goethe science in the way that this or that Goethe collection does with what Goethe said or wrote, but in the sense that that it seizes what lived in Goethe in an initial, elementary way, but which has an inner vitality to bear fruit again and again, which today is something quite different than it could be in 1832, when Goethe died. A spirit lived in Goethe that continued to develop, even after Goethe was dead to this earth. Today we can speak of a Goetheanism of 1919. It does not need to reheat what Goethe himself said word for word, but it must work in his spirit. And one can best work in his spirit if one takes what he tried to do for his time almost a century and a half ago in a small area, that of plants and a little of animals, and only in terms of outer forms, and makes it the impulse for a comprehensive world view, and above all, includes the human being in this comprehensive world view. But in doing so, one professes a Goetheanism that must have a transforming effect on everything that today wants to grow from the most respected parts of our quest for knowledge, from the natural sciences, into a world view.

Perhaps I may, with some reference to what I have already said in previous lectures, once more characterize the spiritual development of civilized humanity over the last four centuries. What have we seen as the main force in human development and in the quest for knowledge? We have seen the rise of intellectual and rational life, and even if we have experienced great triumphs in the field of natural science, we must still say: Although natural science describes external facts to us in abundance , the way in which we, as human beings, approach the external world, namely how we form ideas in our souls about external nature and about life, is steeped in intellectualism through and through.

If one takes the intellectualistic moment in human nature as one's guiding principle, one arrives at something very spiritual. Our abstract ideas and concepts are, of course, very spiritual within. As they have asserted themselves over the last four centuries, they are spiritual in themselves, but they are not capable of becoming anything other than mirror images of external sensual facts. That is the characteristic feature of our intellectual and spiritual life: we have gradually developed abstract, very fine ideas and concepts that have filtered into the spiritual, but they are ideas and concepts that only dare to approach the external sensual reality, that do not have the strength within themselves to grasp anything in life other than the external sensual reality. Those who today strain their soul in this intellectualistic direction often believe that they are pursuing the paths of their research and thinking quite unconditionally and impartially. But this thinking and research, which moves along such intellectualistic paths, is by no means independent of historical development. And it is interesting to see how many people who call themselves philosophers or scientists today believe that they can somehow justify their research in this or that way on the basis of human nature or the essence of the world, whereas the way they research is only the result of thousands of years of human education.

If we go back first – and today I can only give a general characterization – through the centuries after Christ to ancient Greece, we find in the last centuries of pre-Christian Greece the first echoes of that intellectualistic thinking to which we have completely surrendered in the Western civilized world since the 15th century. In ancient Greece, we find the emergence of what was long called dialectics. This dialectics is the inner mobilization of a thought element that increasingly tends towards abstraction. But anyone who looks at Greek life impartially will see that this life of the intellect, which in Plato is still very spiritualized and in Aristotle is already purely logical, goes back to a fully substantial soul-filled life. And if one goes back to the earliest times of Greek thought and cultural development, as Nietzsche did – grandiosely, even if somewhat pathologically – then one finds that in what Nietzsche called the tragic age of the Greeks, the intellectual life does not yet include the abstract dialectical, logical element, nor is there a turning to the merely external world. Instead, this spiritual life still contains something that can only arise from the innermost nature of man itself, which, as if from within itself, bears the essence of the world in the most diverse forms. And if we trace the origin of what arose in Greece further back, what was later filtered down to mere logic, then in the Orient we find what I recently pointed out, what could be called a mysterious knowledge of the mysteries that is accessible to today's humanity — but only to today's humanity. It is a kind of knowledge that is gained in a way that modern humanity can no longer even imagine in its normal life. In those schools of the ancient Orient, which were simultaneously schools and art institutions and religious sites, the individual did not merely have something to learn or to explore intellectually. Rather, before he was even introduced to the secrets of existence, he had to undergo a transformation of his entire being. In these mysteries of the Orient, it was taken for granted that man, in the way he lives his outer life, could not penetrate to the secrets of existence. Therefore, one had to lead man, through strict discipline of his entire being, to that state in which he became a different being, and to this other being one then imparted what was called the content of knowledge. Once upon a time, in the East, knowledge was built up out of a rich, historically no longer existing, but intellectually verifiable, soul-spiritually concretely shaped life. This knowledge then spread to Greece, where it was filtered into dialectics , to logic, to mere intelligence, and which then was filtered further and further until it became the mere intellectualism in which we have been immersed in modern civilization since the middle of the 15th century.

Without directing the eye of the soul unreservedly to such things as I have characterized them, one cannot look into the various cultural currents and balances of culture in today's existence, one cannot come to fruitful views on what is necessary for humanity today. Today it is a matter of looking unreservedly at what has become, and from that recognizing in which spiritual worlds we actually stand in it. If we follow the way in which a spiritual life from the Orient that was more or less foreign to us was transplanted to Greece and filtered into our intellectualism, then we come to the question: How did this spiritual life actually develop?

This spiritual life could not have developed in any other way than by being bound in a certain way to something natural in the human being. If we examine what has actually been working and weaving in human nature so that this spiritual life could develop through the transformation of the human being described, we must say that the fact of heredity, the fact of blood inheritance, plays a major role in this. And we can only study how the development of knowledge has taken place in humanity if we extract it from the knowledge of the fact of blood development. Therefore, the knowledge in the times to which I have referred, in order to explain the origin of our present knowledge, is bound to individual peoples, to individual races, to blood connections, to hereditary conditions. Knowledge arises differentiated according to the individual peoples. What had to be taken into account when the pupil was brought in from the outer life into the mystery school of which I have spoken, and what had to be taken into account in his education, was: What blood, what temperament in the blood, what gift based on the blood lived in him? And this natural element was developed until everything that could arise from it emerged in the knowledge of the person concerned.

Anyone who really knows the developmental history of humanity, who does not cling to — I may use this word again — the fable conveniale-like, what is called history today, but to the real developmental history of humanity, will find that this bondage of the human soul and spiritual life to blood ties and blood facts radically ceases around the middle of the 15th century for the Western civilized world. Something begins to set the tone that can never be bound to blood in the development of man. It is very interesting to see how everything that has been artistically developed since the 15th century in modern humanity emerges from the sources of the human soul, which have nothing to do with the natural and elemental aspects of even the greatest intellectual achievements of earlier times. This may be misunderstood in many circles. But anyone who really wants to understand what lives in Aeschylus, what lives in an ancient Greek philosopher like Heraclitus or Anaxagoras, anyone who wants to comprehend what lived in those ancient civilizations must realize that something lives in them that is bound to the blood of certain races. The Greeks were still aware that all their spiritual being was bound to what their blood produced as a spiritual blossom. This can be seen by studying Greek works of art with any sense, for example, the typical sculpted figures. If you try to understand the nature of these figures, you will find that three types live in the realm of Greek sculpture: first the satyr type, then the Mercury type, which appears particularly in all Mercury heads, but then the type that we find in Zeus, in Hera, in Athena, in Apollo. If we carefully compare the shape of the nose, the shape of the ears, everything about these three types, it will be obvious how the Greeks wanted to represent in the satyr type and in the Mercury type the subordinate humanity within which, as the blood-related superior humanity, that Aryanism had spread, which the Greeks gave their image to in the head of Zeus. One would like to say: It expresses the consciousness of how the Greek felt his spirituality bound to the blood-related, elementary in the development of mankind. This gradually petered out and ceased to have any significance for humanity by the middle of the 15th century. Since that time, the intellectual element, the element of imagination, has been alive in what is produced in the normal life of the spirit, so that everything that arises in the soul, the artist of the soul, has nothing more to do with what surges in the blood, what the blood produces. Today even trivial philosophers have to admit that what lives in intellectualized ideas is not bound to the body, least of all to the blood, and in any case has nothing to do with what played such a great role in the old spirituality: with heredity, with the fact of blood relationship within heredity.

Since the middle of the 15th century, something has emerged in human development that is, so to speak, a very thin spiritual, just merely intellectual, but it educates this modern humanity to independence from everything merely natural, which, however, also removes this humanity from everything that was previously felt to be human. And a strange, I might say tragic, thing occurred in this development of modern humanity. It had to rise to an experience that is independent of the natural, elemental, but it could no longer understand itself with what it received in the soul. In that ancient spirituality, in that spiritual knowledge which was still based on blood, one had, together with the inner knowledge, a knowledge of human nature and essence itself; now one had risen to an abstract spirituality, which can experience great triumphs in natural science, but which cannot possibly go into the essence of man himself, which remains far removed from the essence of man.

