Chapter 2 Title
Der Grundtrieb zur Wissenschaft
computer translators
The fundamental impulse to science
The basically impulse to science
The basically impetus to science
1916 Hoernle: Why The Desire For Knowledge Is Fundamental
1939 Poppelbaum: The Desire For Knowledge
1963 Stebbing: The Fundamental Urge for Knowledge
1964 Wilson: The Fundamental Desire for Knowledge
1986 Lindeman: The Fundamental Desire for Knowledge
1995 Lipson: The Fundamental Urge for Knowledge
Tom: The Fundamental Desire For Science
John:
The Fundamental Urge to Posess Knowledge
The Fundamental Urge to Know
The Inner Need for a Foundation of Scientific Knowledge
The Urgency for Grounded Scientific Knowledge
Compelling Grounds for Acquiring Scientific Knowledge
Chapter 3 Title
Das Denken Im Dienste Der Weltauffassung
computer translators
The thinking in the service of world-view
The thinking in the service of the world view
1916 Hoernle: Thought As The Instrument Of Knowledge
1939 Poppelbaum: Thinking As The Instrument Of Knowledge
1963 Stebbing: Thinking in the Service of Understanding the World
1964 Wilson: Thinking in the Service of Knowledge
1986 Lindeman: Thinking in the Service of Apprehending the World
1995 Lipson: Thinking in the Service of Understanding the World
Tom: Thinking In The Service Of World Conception
Thinking in the Service of World-View
John: How Thinking Serves Perception of the World
Thinking Serves Perception of the World
The Fundamental Urge to Know
As I understand the German word Trieb it is a more physiological and visceral force or thrust than a desire. More like a reflex or hunger. A Triebfäustel is a sledge-hammer.
In 1919 Steiner used the word Trieb to describe the will rooted in the human etheric body (drives or urges), which he distinguished from the will in the astral body (desires). [Study of Man a.k.a. Foundations of Human Experience, Chapter 4]
Why quest for Knowledge? gives more of the feel of Trieb. However that question may not entirely fit the content of the chapter.
The Fundamental Urge to Posess Knowledge
The Fundamental Urge to Know
Let's keep calling its name until it comes to us.
Mr. Ralph's sloppy protocoll of Steiner: "drives or urges"
The particular case of Unzufriedenheit is named Erkenntisdrang.
Clarity?
Does Erkenntnisdrang accurately translate as cognitive stress, or is there another meaning?
Greetings from Mr Sloppy
Mr. Ralph's relationship to Conscious Human Action
Does Mr. Ralph know the history of the words - Erkenntnis, Drang, stress - he uses?
Why use words about which little of their story is known?
Aha!
So, Beginner do you admit that you introduced a word into your earlier post of which so little known?
What reason motivates your reply to my question about the meaning of the word you introduced?
You often ask for terms to be explained, yet you do not follow your own advice.
Did you not post a comment about preaching and practicing recently?
Happy Michaelmas, Beginner.
Mr. Ralph's confuses who uses the word "term"
1. "...a word which is so little known" - ellipsis.
2. "...your reply about the meaning of the word you introduced" - please name the word about which you ask.
3. It is correct that I asked Mr. Last to explain what he means by the word "term", which he used. I prefer not to use such a word like "term" because I know little about terminology, which requires that a term be defined. This also means that the meaning and function of definition must be explained. I have not received a reply from Mr. Last regarding my question what he thinks term means.
Pot and Kettle
I note, Beginner that you are also making use of your freedom to refrain from answering some of the questions put to you.
It seems that we stand blackened together in our freedom to remain silent.
On a more general note,
once I have draft text to revise, I shall probably have little time to respond to any but those posts that are offering information, or clarifying questions about the translation text rather than other posts. In this I am limited in the temporal dimension. A tight focus of attention will be needed to complete this project. Otherwise I enjoy the exchanges here, especially the light-hearted ones.
