Rudolf Steiner Skeptics Welcomed
Submitted by Freedom Professor on Sun, 07/12/2009 - 12:49pm.
|
 Skepticism is an honest search for knowledge. It is used to search for the truth in matters based on sound reasoning, logic, and evidence. The idea is to neither initially accept claims nor dismiss them; it’s about questioning them and testing them for validity. In his Philosophy of Freedom, Rudolf Steiner presents various views and leaves it up to us to form our own opinion. Other times he seeks to convince us with sound logic and a description of inner processes of the mind that we can verify ourselves.
No thought or scrutiny needs to be used if accepting or denying the book’s content depends on how well it fits in with your current understanding, belief system or world-view. But honest scientific skepticism requires the effort of objective thinking and accurate observation.
 Here is an example: In chapter 2 the theory of Materialism is compared to Spiritualism. Materialists seek to explain everything as matter and material process while Spiritualists seek to explain everything with spiritual theory. To do this the Materialists turn away from the spiritual nature of their own “I” while the Spiritualist turns away from the material world.
We can observe this shift of attention toward or away from the “I” while researching physical or spiritual phenomena and discover if what Steiner is saying is true or not. Chapter 2 continues on describing other one-sided world-views and how they result from where we are fixating our attention.
Turn to any page in the Philosophy of Freedom and you can find descriptions of the cognitive or ethical process connected together with objective thinking that with some work in your own reasoning and self-observation skills, you can determine yourself whether they are valid or not.
|
|
days to come!
Hi, Professor, it's so nice to read your comments above. I've found that many people feel that skeptisim regarding aspects of PoF are direct criticisms of Rudolf Steiner himself, no matter how carefully you preface your critical questions with praise for the man. So, it was very wonderful to read your words and I could not agree more.
For me PoF is interesting in how it's point and purpose are sometimes undermined by the logical structure of its expression. This does not mean Steiner was dumb or wrong. In fact, his brilliance is demonstrated in that he even was able to hint at its purpose via classical germanic philosophical language before the turn of the century. I think his brillance is also shown in the ways he abandoned certain expressions that are found in the core text (not additions).
An example: Professor, try to find an anthroposophist who tell you why Steiner used to insist that his epistemology was predicated upon the reader believing that there are so-called conceptless percepts that exist free (and can be observed as such) of conceptuality. It is my opinion that the unwillingness to step over the very obstacles that Steiner himself overstepped is a symptomatic expression of what has become one-sided in the movement itself. There seems to be much evidence for this.
There is also tremendous evidence that a growing group of young anthroposophists are readying themselves to rediscover the philosophically living root insight of PoF. Exciting days, professor!!
lost pof chapter
Isn't that explained in the lost chapter of POF removed by the Supreme Council and hidden in a vault within the underground catacombs below the Goetheanum?
Post new comment