But that had another consequence. If we look back at this development, which I have characterized as being bound to the natural, elementary, and turn our gaze not to the nature of knowledge, but to what happens in history in terms of good or evil, sympathetic or antipathetic deeds, we find that these deeds are connected to natural cognition, to the natural experience of the spirit, and are the expression of the natural experience of the spirit: Man experiences himself through his blood, rises through his blood to spirituality, experiences what his blood gives him in powerful images, in imaginations that are representations of the spiritual experienced, and what he experiences in his soul passes over into his whole being. And the outflow of what pulses from his perceptions, from his sensed perceptions, sensed ideas, becomes his deeds.

And today? We have arrived at a point of culmination. We have three to four centuries of intellectual life behind us. We look around us in the modern civilized world and find everywhere an intensive development of intellectual research, the most diverse ideas, but all these ideas are so abstract and so far removed from life that they cannot be transformed into impulses for action. When we see the general spiritual slumber in which people find themselves today, from which they are always and forever unwilling to admit how much we are on a slippery slope and how much we need to draw to draw from our soul life the strength to find the impulses that can lead to action. This reminds one of a saying that was used in earlier centuries to call to the Germans, who were already found to be sleepy at the time: “Sleep, Michel, sleep, in the garden a sheep is walking, in the garden a little Pfäflelin is walking, it will take you to heaven. Sleep, Michel, sleep!” Yes, that is the attitude of many today: listening to some abstract religious teaching that has no connection with the immediate external reality and life in this reality. We have lost the connection between the external knowledge of nature, which we grasp only intellectually, and what lives in our soul and what was included in the old, blood-based knowledge of nature, the view of the essence of man.

I know how reluctant people are today to listen to such characterizations, which they regard as something outlandish, as fantasies that seek to exaggerate things. Nevertheless, it must be said: unless we listen to what comes from this quarter, we will not arrive at fruitful ideas about a reorganization or a new structure, which seems so necessary today if we observe things impartially. The spiritual and the soul — well, our school philosophers still talk about something soul-like in relation to the external world; but that clear grasp of the human being as body, soul and spirit is no longer part of our Western way of looking at things. There we can perceive a very remarkable fact. As I have already explained in other lectures, we can only come to terms with the essence of the human being if we are able to divide the human being into body, soul and spirit. For the body is what provides the tool for the spiritual powers between birth and death, the spirit is what makes use of this tool, and the soul is what is neither body nor spirit, but what connects the two. Without understanding this trinity, one cannot penetrate the essence of man. But even outstanding philosophers speak of it: man consists of body and soul. They believe they are pursuing unprejudiced science. Yes, unprejudiced science! They only do not know: In intellectual life we are dependent on the entire oriental development. Thus, in our looking at body and soul, we are dependent on the 8th General Council of Constantinople in 869, where the dogma was established that as a Christian one should not believe in body, soul and spirit, but only in body and soul, and one should believe that the soul has some spiritual properties. This has since become a dogma of the Catholic Church, it has become a commandment for those who have searched externally. And today people believe that they are pursuing an unbiased search that they are spinning out of themselves, while they are only following the old education that was inaugurated by the general council at Constantinople in 869, where the spirit was abolished.

All this has contributed to our spiritual life becoming so abstract, so intellectualistic, that there is no longer anything in it - but humanity is subject to a development, and there can no longer be anything in it - that lived in the old spiritual life and gave impulses to the will. And a time would have to come in which man would appear completely paralyzed in relation to his deeds if we retained only materialism within our Western intellectual life. From the course of Western intellectual development, it must be felt that a new fertilization of this intellectual development is necessary; that we must regain what we have lost as old blood from another side. It was right for humanity to undergo an intellectual development independent of blood for three to four centuries. In this way it educated itself to freedom, to a certain emancipation from the merely natural. But what we have developed in terms of intellectualism must in turn be impregnated, it must in turn be filled in our being with a kind of knowledge that can flow into human action, that can soul and spiritualize the human being at will. Such spiritual knowledge, a modern spiritual knowledge that wants nothing to do with a revival of the old oriental spiritual knowledge, is what anthroposophically oriented spiritual science strives for. And in this sense, it now seeks to achieve that intimacy with everything that lives in the universe, not only for plant and animal forms, but especially for humans, whereby one can say: the forces that live outside enter into our being, they awaken in our being itself, and by recognizing them, the growth forces of nature and the spiritual world live in us, above all our own human growth forces. So when we impregnate our intellectual life with spiritual experiences, we stand in modern civilization in such a way that not only something blood-related, but also something seen in the free spiritual lives in us, which in turn can have an inspiring and invigorating effect on our life of action.

It is true that the human life of will and deed would have to weaken if it did not receive the impact of what can be seen in the spirit. It is fair to say today, for example: Yes, but the insights of this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science are gained in the inner, contemplative life! Of course they are won in the inwardly contemplative life, just as, after all, chemical knowledge is also won, closed off from the application of chemical achievements in the practical world, in secluded laboratories and study rooms. What we need to do is to gain knowledge that can shed light on the human being, that can form the content of a true spiritual knowledge today, in which, again, but in a very different way than in the ancient mysteries, the human being transforms himself and comes to gain a spiritual view, as he has a sensory view here in the sensory world through his sensory organs and an intellectual view through his mind. This intellectual modesty, of which I spoke in the penultimate lecture here, must be developed so that one says to oneself: just as a five-year-old child must first be educated to learn to read, so too must a person who is involved in external life first transform himself in order to approach the real secrets of the natural and spiritual world. And it is only through renunciation, through voluntarily borne suffering, that real knowledge of the human being can be gained. You can see this from the fact that it is necessary for the truly cognizant person, the person penetrating into the spiritual world, no longer to look at the world as if with different eyes, to hear as if with different ears, to think as if with different thoughts, but to look at the world in an independent spiritual organism. But between birth and death one is not adapted to this world, into which one enters; one enters into a world, to which one stands as a stranger. This non-adaptation, this being placed into a world, to which one, insofar as one makes use of one's body, does not belong, is something that must be characterized by a spiritual-soul pain, which of course can only be recognized through experience. Through such and similar things, which certainly lie far removed from the outer storms and floods of life, one must penetrate into the spiritual world. But what is gained through the spiritual science meant here is slandered when one says: This is a mysticism that is unworldly; when one says: This is something that is alien to life or hostile to life. No, what is gained in spiritual research, albeit apart from life, is something that, when presented to humanity, is knowledge, a realization that can be grasped by common sense, but then impels the human being in such a way that it can become the bearer of his life of will and action.

What knowledge does spiritual science oriented towards anthroposophy strive for in its desire to develop a comprehensive Goetheanism? It strives for a knowledge of the spirit that can be the foundation for a strong life of will and deed. Our world can only be helped if that which can be seen out of the spirit enters into our life of will and deed. Intellectual knowledge and its application, knowledge of nature, is something contemplative, it is something that can at most be transferred into technology, into the extra-human. But what is seen out of the spirit will become an impulse to steer social life, this social life that is becoming so difficult, in truly salutary ways.

One could reflect a little and consider whether such characteristically spiritual scientific demands should not be taken into account after all, when one sees the immense suffering caused to humanity by the fact that so much is going wrong in social life today, that Leninism and Trotskyism and the like are introduced into social life. These are nothing but the intellectual poison which, during the four centuries, was admittedly needed for the liberation of humanity, but could only be used as long as the old social form was not yet affected by it. The moment it is affected, the poisonous effect of mere intellectualism in social life must show itself. It will begin to show itself in terrible manifestations, and it will show itself more and more. It is a terrible illusion when people believe that they are not just at the beginning in this area, but at a point where one can watch calmly. No, we are at the beginning, and healing can only come if it comes from the spirit. Spiritual knowledge must become the foundation. Instead of letting off all kinds of sometimes well-meant declamations, for example about the way in which this spiritual science has nothing to do with religion, it would be better to look the phenomena of life in the eye without bias.