Terminology corner:
light - radiant and clear, sometimes amusing
heart - organ of great sensitivity and also of thought in advanced thinkers
Source - Quid ego feci?
Mr. Ralph's false accusation
Mr. Ralph knows from two earlier instances I asked him to justify why certain of his questions are necessary to understand Steiner's text better.
Mr. Ralph now accuses me of not "answering some of the questions put" without bothering to state the questions I allegedly ignored.
A review of my posts can easily show that I have submitted various contributions to understanding the Steiner text - for example, the connection between "Ahnen" and "Aehnlichkeit" - both at the start of Der Grundtrieb zur Wissenschaft or my identification of important moments in the Faust quotation - none of which find any serious response by Mr. Ralph.
Particular case of Unzufriedenheit (Der Grundtrieb zur Wissensc
Why should the English word "stress" have anything whatsoever to do with the German word "Drang"?
Desire/Urge for Science
The Fundamental Desire/Urge For Science
Has anyone heard of a reason why "science" cannot be used here?
Wissenschaft n. science, system of knowledge gained by systematic research and organized into general laws; specific field of systematic knowledge
I see how a feeling mystic would prefer "knowledge" as this can be more vague compared to the "science" meaning of "systematic knowledge".
"Wissenschaft" versus "Wissen"
Why don't you try to consider the word "Wissenschaft" in comparison to the word "Wissen"?
Calling out...
So I switched off the computer and called. The responses went through a metamorphosis in dialogue with the above posts.
The Basic Need for Science
The Inner Need for a Foundation of Scientific Knowledge
The Urgency for Grounded Knowledge
Call up the strangers within you, Jeff! Thanks for your appreciation.
PS: After thinking about a hint from Beginner I noticed that the title of Chapter 2 really has to link properly to the end of Chapter 1. The most obvious link is that that science, as a ground of reason, is necessary if there is to be a substantial mental image of freedom.
fingers crossed
John, I like Tom a lot, but I don't like when he deletes my comments to this website. I just wrote a couple responses dealing with this question of science. I was nice and silly but quoting PoF on this topic. I said nothing provactive or rude. Each of my comments is gone. In the past Tom has deleted my comments without telling, even if they are in no way personal. I'll send a copy of my last two communications to you via email just to show you how boring they were (I'm assuming Tom will also delete this because it mentions the other ones). I don't know what to do. I guess it's like with China. I don't want to give up just because I'm not as powerful as Tom. I'm even following his rules. He simply doesn't like me at all. Which is fine. But I like him and you and I LOVE this conversation you are having about "science". My last two responses were to you and were simply related to the idea of Reason and Science. But they are gone, along with a conversation to Joel. It's just soooo odd. Well, thankfully, I have most people's private emails and, obviously, can get around on here (even if he bans me again, gulp). But, I will continue to not call anybody names and stick to the ideas. And, damn it, I really like this thread and I wish Tom would let me talk.
my fingers are crossed that Tom will reconsider kicking me out.
working group threads
The translation work group threads are for translation suggestions and not discussion unless it is brief and tightly, tightly related to translation suggestions. Anybody can post their own Journal for the discussion of any topic.
Systematic threading rather than cross stitch
Dear Jeff,
It is evident to me that Tom, here, is inclined to organise the work on translating without too much distraction. It is also clear that this translating endeavour throws open important issues.
I have a suggestion for you to consider Jeff. I have an idea that it will likely be acceptable to Tom. It goes something like this. If an interesting theme emerges in this forum, post a new journal where you open up the theme instead of replying here. Then post a message in the forum thread that reads similarly to "I would like to pick up this theme about [indicate theme] in this journal.". include a link to your Journal and, with the consciously superstitious touching of wood, all will proceed with happiness for all.
My apologies for sounding a trifle condescending in spelling it out, but I believe that this is a method that will render tears of grief extinct in this forum for a while.