So I was told that here in Stuttgart a lecture was given on anthroposophically oriented spiritual science in which it was said: All kinds of things may be brought to light by clairvoyant powers, of which spiritual science speaks; but this has nothing to do with the simple childlikeness that is said to be effective in religion, in the religious understanding of Christianity as well. This is how one can declaim, how one can believe one is allowed to speak when one is abandoned of all spirits of historical observation, of all spirits that explain the development of humanity. If one is not abandoned by them, then the spirit of human development proclaims loudly and clearly that this abstract talk of an abstract unifying of something in man, which one cannot define either, with an undefinable word, or Christ, that this enthusiasm for a childlike element has led us into the social misery in which we find ourselves. At first the spiritual and intellectual element was monopolized by the confessions. This gave rise to a natural science in which there is no spirit, which presents the image of nature in a spiritless way. And by admitting that all kinds of spiritual realities can be revealed to humanity through spiritual science, it is now demanded that it should be confessed that in this spiritual reality nothing is alive of what man should seek as his divine. Yes, the materialism of natural science has successfully managed to de-spiritualize nature. This religiosity will increasingly lead to the de-divinization of the spirit. And then we will have a de-spiritualized nature, a de-divinized spirit and a religion without content. This religion without content will not inspire any deeds. Spiritual knowledge must bring about deeds, otherwise our moral impulses for our Western intellectual life are in the air. Our moral impulses strive from within us in a completely different way than intellectual knowledge. Anyone who is able to look at themselves impartially knows that the intellectually conceived, for example, scientific knowledge in the life of the soul is something quite different from those impulses that arise within us as moral drives, as moral intuitions, and demand that we introduce them into life. But this modern intellectualism, through its intellectualism, has no bridge between its knowledge of nature and its moral life. What has become of the moral worldview? If we disregard a religious worldview that has now become more or less meaningless, if we look at those honest people who build a worldview out of science, which is certainly highly one-sided but still honest , we have to say: they imagine that some kind of connection between vortex phenomena arose from a Kant-Laplacean cosmic fog, and that little by little what we now call our world with natural beings and human beings arose from it. But moral ideals and moral intuitions arise in the human being. If we believe only in the natural context, then these moral ideals, these moral intuitions, are merely what emerges, what is valid only as long as people say so. Many old instincts from that human development are still alive, which actually came to an end in the 15th century. If these instincts were not to live on, if they were to be eradicated and nothing else were to enter into human spiritual life, then one would have to limit oneself to the external documentation of what we call moral ideals. And instead of feeling inwardly bound to our moral ideals, instead of feeling bound to the spiritual life that rises above all physical life, instead of this, at most, one might find it honorable to be thought a moral person by other people, one might find it opportune not to violate what is established by law in the state. In short, if our intellectuality remains, that glowing of a spiritualized soul should also disappear from the human moral life. For reality can only be given to our moral life when spirit-perception again impregnates and permeates all that we have acquired for ourselves through three to four centuries. By no means should this be criticized in a reactionary way, but only the necessities should be emphasized. But what does this spiritual insight show us, what is the moral of our spiritual insight? This spiritual insight recognizes external nature, it sees in it, in an initial sense, what reasonable geologists - I want to speak comparatively - assume for the geological formation of the earth. Such geologists say: a large part of our geological development is already in a state of decline. In many regions of the earth, we are walking over dead matter when we walk across the ground. But such dead matter is much more universally present than merely in the geological; it also permeates our cultural life, and in more recent times we have acquired a natural science that is directed only towards the dead, the inanimate, because we are gradually surrounded by the dying in our culture. We get to know what is dying out, what comes from ancient times of development and what is reaching its last phase in the development of the earth. But then we can compare what is reaching its last phase there with what blossoms in us as our moral ideals and intuitions. What are these moral ideals and intuitions? These moral ideals and intuitions, when they arise in us, reveal themselves to what is here called anthroposophically oriented spiritual science in such a way that one sees in them something that could be compared to the germ for the next plant contained in a plant blossom, while what dies off in the blossom is the inheritance from the previous plant. We see our moral life sprouting up within us. By experiencing the natural, we experience what has developed from ancient times to the earth; by feeling the moral ideals flourish, we experience what, when the earth is once thrown off like a slag corpse, will go out with the human souls into a cosmic, immortal life, just as the individual human being, when he discards his corpse, enters into spiritual-soul existence. Thus we see the germs of future earth metamorphoses sprouting within us as we unfold our moral life.

If you are able to take such an idea, which may certainly still seem fantastic to today's humanity, in its full seriousness and in its entire depth, then think what will become of a concept such as moral responsibility! You say to yourself: What are you, human? You are a result of the past and of the whole development of the earth. As such you are going downhill. Your moral sense is awakening within you; it is the germ of the future, which now seems unreal, so much so that we consider it to be merely abstract. But it is the first beginning of a future rich reality. And one should still say to oneself: If you do not practise this morality, if you do not connect with it, then you sin not only against your fellow man, but also against the spiritual worlds. For they have placed in you the seed through your morality to grow into the future of the world. If you are immoral, you exclude yourself from the future of humanity. In addition to the strength that comes from the knowledge of the spirit for the will and the life of deeds, such seriousness, I would even say cosmic, universally oriented human responsibility, can still be added to the life of morals. We can feel: In ancient Greece, the horizon of the educated was limited. One was a citizen of the country. Then came the newer times. America was discovered, and the globular shape of the earth was rediscovered through direct travel around the earth, through experience. Man became a citizen of the world. Once again, we have progressed. Mankind has passed through the stage of being a citizen of the country and of the earth. Today, it is called upon to become a citizen of the world in the truest sense of the word, that is, to feel itself as a citizen of those worlds that are outside our earth, but which belong to it as part of a whole, and to be a citizen of those future worlds to which I have alluded.

In this way, an ethical view can be rooted in spiritual knowledge in a new way. Only when such strength permeates our moral life will we be able to transform the moral doctrine into a socially effective view of life.

Approaches such as those outlined here have been attempted in something like the threefold social organism and in something like my book The Core Issues of the Social Question. Many people consider these to be abstractions, utopias, and yet they are the most real, because they are based on that new understanding of reality that cannot be achieved by any natural science, since it is too much affected by intellectualistic life. This intellectual life has gradually led man to turn in on himself. Today we can see remarkable examples of how man, no longer comprehending the human being from his external knowledge of nature, has become egotistical. At the same time as intellectualism has entered into all outer and inner human life during the last three or four centuries, this intellectualism, this egoism has also seized religious life. Today, unfortunately, human education over the centuries has prepared the way for speaking about the immortality of the human soul only from a certain egoistic point of view. People today recoil from the thought that — as it is not a matter of course, but as it would be possible — the cessation of their spiritual and soul-life could occur if the corpse were returned to the earth. This contradicts what is left of the natural as a clear last thing; it contradicts a clear egoistic urge. One indulges in this egoistic impulse when one speaks, as one does under the compulsion of dogmas, only of the continuation of the human soul-life after death, which, of course, is fully substantiated by spiritual science; but one does not speak of the fact that our spiritual soul was in a spiritual world before our birth or conception. Before we descend into physical corporeality and take on the covering given to us by the inheritance of father and mother, we undergo a development in a spiritual-soul world just as we do here on earth. And just as our life after death is a continuation of our life here on earth, a development of the experiences we have had here, so the life we undergo between birth and death is a continuation of the life we had before birth.

This, for example, imposes great duties on the educator when he is fully aware of the responsibility that weighs on his soul, in that he has to develop that which has descended from eternal spiritual heights into a human body and, through the outer form and shell, expresses itself more and more from year to year. This is the other thing that can be added to the knowledge that accommodates egoism, which only takes into account the fact of the immortality of the human soul in the face of death, which is of course an established fact. This is the other side that spiritual science in particular must emphasize for the modern human being: life before birth or before conception and the continuation of that same life here. It is easy to become world-weary when one speaks only of the afterlife. Anyone who seriously considers the prenatal period will feel obliged - since the order of the world is such that the human being has to descend into physical existence - to make this an active one. For only in this way can we shape what we are seeking to shape if we know that we descend into physical existence through birth. While the mere prospect of what comes after death leads to the deadening of the soul and spirit in physical existence, the consciousness that we have descended into this physical-sensual existence as spirits must lead to the strengthening of our will, to the working through of our whole life. Human hopes for the future can only arise with certainty from spiritual insight if we are rooted in spirit with our insight, if we permeate and impregnate our intellectual nature with what spiritual science gives us. Then, in turn, the impulse of deed and the impulse of will can enter into our lives. And our life will need these spiritual impulses, for this life is a descending one. Former generations could still rely on their instincts. We can see that in the ancient Greeks, those who matured for public life only needed to develop their blood instincts. This will no longer be possible; education would have to disappear if we were to rely only on what the earth could still bring us from human instincts. Present-day Eastern European socialism relies on these instincts; it relies on a zero. One reality will be relied upon if the hope is raised that socialism should be built on a spiritual-scientific basis. However, such views as have been put forward here are not yet taken seriously in their full import, at least not by a large number of people. Some people do take them seriously, but only from a very particular point of view. For example, in our journal 'Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus' (Threefolding of the Social Organism), when I was still working in Dornach, I read how something that comes from a certain quarter is taken very seriously; and I read that a remarkable lecture was given there, I believe even accompanied by music which was based on something that appears like a program from a certain quarter, for example, in the “Stimmen der Zeit” [Voices of the Times] by the Jesuit Father Zimmermann, in almost every issue, and which produces just such reactions as the one that is said to have occurred here. It was said, and by a member of the cathedral chapter at that, that one could indeed inform oneself about what Steiner says from the writings of his opponents, because the writings that he himself writes and those of his followers are not allowed to be read by Catholics because the Pope has forbidden them. In fact, the Sacred Congregation of the Roman Church of July 18, 1919, issued a general edict prohibiting the reading of theosophical and anthroposophical writings, at least according to the interpretation of this general edict by Father Zimmermann, a Jesuit priest. And yet one cannot believe that this Jesuit Father Zimmermann always lies. He lied: he claimed that I had been a former priest, that I had escaped from a monastery. I was never in a monastery. Then he said: 'The claim that Steiner was a runaway priest can no longer be maintained today'. A strange way to make up for telling a lie! Now I do not believe that what has found this strange expression is also a lie. It goes that one can educate oneself from the writings of my opponents because the anthroposophical writings were banned by the Holy Congregation of July 18, 1919. Yes, on this side one senses that something in anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, which has very real powers, wants to be placed in the present.

This anthroposophically oriented spiritual science – let me say this in conclusion, I would like to say, as an objective and at the same time personal comment – this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science will continue to represent what it has to represent as the basis of knowledge for the life of action, as the basis of knowledge for the moral and social life, as the basis of knowledge for the most beautiful human hopes, against all resistance, as well as it can. As far as I am concerned, it can be gagged; but as soon as it can stir even a little, it will again assert what it believes it can recognize as the truth necessary for humanity. And just as, at the moment when the prospect of victory began to turn against us, a testimony to international spiritual life was created in the Goetheanum for the whole international world, without shying away from the fact that what is now developed Goetheanism comes from the roots of German spiritual life, then this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science will also fight for the recognition that everything else that wants to stand in the way as an obstacle, for the knowledge that has become part of their conviction, as a world content.

Thirty-five years ago, in one of my first essays, I wrote the words as a call to arms to the German people, to characterize how the German essence must necessarily return to the best spiritual sources of its strength. an appeal to the German people: “Despite all the progress we have made in the most diverse fields of culture, we cannot escape the fact that the signature of our age leaves much, very much, to be desired. Most of our progress has been only in breadth and not in depth. But only progress in depth is decisive for the content of an age. It may be that the abundance of facts that have come upon us from all sides makes it understandable that we have momentarily lost sight of the broader view in favor of the deeper one. We only wish that the severed thread of progressive development would soon be re-established and that the new facts would be grasped from the spiritual height that has been attained.

In the feeling that if the spiritual low of that time did not meet with a counterpoise in a real spiritual upliftment, something catastrophic must happen, in this feeling, with a heart-wrenching pain, I wrote these words down and had them printed 35 years ago. I believe that today, from the same point of view as I have stated, I may refer to these words in a factual and personal way. For the course of events in these three and a half decades is proof that it is justified to let the call for spirituality resound again. May it, since it was not heard at the time, be heard today and in the near future by the Germans, so that they can build from within, out of a grasped spirituality, what has been so terribly way in recent years, indeed, what has only just begun to be destroyed, and what will certainly continue on the paths of destruction if one does not take spirituality with them for the new building.

That is what one would like to appeal to today: the will to spirituality in the German people in particular. And one may appeal to this will to spirituality; for it is certain: if the German people develop this will to spirituality, then they must find it. As I said recently, there seems to be no talent for materialism – the events of the last few decades prove this; but there is talent for spirituality, as proven by the spirit of our development over the centuries. Therefore, one may appeal to the will for spirituality: the German people, if they only develop the will, will find spirituality, they have the talent for it. But because it has this gift, it also has a great responsibility before the call for spirituality. May the awareness of this responsibility awaken, awaken in such a way that the German people may once more intervene energetically in the development of humanity on a spiritual basis and from spiritual impulses, may continue what it has done for the benefit of humanity through its greatest spirits for many centuries.

Dear attendees! A significant phenomenon in the field of discussing current public issues is the book by the Englishman John Maynard Keynes about the economic consequences of the peace agreement. Today, this book in particular can be mentioned in the broadest sense when discussing public affairs, because on the one hand it is written with all the prejudices, I might say with all the preconceptions of an Englishman, but on the other hand it is written with an extraordinarily significant knowledge and overview of contemporary public life. After all, Keynes was a delegate at the English Treasury during the war for a long time. And Keynes was then in the English delegation at the Versailles Peace Conference until he resigned his post because he was extremely disappointed by the negotiations in Versailles in June 1919. It must be said that if you take a closer look at the content of this work, you will find many things that are quite significant for forming an opinion on the public affairs of the present moment. I will just mention a few characteristic points from this book by way of introduction to my remarks today.

When Keynes went to Paris, he also went there, so to speak, with a full sack of prejudices – above all, prejudices about the possible success of this peace agreement from an English point of view, but also prejudices about the personalities involved in the course of current public affairs. I may say that I found it particularly interesting to hear the judgment that one of the members of the Versailles negotiations had formed about the man whom, until recently, the whole world had idolized. If I have repeatedly and repeatedly rebelled against this judgment of the whole world – truly rebelled not only within Germany, but, where I had the opportunity to do so, during the war itself and until the end of the terrible days, also in Switzerland – then I was really able to make very little impression with such rebellion. It had to be learned that even within Germany there had been a short period of time when a larger number of people had joined in the deification of Woodrow Wilson – for that is who I and Keynes mean – a deification that had taken hold throughout the world. Time and again, it had to be pointed out, based on the views that I have been advocating here in Stuttgart for a long time, that when it comes to Woodrow Wilson, we are dealing with a man of phrases, with a man whose words have no real, substantial content.

And now Keynes describes the behavior of Woodrow Wilson at the Peace Congress in Versailles. He describes the glory with which this man was received and the prejudice with which he was met. And he describes how this man, far from any insight into any reality, attended the meetings. He describes how this man, because of his slow thinking, was not even able to follow the thoughts of the others, how the others were already on completely different things when Wilson was still thinking about something that had happened or been said in an earlier time. It must be said that the complete inadequacy and phrase-mongering of this world-famous contemporary figure has been portrayed here with extraordinary skill by someone who truly did not see this fact from a Central European point of view. Keynes also described other people who, precisely because of their presence at the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, gained a significant influence over the fate of Europe. He says of Clemenceau that this old man has actually slept through the period since 1871, that his only concern is to restore the state of Europe that prevailed before 1871, and above all to gain from the current world situation what the French consider necessary for their own nationality since 1871. Then he describes the statesman of his own country, Lloyd George: how the man is only concerned with momentary successes, but how the man has a fine instinct and, as it were, scents out the views and opinions of the personalities who surround him and with whom he has to deal.

And then Keynes looks at what is being negotiated. And in his book he discusses, with the insight and method of a calculator, a strict calculator, what economic consequences for Europe can result from what has been concocted by this so-called “peace agreement”. And he comes to the conclusion, not out of some political ambition, not out of some sentiment or sensitiveness, but out of the results of his calculations, that the economic impact on Europe of this so-called peace treaty must be the economic decline of Europe. Nothing less is learned from this book, through exact calculation results, as I said, than that the decision-making personalities have made arrangements and institutions that must necessarily lead to the dismantling of the economies of the whole of Europe.

One can read, I would say, in the undertone of the book, how the Englishman speaks from the English point of view; how he actually lets the feeling work on his soul: this downfall of Europe must be so thorough that England must suffer too. So one can say: Like so many present-day statesmen of the West, this Fellow of the University of Cambridge is also a little obsessed with fear, but a description of the current situation can be found in this book in particular. Such a thing illuminates the current international situation of the world more than all the rest of the talk.

But the most significant thing for me about this book is that, having approached his subject from the point of view of an exact calculator, and at the same time mixing in vivid descriptions by a connoisseur of human nature of the personalities who were involved in the institutions that were to lead to this downfall, one sees nothing that would cast any ray of light from this book on what one should do to prevent general destruction from occurring, so that instead of dismantling, building could come about. And it is characteristic that this calculator, of all people, has an extraordinarily strange sentence on the last pages of this book of his. He says, roughly, that he cannot imagine that anything favorable for the further development of European civilization can arise from the old views, as they have so blatantly developed in the Versailles Peace Treaty. And he can only hope that a better time will come by combining all the forces of education and imagination – “by setting in motion those forces of instruction and imagination,” as he says. But this means nothing less, my dear ladies and gentlemen, than that this exact calculator hopes for nothing more than a transformation of the spiritual condition of European man.