Best wishes, John
Mr. Ralph's urge to use the word "hint" if I ask about the text
Mr. Ralph continues above to refer to what I wrote as "a hint" despite my earlier protest that this word was inappropriate for what I wrote. Mr. Ralph also needs - an urge? - to mention my name above in connection with what he insists is (for him) a "hint" - I simply pointed out the first word of the second chapter and asked about it.
If Mr. Ralph interprets this question about the first part of the text supposedly in question as theme as a hint, I wonder how many "hints" will be necessary for Mr. Ralph so that he pay more attention to the text?
What Mr. Ralph does offer for consideration above is not about the first word Grundtrieb, but the next noun "Wissenschaft" - the other noun in the title of the second chapter. It Both nouns must be thought - at a later stage - in connection to each other: "Grundtrieb ZUR Wissenschaft".
If "Wissenschaft" is to be considered in relation to Das bewusste menschliche Handeln, why limit it - as Mr. Ralph proposes above - merely "to the end"?
If Mr. Ralph can present an explanation based on the text for the transition from the conclusion of the one chapter to the title of the next, excellent - this would also contribute to a better understanding of the text.
Avrah KaDabra
"science, as ground of reason, is necessary if..."
Where is this judgment to be found in Steiner's text?
Beating around the Bush
Whatever your reason for offering the helpful suggestion in your post, Beginner, I recieved it as a hint, possibly due to my personal inclination to question everything.
Please keep the suggestions coming. I appreciate any encouragement to look at the text with new questions. Any help to look more closely at the text is very welcome. I am not so deluded as to think I have noticed everything. Your own suggestions for an adequate English translation of the title of Chapter 2 would be as much appreciated as beating us around the bush for enlightenment.
Sorry but I have not understood your comment: "If "Wissenschaft" is to be considered in relation to Das bewusste menschliche Handeln, why limit it - as Mr. Ralph proposes above - merely "to the end"?" Could you explain what you meant here please.
I am interested in why you ask for an explanation based on the text. Is it less useful to base an explanation on the line of reasoning in the text? In my academic work it is considered less useful to adhere to an exact reproduction of the text, which does not demonstrate understanding of the author's reasoning. Are matters different in the halls of philosophy?
Mr. Ralph's difficulty to understand texts
Regarding your difficulty to understand, Mr. Ralph:
Nice that you want to see how the title follows from the text - why not take the whole preceeding text, instead of just the end, as you suggested?
Why do you have such reading problems, Mr. Ralph?
PS: I already told you in a previous exchange, Mr. Ralph, when you asked a question that I expect you to justify why your question could help to better understand Steiner's text.
If you do not justify your question in this sense, Mr. Ralph, I do not feel obliged to divert my attention from this aim of understanding Steiner's text better.
Science and Knowledge
Hi,
Personally I think the following paragraph from Chapter 2 would not sit well if the title of the whole chapter were "The Fundamental Desire for Science":
This feeling makes us strive to bridge over this antithesis, and in this bridging lies ultimately the whole spiritual striving of mankind. The history of our spiritual life is a continuing search for the unity between ourselves and the world. Religion, art and science follow, one and all, this aim. The religious believer seeks in the revelation which God grants him the solution to the universal riddle which his I, dissatisfied with the world of mere appearance, sets before him. The artist seeks to embody in his material the ideas that are in his I, in order to reconcile what lives in him with the world outside. He too feels dissatisfied with the world of mere appearance and seeks to mould into it that something more which his I, transcending it, contains. The thinker seeks the laws of phenomena, and strives to penetrate by thinking what he experiences by observing. Only when we have made the world-content into our thought-content do we again find the unity out of which we had separated ourselves. We shall see later that this goal can be reached only if the task of the research scientist is conceived at a much deeper level than is often the case. The whole situation I have described here presents itself to us on the stage of history in the conflict between the one-world theory, or monism, and the two-world theory, or dualism.