From this site, there has often been talk about the necessity of this transformation of the spiritual condition of European humanity. Today one cannot speak about economic questions while continuing to think in terms of the old conditions of economic life. Today one cannot speak about the reorganization of the state on the basis of the conceptions one has been accustomed to in the thinking of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. And one cannot talk about all this without pointing out how necessary it is that a new way of thinking about public affairs should take hold in the whole of European humanity. For what has occurred as a catastrophe of terror is the result not of this or that defective institution, but of the whole state of mind that European humanity has arrived at at the beginning of the 20th century. What has taken place in the sphere of legal or state life, and in the sphere of economic life, is nothing other than the spirit, or rather, as will become clear in the course of this evening, will become apparent in the course of this evening: the evil spirit that has expressed its effects in the living conditions of European humanity, the evil spirit that has been carried over from the life of the spirit, from the so-called life of the spirit, into the life of law and of the state and into the life of economics.

We must now grasp this spirit by its most significant symptoms. We must grasp it where it has asserted itself within intellectual life itself. If we want to get a clear view of these conditions, we must first take a look at what has developed since the beginning of so-called modern intellectual life, since the last three to four centuries. And one must gain an insight into how this intellectual life has crept into the life of human feeling and emotion. And one must gain a further insight into how our economic conditions have gradually become the outward expression of this intellectual life.

But what is the most significant characteristic of this intellectual life? Again and again, one must say that only someone who is able to sufficiently appreciate the bright sides of this intellectual life, who is able to see through what science, in particular, has achieved for the development of humanity, for civilized humanity, in the last few centuries, can really form a correct judgment of this intellectual life as it has developed over the last three to four centuries. Here we must always point out how the fabric of nature has been embraced by the ideas of this science. We must point out how, by embracing the field of nature, the maxims, the drives, the impulses have been found for the great achievements of modern technology, which are, after all, what have completely transformed economic life in the course of the most recent history of the development of mankind.

Let us imagine that – and this hardly ever happens today – someone takes the trouble to look around at the common branches of the natural scientific world view, as they have developed over the last few centuries. Let us imagine that someone looks around at the significant achievements of mechanical, physical, chemical, biological and so on. We imagine that such a person would also be able to assess what the way of thinking, the way of imagining, that has been trained on the admirable methods of these physical, these chemical, these biological, these mechanical achievements, has achieved for the knowledge of the anthropological in human development. We imagine how, starting from a scientific education, it was possible to explore how humans developed from originally primitive conditions to higher cultural conditions, how the social conditions of the present gradually developed. We imagine how people equipped with a scientific education endeavored to gain sociological insights into the living conditions of human beings. If we now imagine such a person with this universality of [scientific] knowledge, who, as I said, no longer really exists, we have to ask ourselves: How does such a person today face the great human questions of existence? How does he stand, above all, before the fundamental question that must always arise from the depths of the human soul to the question: What is man actually within the realm of the earthly-cosmic, the soul-spiritual world order?

The strangest thing is precisely the way this question is answered by the scientific world view. This natural-scientific world view has achieved a great deal by producing, as it were, the theory of evolution as its conclusion and by showing how one can imagine that organisms develop from the simplest to the most complicated and that at the pinnacle of this development, as it were, as the summing up of living beings on earth, stands man himself. What can be achieved in this field? It was possible to answer the question: What is the relationship between man and the animal world? What is man's relationship to those beings that he must regard as subordinate to his own organization in the universe? — These questions could be answered in an exemplary way from the external, sensory facts. But the moment the great human question arises: What are you actually as a human being?, this approach fails.

I believe that those of the honored listeners who have heard the whole series of lectures that I have been giving here for years will have hundreds of proofs for what I am saying now. If one summarizes everything that can be gained in this field and finally raises the question: What is this human being that you are in the context of the earthly-cosmic, in the context of the soul-spiritual world being? —, then one must say to oneself, especially when one is able to sufficiently appreciate the achievements of the modern scientific world view: As much as one can know in this direction, as much as one can have knowledge about nature - all these insights say nothing about the human being itself. And as this natural-scientific world view has asserted itself more and more in the minds of men, as it were, as a spiritual — I could also say unspiritual — authority, what has been conceived there of nature has extended into the life of feeling, into the life of will.

Man does not truly want to know nature only intellectually. Man wants to sense and feel what he is. Man wants to pour into his will, into his acts of will, into his entire outer life and its effects, that which can flow from his innermost, deepest being into the world being. Today, he has the feeling that he cannot merely act instinctively in his volitional decisions and acts; he must absorb something that presents him with goals for his actions and his will. These goals do not come in a way that they permeate this volition in a satisfying way if one knows nothing about the world and man except what science can give. And so, precisely because of the great achievements of the scientific world view, a desolation of human feeling and a perplexity of human will have occurred. Those people who, in a certain selfishness of soul, do not want to go along with what the achievements of natural science give, rely on old religious or other traditions. They effectively blind themselves to the fact that these traditions can no longer be used to live by now that these achievements of natural knowledge are available. They do this out of a certain selfishness, saying to themselves: I fill my inner being with what one or the other confession gives; I do not care whether this confession can still give something to people today who want to keep up with the demands of their time, in the face of the statements of the scientific way of thinking.

We can grasp the essence of public life in the present by pointing to these scientific foundations of contemporary thinking; I will say more about this in advance. We must not forget that what one generation thinks becomes the attitude, the impulse of feeling and will in the next generations. And perhaps today, with some justification, we may refer to some rather peculiar people who spoke about half a century ago. There was one man, one might say a strange blusterer, who said many a thing in those days in the seventies of the nineteenth century that one might call a blusterer. I refer to Johannes Scherr. By calling him a blusterer, no one would suspect that I overestimate the man. But the following must be said: This man had a heart and mind for what was happening in European civilization, and in his rambling speeches there are some extraordinarily apt remarks, though some remarks that perhaps only the sleeping souls among people could properly judge today – if only the works of such old fogies were taken seriously again; they are left to gather dust in libraries. Johannes Scherr saw at the time how this way of thinking reached a certain peak, which is indeed able to say great and powerful things about knowledge of nature, but is incapable of telling man what he actually is himself - a way of thinking which is incapable of giving man the feeling that he himself is spiritual and soul-like in his innermost being and that he must invest spiritual and soul forces in the impulses of his will. Johannes Scherr has observed enough to ask himself: How does a way of thinking that is only able to talk about matter, but not about the human being, how does this way of thinking flow into humanity, if one looks not only at the present - at the then present of the sixties and seventies - but also at the following generations? He wonders what happens when what the, well, one might say “silent scholars” proclaim on their lecterns in a certain age turns into people's perceptions and feelings, when what is proclaimed in this way takes hold and into the counting houses, the factories, the banks and the stock exchanges. He asks himself what happens when that which is asserted as a mode of conception in the knowledge of nature becomes the dominant mode of conception in relation to the shaping of the financial and economic world as well.

Such questions are not usually asked. For it is believed that what man thinks in the economic field, what is speculated on the stock exchange, what is negotiated in the banks, is independent of what the quiet scholar proclaims from the lectern. But in life everything is intimately connected. This intimate connection is hidden only by the fact that it can be a theoretical way of thinking for one generation, but for the next it becomes the driving force behind external action and public sentiment. It was under the impression of such thoughts that Johannes Scherr said an extraordinarily beautiful sentence at the time. He said: When the materialistic demon that now dominates all circles makes its way through the civilized world; when it asserts everything it is designed to do in Europe's financial economy, in Europe's economic constitution, then a time will come when one will have to say: nonsense, you have triumphed!

Such words were spoken in those days. What lies behind these words? Behind these words lie all the hymns of praise for the economic upswing, for the way we have come so gloriously far, for the glorious achievements of modern life with which we entered the 20th century from the 19th. What we have heard of the nature of these paeans of praise! But beneath the surface of all this praise, there was a growing sense of what Johannes Scherr said: “It will express itself in such a way that one must say: nonsense, you have triumphed.” And nonsense has triumphed! Let us look back over the last five or six years. What, ladies and gentlemen, is the fate of those who, with an inner insight into the circumstances of the present, are able to calculate the future? At most, what they say is heard as a sensation, but it is not taken seriously. They let things take their course, abandoning themselves to their slumbering souls, and then they arrive at the frame of mind that sees with each passing week how things descend deeper into the abyss, but still keeps saying: tomorrow will be better. This or that will happen. Tomorrow we will again – yes, I don't know, come to something.