Steiner is pointing to a basic human urge which includes within its ken such phenomena as religion, art and science. It may be that science or a development of science (spiritual science?) will prove to be that which best meets this fundamental urge, I believe that is part of what Steiner is driving at in his "Philosophy of Freedom". But that doesn't necessarily justify using the word "Science" in the title of this particular chapter at this particular point.
In my opinion the title "The Fundamental Desire for Science" is not justified by the content of Chapter 2. I vote for retaining the word "knowledge".
Regards,
Tim
Mr. Bourke's opinion about "Wissenschaft"
What is for Rudolf Steiner's text the difference between "science" and "knowledge", Mr. Bourke?
Wissenschaft
Hi Beginner,
Knowing no German really I am totally reliant on my reading of the various English translations of the text plus Google.
As I understand Steiner's meaning here, he is referring to "knowledge" as something which human beings universally strive for through such activities as art, religion and science.
However doing a quick Google and looking at the original German it appears that "Wissenschaft" and "science" mean almost the same thing. But "scholarship" or "systematic knowledge" appear to be other meanings.
Perhaps a source of the problem lies in the fact that it appears "Wissenschaft" is derived from the German verb "Wissen" "to know" whereas "science" does not appear to have a corresponding verb in English - you have to say something like "know scientifically".
"The Fundamental Urge to Systematic Knowledge"... probably not a good option ;-)
Anyway I think I can see why so many translators have opted for "Knowledge". But I can also see why you might consider translating "Wissenschaft" as "Science" here.
Regards,
Tim
Beware of Mr. Bourke
Mr. Bourke does not answer my question, but provides misinformation - in addition to his opinions. Because Mr. Bourke is of the opinion the German noun Wissenschaft in the German title Der Grundtrieb zur Wissenschaft would be better translated as knowledge than as science and propagates his opinion on this website which is dedicated to understand Rudolf Steiner's book, I asked Mr. Bourne how are the words "science" and knowledge" used in Steiner's text - what is the difference between them?
Mr. Bourke claims Steiner "is referring to 'knowledge' as something which human beings universally strive for through such activities as art, religion and science", but doesn't bother to quote any Steiner passages he claims to intepret. The reason for this methodological oversight by Mr. Bourke might simply be that his "intepretation" has its justification in whatever except the Steiner text. Let us assume, however, that because Mr. Bourke seldom fails to mention his lack of German proficiency, his methodological omission is due to overcautious reluctance to present the English translations.
Mr. Bourke informs us above: "it appears 'Wissenschaft' is derived from the the German verb 'Wissen'. Although we may know very little about the German language, what we do know enables us to easily recognize that what Mr. Bourke writes here is at least in one, if not more, aspects, incorrect. The German verb cannot be "Wissen" - this is the nominalized form of the German verb "wissen". The German verb "wissen" can become by nominalization the German noun "[das] Wissen".
Beware
Hi Beginner,
I totally agree beware taking anything I say as 100% accurate or correct ;-)
It is amazing the difference a capital can make (W/w). Looks like you worked out more or less what I meant anyway!
Thanks,
Tim
Accuracy of meaning is not the same as a translation
I suggest that we all consider the following phrase:
The basis for the insistent demand for systematic explanations that expand the totality of human knowedge
This is meaningful but it is too long to be a translation of Steiner's chapter heading. This phrase can help us to understand what Chapter 2 is all about.
Beginner has recently made some accurate observations here and I look forward to his comments.
I am pushed for time just now. Back soon.
Interesting...
Thanks John I will have to think about that one for a while ;-)
Wissenschaft
There lives in many German words the possibility to find overlapping meanings and correspondences (similar meanings) with a range of English words because English generally applies more limited definitions to itself in prose. (In poetry, English likes to improvise itself more openly.)
For example Wissenschaft can also mean scholarship, and der Wissenschaftier is a researcher.
It may be unreasonably pedantic to suggest that science is the ONLY translation possible for Wissenschaft. We could consider scientific research as an appropriate translation in the title of Chapter 2.
Post new comment