Where does this way of thinking come from? What is the origin of that which Johannes Scherr, the German writer and critic, called the demon? The origin lies precisely in the fact that a world view has emerged over the last three to four centuries which, from the ideas that one gains from it, is unable to say or allow anything to be felt about man himself. But what does one do when one is brought up on a world view that does not allow one to feel or sense anything about man himself? What does one do then? One is compelled to talk about human beings. Yes, one must talk about human beings; one cannot avoid it, since everyone is actually involved in public life, and since people appear in public life who must talk to each other about their affairs, must talk to each other about the whole world. One cannot avoid talking about human beings.

And what is the consequence if one must speak about the human being after all, if one must speak about what should be treated in terms of institutions under the human being in terms of the rule of law, in terms of spiritual and cultural matters, and in terms of the economy? What is necessary if one is to speak about the human being after all and has no basis because precisely what is emerging as a worldview does not provide such a basis – what is needed then? Given what dominates the world today in the field of intellectual life, of public intellectual life, one needs – because one is not able to put spiritual substance into his words from the inner experience of the spirit – one needs the phrase!

You see, ladies and gentlemen, the spiritual science meant here wants people to put into their speech, into their words, that which alone gives words their justification: spiritual substance. The words that a person speaks do not acquire spiritual substance through scientific knowledge; spiritual substance cannot be gained in the easy way that is practiced in chemistry, physics, botany, and biology. Spiritual substance must be acquired in a way that is less comfortable for spiritual science, as it is meant here. Spiritual substance must be acquired by gaining a real insight into the innermost nature of man. But this is only possible if one develops the intellectual modesty that has already been characterized here. This is only possible if one comes to say to oneself: the great achievements of natural science in particular show me that if I remain as I was when I was born into the world, purely physically, I face the great affairs of humanity like a five-year-old child faces a volume of Goethean poetry: it tears the volume apart, not knowing what it is dealing with. But the child can develop so that it then takes on the essence of what was previously something completely different to it. Modern man does not like to apply this to himself as an adult. He does not like to say to himself: I must take my inner soul development into my own hands; I must go beyond what I have simply become through physical birth, through my own inner soul work; I must develop my soul to a higher level than what I receive without my own efforts.

And when the spiritual researcher goes among people and says: In order to really recognize the spiritual, which is also in man, it is necessary to apply inner, spiritual methods, to transform one's thinking through inner soul exercises in such a way as it is described in the book “How to Know Higher Worlds,” or in the second part of “Occult Science,” or in the other books, people come and say: Oh, so-and-so says it is only the imagination of a dreamer. When he describes how a discipline of the will, otherwise not occurring in ordinary, external life, is necessary to lift the soul out of the state into which it has come through mere physical birth, and to develop it in a way that can only be achieved through one's own inner cultivation of the soul , and so develop it as one can only achieve from one's own inner control of the soul. Then people come and say: Oh, that's just the ravings of a fantasist; that's someone who wants to capitalize on the disappointments and shattered hopes of modern humanity, who is telling people something about the possibility of supersensible knowledge!

No, my dear audience, the true spiritual researcher does not speak from such a background today. He truly does not speak out of amateurishness towards science, but he speaks precisely out of a true knowledge of the achievements of science. And he knows that spiritual-scientific methods are necessary because, although science says something about many things, it does not say anything about the actual nature of the human being. He knows that we can only gain insights into the nature of the human being through knowledge that is acquired through slow, laborious inner soul work, and that this knowledge of the human being must be acquired by truly rising from the sensory to the supersensory. Let the philistines look down on this elevation to the supersensible as fantasy; it is necessary for knowledge of man, for knowledge based on sense perception shows in every field that it can never give any information about the nature of man. But what is intended by this spiritual science is a renewal of man from the very depths of his inner being; it is the striving for the possibility of gaining knowledge about man that really passes over into intuitive perception, that really also provides goals, ideals, that can flow into the will, right into the reality of economic life.

But what kind of effects on life arise when one does not strive for this spirit, which is so unappealing to modern humanity, but when one strives for the anti-spirit, which as a world view is only able to provide information about the non-human, about the extra-human? What kind of effects on life does this produce?

The first of these effects on life appears throughout the civilized world, and what already dominates this civilized world in the field of intellectual life – people just don't want to see it, they just close their eyes to it – the first effect on life is the world domination of phrase. Because if you don't have a spiritual outlook that flows into the world as a living substance, the words remain empty. Then words are uttered that only make sense as a phrase, that is, have no meaning. And in the course of the last few years, when the unspiritual itself has led ad absurdum through the external world events, we could truly see the triumph of the phrase across the entire civilized world. Phrases are words that do not require any real basis to be thought of – one only needs to recall characteristic phenomena, such as the two English parties that remained in parliament until the mid-19th century, the Whigs and the Tories. One says these words and of course no longer has any idea of the origin in life that these words once had. When the word arose, “Whigs” was a term of abuse used by Scottish revolutionaries against English institutions, and “Tories” was the nickname for Irish papists. Just as these words in the English parliamentary language relate to their real-life origins, so today the statements that set the tone for people relate to their real-life origins. How life, reality, is overshadowed by what we do not dare to think, but what we force out of ourselves as words. The world domination of the phrase will become clear to people. For those who do not want to realize it from the contemplation of circumstances, it will become clear to them by the fact that they starve to death through an economic life that develops without the dominant impulse of the spirit, through such an economic life. Starvation will provide the real proof that our economic life is not ruled by the spirit but by the anti-spirit, because we have brought it about that we no longer seek the spirit in reality but adhere to the anti-spirit, which in the field of so-called intellectual life can then only express itself as a phrase about the human.

There is only one remedy for this, there is only one remedy for getting beyond the world domination of empty phrases: to emancipate the intellectual life from that under whose pressure it has become empty verbiage. A spiritual life that does not build on its own foundations, a spiritual life that allows itself to be organized by economic life or cobbled together by state life, a spiritual life that must follow the guidelines of the state or the forces of economic life, such a spiritual life cannot develop freely. Only a spiritual life that is free can develop freely and thus come to real spirit and get beyond empty phrases by creating its own institutions out of its own foundations. There is only one remedy for the ever-increasing triumph of the world-phrase, and that is to make spiritual life independent. Just as the fruits of the field perish under a swarm of locusts, so does spiritual life become desolate when it is dependent on factors other than itself alone, and what is revealed by spiritual life among people becomes a phrase. The world domination of empty phrases will only end when spiritual life is organized by those who are the bearers of spiritual life; it will only end when, from the lowest to the highest school and in all other fields of spiritual life, those who are active in that spiritual life make the institutions of spiritual life, and when what is the principle for teaching, for the dissemination of spiritual life, is also the decisive factor for the external institutions. Only an independent intellectual life will be able to oppose the triumph of the phrase, which has had such a devastating effect and which has led itself ad absurdum in the terrible events of the last five to six years.

My dear attendees, if you look honestly and sincerely at the development of intellectual life, the so-called intellectual life, in recent years, in the last few decades, you will see strange examples of how this intellectual life has gradually become powerless in the face of the realities of life. It is most remarkable what meets the eye when one contemplates a personality whom one admires most highly, a personality who is characteristic of the highest achievements of intellectual life at the end of the 19th century. I see Herman Grimm, the great art historian, as such a personality. Again, I want to speak of the phenomenon of Herman Grimm only as a symptom of the newer intellectual life. This Herman Grimm, this art historian, has created something great, truly great. And when I look around at his rich essays, which are available from him, I have to say: something that is so saturated with the inner richness of the late 19th century, such as his two essays, one on Iphigenia and the other on Tasso, are truly spiritual revelations that show to the highest degree what a person at the height of modern intellectual life is capable of achieving. And these intellectual achievements are characteristic of the way in which the minds of those who were truly the best worked. Herman Grimm wrote treatises on Goethe's Iphigenia and Tasso that show aspects of intellectual life that penetrate the human being with admirable depth. But he wrote something that already exists in the mind. He needs something like Iphigenia or Tasso, which already existed, as a model. I looked around to see what such a symptom actually means, and I could not help but find: The greatest and most beautiful achievements of our intellectual heroes at the end of the 19th century are precisely those in which they have written in a spirited way about the intellectual achievements of the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries. Very characteristic, very significant. But anyone who is awake and not looking at recent intellectual life with a sleeping soul could make this observation.

Now there is also a book about Goethe by the same Herman Grimm. It is not about Iphigenia, not about Tasso, not about the intellectual products of man, but about Goethe himself, about the living man Goethe. I read chapter after chapter – I have already repeatedly said publicly what I have to say about this book about Goethe – I read chapter after chapter; I try to visualize how this brilliant man, who wrote so magnificently about Iphigenia and Tasso, now speaks about Goethe, the living man himself. Chapter after chapter, I do not find the description of a living human being; I find silhouettes that creep across the wall, silhouettes without thickness, silhouettes of Goethe, the living human being. Herman Grimm was able to describe that which was produced spiritually. At the moment when he stood before the description of the living human being, not a description of this living human being arises, but shadowy images arise that have no thickness, that have a surface, that only scurry away, that one cannot push against, but through which one reaches everywhere when one gets close to them. This is very characteristic of the effects of the spiritual state of mind of this end of the 19th century on life. At the moment when it turns to spiritual matters, this spiritual state of mind was strong enough to judge and describe people's spiritual production, and also to provide numerous insights into human life in general. But it fails the moment it is supposed to penetrate the spirit of the reality before us.

This is what spiritual science, as it is meant here, strives for: to guide the human soul to the real spirit, so that we are able to find the spirit in reality. It strives to enable us not only to paint shadowy images of reality, but to grasp the spirit in reality. Then we will not gain the abstractions and intellectualism that today's knowledge of nature serves up, but we will gain a real insight into the inner workings and essence of nature. And from there we will gain an attitude that corresponds to the human being's own nature, dignity and significance in the earthly-cosmic, in the soul-spiritual context, which truly corresponds to this nature, this dignity of the human being. But only by penetrating into reality through the spirit can we overcome the clichés and put into the living word that which is effective in actions and encounters between people, and which can also be effective in economic life. Those who believe that mere improvement of old institutions will suffice in economic life, who do not want to move on to such a complete renewal of the way of thinking, are indulging in insubstantial illusions. For today we are not faced with small, we are faced with the greatest conceivable human issues.

And especially when it comes to establishing a truly social relationship between people on the outside, it is necessary that people treat each other in such a way that they can see the spirit in their fellow human beings. It is necessary that he can see in his fellow man that which is a special case of a spiritual-soul entity, that he can imbue himself with all the feelings and perceptions that can only be impelled, only inwardly permeated, by a spiritual world view. Because we had no independent spiritual life, we developed materialism on a large scale, and in the field of spiritual life we developed the world domination of empty phrases, which is still hidden from many people who are asleep in soul.

And when the demon enters the realm of feelings and perceptions – not the spirit, which brings life and creativity to everything that comes from the human being – when the demon enters the feelings and perceptions, what then arises? Then no living relationship arises between people that can provide the basis for the social structure of the social organism; then convention arises in the relationships, in the emotional and mental relationships between people, through the unspiritual. I would like to say that we Germans can count ourselves lucky that we have to say “phrase” when describing the current state of intellectual life, because we have no real word for it in German. And now we are once again at a loss to find a German word for what has emerged in more recent times from the emotional life dominated by the demon; we have to say 'convention'. Convention is that which is merely externally fixed; that which we can only look at externally, which is not grasped by the innermost essence of feeling and sensing. But in those people in whom the thinking and consciousness does not flow in, what can spiritualize the phrase, in those people the spirit that permeates feeling and feeling cannot be forced in, and no social intercourse, no social relationship can develop that is worthy of human beings. Under the influence of convention and external appearances, a second area has developed, which in modern life has become state life, political life. Just as intellectual life is dominated by the world domination of phrase, so state life is completely dominated by convention.

Only when true democracy reveals itself among people, a democracy that is truly built on the living relationship between people, will that which develops from living person to living person take the place of convention. This is based on the fact that the mature human being faces the mature human being, when, therefore, those human relationships come into consideration that are independent of the greater capacity, the ability of the mind, and that are independent, because they are legal relationships, of the strength of economic power. When the economic life on the one hand and the intellectual life on the other are detached from the legal or state territory, and when only that which comes from the equality of all people who have come of age is asserted on this legal or state territory, then what develops from living human being to living human being will truly take the place of world domination by convention. It is what a world accustomed to empty phrases cries out for and understands nothing of: the right that can only be born out of the living feeling, the living sensation in the intercourse of one human being with another, the right that can never be born out of any convention. But in this area we live under the world domination of convention. Convention is everything that asserts itself as sentiment, as feeling, in public affairs through the unspiritual, just as phraseology asserts itself in public affairs when, in the sphere of intellectual life, it is not the spirit but the unspiritual that conditions the realities of life.

And let us look at the third area of public life, the area of economic life. Since a spiritual life that truly encompasses the human, that generates human sentiments and feelings, has not emerged in this age of materialism, economic affairs could not be imbued with goals that would have been inspired by the spirit. A true life practice could not develop in the field of economic life, because a real life practice can only flourish if the people who are the bearers of this life practice bring into every action, into every activity, what they gain from the connection of their soul with the spiritual-soul nature of the world. Something else develops in the place of the practice of life when the spirit is replaced by the unspiritual. When the unspiritual becomes dominant, then, on the level of the outer, economic life, man falls into routine by not imbuing economic measures with what the spirit inspires in him; he falls into routine instead of the practice of life. Man falls into routine. And that is the characteristic feature in the economic field: that we have come more and more from the realm of the real essence of life, of the purposeful, only from the spirit to give birth to the realm of routine. Just as we have come to use empty phrases in the sphere of intellectual life, and to rely on convention in the sphere of political and legal life, so we have come to rely on routine in the sphere of economic life.

How completely the man of today is absorbed in his routine! How proud he is of it! How he asks only: How is it done? And how he strives to educate the one whom he wants to put into the business of managing, so that things go mechanically! How one sees precisely a great thing in it, in the economic life, not to have people who come up with something, but to have people who are able to continue the practice of life, which has gradually become routine, as mechanically as possible.

That is why it has come about that man, because he is stuck in the routine and cannot draw any satisfaction from this routine itself, seeks to get rid of what he has in the outer practical life as quickly as possible and then pursues sensations, pursues that which is as different as possible from that in which he is professionally immersed. Is there any spirit in the outer economic life? Are people who are respected because they come up with ideas welcome in the economic world? They are more of a nuisance to the economic world than the old hands. But if these people who come up with ideas are welcome, then the economic professions will flourish. They will not take on an egotistical character, but an altruistic, humanistic one. Why is that? Well, when a person merely follows routine, there are no other impulses for him than selfishness, than the satisfaction of his instincts. When you put into external life what you have under the influence of a spiritual education of humanity, then what you put into it because it comes from the spirit has a very special quality. It has the peculiarity that it does not apply to every single person, but that it is basically irrelevant whether one person thinks or another thinks; it has the peculiarity that it works as a thing, that it has an effect that can benefit all people in some way in the realities of life.

All this, dear attendees, is certainly not said to be contemptuous, to be spoken from above down to the modern world's demon, it is said for a completely different purpose. It is said to create the sense of looking at those foundations that are indelible in human nature and yet always lead from the demon to the spirit. This is said to awaken the present sleepiness of souls, so that those depths of human life in human reality may be sought out, from which alone we can remedy the decline and arrive at a constructive development.

The practical Keynes, from whom I started, says: What we do not know, what we cannot provide information about, depends on how all the hidden forces combine - he calls these forces “instruction” and “imagination” - to arrive at a new view of the world. Spiritual science wants to give this in the most comprehensive sense; spiritual science wants to bring that which the insightful people of the present must cry out for, but which they consider a fantasy the moment it comes before their souls. People today would rather be told: “There is someone who is talking about the astral body, who is talking about spirit and immortality” than to really delve into what can be said in the field of spiritual science from the same exact method as the scientific knowledge itself is gained.

But if we consider the foundations on which this spiritual science rests, then, my dear ladies and gentlemen, we will also realize that this spiritual science has a particular characteristic: it not only works through what one knows through it, but it changes the way a person thinks. It leads people to a different view of themselves. It gives people a different feeling about themselves and thus also a different feeling towards their fellow human beings. Spiritual science enables people to fertilize economic affairs from the spirit again. It leads to the fact that it must be demanded that this economic life must exist independently as a third area of the social organism; it must exist in such a way that economic affairs are only ordered out of economic objectivity and economic expertise by personalities who have grown into this economic life. All institutions of economic life must be based on the fact that the facts in economic life come about through expertise and knowledge of the subject, but not through parliamentary or majority decisions. Majority decisions only make sense when it comes to matters between people who are equal as mature human beings.

In the field of economic life, expertise and experience are decisive. In the realm of the spirit, however, it is our talents and abilities that count. Both areas demand independence. And at the center of it all, the social organism demands independence as the third link in the social organism. This concerns everything that takes place in public life that arises from the soul, from feelings and emotions, but which must be actively fanned by the spirit, not by the unspiritual. Everything depends on the spirit taking the place of the unspiritual. The spirit will overcome the domination of empty phrases in the life of the spirit itself. The spirit will permeate the life of feeling and sentiment so that we will gain a real life of state and of right. The spirit will so enrich economic life that this independent economic life can truly flourish in a way that is different from under the influence of unspirituality, under the influence of complicated, abstract Marxist or other theories. If one wants to make these theories a reality, then what has emerged in Eastern Europe is the most extreme, most radical phase of destruction – destruction, not construction.

Humanity has to face three things, not in order to criticize, but to seek in the depths of the human being and of humanity itself that which can truly lead to a reconstruction. These three things are: empty phrases, convention, and routine. In place of empty phrases, there must be cultivation of the real spirit of life. In place of convention, there must be a living sense, which can only arise when we, inspired by spiritual ideas, face each other as human beings in the life of the law and the state; otherwise, because the spirit is the fruitful part of everything, we come to mere empty phrases even in the sphere of the life of the law. Otherwise we shall end up speaking like that man who was worshiped by the whole world and who said remarkable things, for example, about the law. I am referring to Woodrow Wilson, whom I have studied in some detail, so I am not talking about him like the blind man about color. For example, in his thick book about the state, which is actually a compendium of modern phraseology, we find the following phraseological definition: “The law is the will of the state with regard to the civil conduct of those who are under its authority.

Now, my dear attendees, the one who is accustomed to reality and knows how the living will sprouts from the living personality - I would like to know what he should think when this historian of the state tells him: The law is the will of the state. - In the time when the state is nothing more to man than an external institution of

AI economic life, one speaks, without really knowing it, of the will of the state - in seriously meant books, which, however, for the truly serious mind inclined towards essence, are compendiums of modern phraseology.

Now, if we look at modern economic life, there is a lot of talk about it. But this economic life itself is basically not governed by what is said. Here, too, the phrase passes over it like a breath, and below it the real economic life takes place. The phrase passes over it so much that the Marxist-Socialist doctrine senses the phrase-like nature of these phrases and calls it “ideology”. It senses, as it were, that the unspiritual reigns in economic life, but it does not think of putting the spirit in the place of the unspiritual; instead, it sets itself the ideal of putting another unspiritual in the place of the unspiritual that has ruled so far, a different unspiritual that is to rule in the future.

Truly, anyone who wants to look today at what can lead to recovery must know exactly how the decline was brought about under the triumvirate of phrase, convention and routine, yes, how the horror of the last five to six years was brought about. The day after tomorrow, I will try to talk about what needs to be found if one is to see through this triumvirate in a healthy way. But this lecture had to precede the others today for the reason that only he can understand what is needed for tomorrow who is able to see clearly what has brought about the destruction. Today it is truly not enough just to point out that somehow the forces must be transformed into a new “teaching”, into a new “imagination”. Today it is already necessary to point to these living sources of the spirit.

Now that I have, so to speak, long since discussed my time, perhaps I may add a few minutes to what I have said today. It is something that shows, by way of an obvious example, how what is being said today among people who are striving to understand the times and at the same time looking for conditions that can lead to a way out of destruction and towards some kind of reconstruction. But if I wanted to talk at length about what I want to touch on in a few words, I would have to give a long lecture, because there is a great deal to it.

When I left here last time, I heard that all sorts of slander was circulating about me and those associated with me in our work. It soon became clear that these slanders were carried out with extraordinary sophistication, with the informers choosing just the right moment. I was then able to learn that this denunciation, this slander, is even based on letters that are forged and could be understood as having been written by myself. These letters are used to prove things that originate from me or from the people of the Federation for the Threefolding of the Social Organism. Yes, they even lacked shame in the slander that lay in saying that my measures included helping to extradite Germans to the Entente, and in so doing, they referred to letters I had written.

Dear attendees, for me this is just one example of how people are treated today who honestly strive to search for the truth and who do not shy away from saying what today leads to destruction rather than to reconstruction. But of course it goes without saying that such mud-slingers, who come up with such things, should actually be stopped in some way. But they cannot be stopped. There are no legal means; refutations are of no value because the people themselves know that what they are spreading is a lie. They do not spread it for the sake of telling the truth, but to get rid of those who are inconvenient to them. For such people it is not about saying something they believe, but about raising something that can harm the person concerned, if possible, in the eyes of those who have no judgment. I have experienced this for many years, albeit not with the same refinement as has occurred recently. I take no pleasure in getting involved with such dirty people and touching their dirty laundry.

Nor do I love it when, years ago, a certain clerical side – and there are certainly people among them who do not care about the truth – spread the word that I was a priest who had left the Catholic Church. When such people are confronted with a mass of evidence proving the falsity of what they have written, they have no answer except what the gentleman concerned had written in a respected clerical journal: “Recent enquiries show that the claim that Dr. Steiner was once a priest can no longer be maintained.” In so doing, people believe that they are making amends for the damage they have done to numerous souls. But it is not done by saying that. The point is that the attitude that the Austrian parliamentarian Count Walterskirchen once held against the government must take hold in the face of such behavior: He who has once lied will not be believed even if he speaks the truth a hundred times. Well, that is one example. Those who make such accusations are nothing more than purveyors of objective untruths, and I suspect – because I believe that they know this too – that they are liars. It must be said publicly: there is nothing to the whole slander except that it is a completely fabricated story from start to finish.

The second thing that is being peddled again and again today is the rehashing of a Jesuit lie that occurred many years ago. I will certainly not say anything here about the pros and cons of anti-Semitism. I am not expressing an opinion here about this world view. But again and again and again, certain people, because they know that they can make money from it, spread the lie that I am Jewish; somehow it is always pointed out from some corner. At the time when this system was first practiced by the Jesuits, I had my certificate of baptism photographed, and I still have very small photographs of my certificate of baptism that I can show to anyone who wants to see them. But I do not believe that one can do anything with such a document against the pages that actually come into question. Among those who have brought up this strange tale of my Jewishness is the “Semi-Kürschner”. In it, my entire biography is doctored in such a way as to suggest that I am somehow of Jewish descent. What I can trace in my ancestry is solely that all my ancestors on my mother's and father's side emerged from the Lower Austrian peasantry. My father served a truly non-Jewish institution, namely the monastery and abbey of Geras in Lower Austria, which is a Premonstratensian monastery. The Premonstratensian monks liked him and even gave him a scholarship to train for the first few years of high school. He later became an Austrian railway official, but not a civil servant, rather a private official. But just as it can be proven that these ancestors on my father's side were so un-Jewish that they were servants in a devoutly Catholic monastery, so it can be proven for all the ancestors on my mother's side, as far as they are accessible to me. But I don't even think that one can do anything with such a thing in the face of these pages, which deal in these lies. Among those personalities listed in the Semi-Kürschner as Jews is one who in more recent times even came close to joining the Jesuits, Hermann Bahr. His biography has been doctored to such an extent that one might believe that he was somehow of Jewish descent. But now he was able to come up with the fact that twelve of his ancestors were real Upper Austrian farmers, not Jewish or anything of the sort. When this could be documented, the editorial staff of the “Semi-Kürschner,” which is quite in line with the series from which such things come, objected: Well, yes, we want to believe that the twelve ancestors are far removed from all Judaism. But then we believe in reincarnation and believe that Hermann Bahr was a Jew in a previous incarnation.

As you can see, this side cannot be dealt with by thoughts or refutations. Completely different methods must be found. However, I do not believe that another path can be found that will really lead to the goal, other than the fact that little by little the number of people who think reasonably and decently will become greater and greater compared to those who want to wallow in filth in order to defame their fellow human beings. I do not believe that indecency can be defeated by anything other than decent-minded people. Neither court proceedings nor refutations will get us anywhere; it can only be done if as many people as possible have a sense of decency.

And it must be said publicly: Even such things as I have had to present now are part of what is coming in our time from the intrusion of the unspiritual into the realities of life instead of the spirit. But everything that is working so terribly destructively among mankind today is aimed at the one thing that must be summarized in the words: Humanity in general, but especially the German spirit, is in great need of to replace the unspiritual, to replace the materialistic unspiritual, with the spirit, because the unspiritual must be defeated if we want to rebuild, if we want to advance as a people. And only the spirit, the true spirit, will defeat the unspiritual.