Spiritual and Social Changes in the Development of Humanity

GA 196 — 15 February 1920, Dornach

Fifteenth Lecture

Yesterday and the day before, I tried to explain how necessary it is for the future development of humanity that people come to a real self-knowledge, that is, to a knowledge of humanity. But how it is impossible to come to a knowledge of humanity without finding the connection of the human being with the extra-terrestrial worlds. Of all that the human being carries with him in his essential being through his journey through life, the physical organization is only the smallest part. But only this physical organization, as it is found in the human being today, is fundamentally an earthly product. That which otherwise belongs to the human being's essential being is not an earthly product in the sense that I have discussed it from a certain point of view in these two lectures.

But the present physical human organization already indicates that man as such is a being that points beyond the immediate present. Although the physical organization certainly points to the earthly, in the earthly, man's physical organization points us beyond the immediate world-historical moment into the past and into the future. Among the abilities of man, we have had to emphasize cognitive abilities: sensory activity, intelligence, memory, and we have had to emphasize feeling, desire and will: abilities that are more of a nature of desire.

Now, when we ask ourselves: What must man have in his physical organization in order to develop cognitive abilities? — we must turn our attention to the human head organization and everything connected with it. It is only in the way I explained it yesterday and the day before — but in that way — that the main organization is necessary to develop cognitive abilities for the ego, for earthly human consciousness. It is wrong to believe that the eye is the absolute creator of the visual sensation; but it is right to know that the eye is the mediator of the visual sensation for the consciousness of the I. And the same applies to the other senses, especially the higher ones.

In this way, and with many variations, the human bodily organization points to the earthly; but at the same time it points beyond the present moment, so that we can say: The human being, as we see him before us in his head organization, points to the previous earth life. Just as our intelligence points to the distant, very distant past solar life, so our present physical head organization, with the earthly nature of the cognitive abilities, that is, for the organization of the cognitive abilities towards the I-consciousness, points back to our earlier earth course. I have already pointed out what the human head actually is. You can say the following schematically: The human being consists of the head and the rest of the organization. — Let us say (see drawing), this is the present course of life (center), this is the previous course of life (left), this is the following course of life (right). So we can say: the head of our present life originated through the metamorphosis of our remaining bodily organization in the previous life, and we have lost our head from the previous life. — Of course, I do not mean the physical organization — that is obvious — but the forces, the formative forces that the physical organization really has. What we now carry in us, as the rest of the human organization, the trunk with limbs, in addition to the main organization, the carrier of the cognitive abilities for the I, will become the main organization of our future life on earth.

You already carry within you the powers that will be concentrated in the head in your later life on earth. What you accomplish today with your arms, what you accomplish with your legs, will become part of the inner organization of the head in your next life on earth. And the powers that emanate from your head in your next life on earth will become your karma, your destiny for that life. But that which will be your fate in your next life on earth will pass indirectly through the rest of your organization, through which you will enter into human life today, into your future life as a head.

If today, let us say, you behave lovingly towards another person through an earthly walk, then that is something that your extra-head organism has carried out. That will be a head power that your destiny brings about in your next earthly life. So then, our head with its abilities always points to the earlier course of earthly life, namely to the organization of the limbs. Man is subject to this great metamorphosis. His head is a metamorphosed organism from a previous incarnation, and his present trunk and especially limb organization underlies the organization of the head in the next life on earth.

This is something that must, in a sense, have practical significance in the coexistence of people. For when a person knows that he is integrated into the development of humanity, only then does he feel that he is truly standing in this earthly life, and he will understand many things that are otherwise incomprehensible. We now live, as I have often explained, in the fifth post-Atlantic period. It began in the middle of the 15th century, that is, in the middle of the 15th century, new conditions of existence were given for European civilization with its American extension, insofar as it arose later. But the consequences of these new conditions of existence have not yet occurred. The people of the civilized countries often live in habits, even in thought-habits, which correspond more to the earlier, the fourth post-Atlantic period. We have educated our intelligentsia not in the things that belong to the present, but we have had them learn Latin and Greek and so on. A Greek would have had different views in this regard. He would have looked askance at the time when Greek culture was at its zenith if his son had been taught Egyptian or Persian or something similar instead of Greek. But the time when this was still permissible, when we could still cling to the remnants of the Greco-Latin period, is past. For people born after the mid-15th century are all rebirths, in essence, of those physical human beings who lived in the Greco-Latin period. What did they bring with them, these people? The heads of the bodies they had in the Greco-Latin period. So if someone was born, let us say in the 16th or 17th century, he came into the world with a head, that is, with cognitive abilities, insofar as the head is the mediator of cognitive abilities for the sense of self, which arose from his body from the Greek-Latin period. Therefore, he still came into the world with tendencies that originated in this Greek-Latin period. But this is now partly exhausted or is in the process of being exhausted. Very soon not many people will be born with minds from that time, but more and more people will be born who had their previous embodiment in the fifth post-Atlantic period, not all of them, but many, especially those who set the tone, or at least those who, towards the end of the fourth post-Atlantic period, lived with their bodies doing completely different things than those in the prime of the fourth post-Atlantic period.

This must be taken into account if we want to consciously place ourselves in the development of humanity: you have your head from your previous incarnation and you have your body so that you can prepare a later head for the following incarnation. And the time must come when the lack of awareness of this connection with previous and subsequent incarnations is just as much a sign of stupidity in people as it would be stupidity if one did not know how old one was, if one believed that he was only born last week, although he is already an adult, or if he believed or was made to believe, when he is a ten-year-old boy, that he would always remain a ten-year-old boy, that he would not even become an old man. Today man only lives selfishly in his one life on earth. At the most, he believes that there are a number of earth lives, but it becomes faith, it does not become practical wisdom of life, as this feeling of being in between the incarnations must be; as it must become practical wisdom of life when one has reached the age of forty, that one knows that the forty-year period is the continuation of childhood and youth and is the beginning of growing old and becoming an old man. What human consciousness encompasses must expand. It will not expand in a living way if it is not fertilized by insights from spiritual science. Otherwise it remains a mere abstract belief, otherwise people will continue to say: Yes, I know, I have already been on earth countless times, and I will come back to earth countless times again. But this belief does not matter; only the living feeling of being part of the development of humanity, the feeling: With your head you are actually quite an old fellow, because that is only the fully grown body of a previous incarnation, with the rest of your physical organization you are a baby, because that will only grow into a mature head in the next incarnation – this feeling of the human being as a real duality placed in time is something that must become a part of living consciousness. And just as today one tries to determine, by means of all kinds of skull measurements and similar interesting stuff, how the individual human beings, human nations, human races differ on earth, so in the future, according to soul-spiritual knowledge, which, however, cannot be gained without such foundations as we have developed in these days, one will have to recognize the people who inhabit the earth in their differentiation. We will have to ask about the spiritual and psychological peculiarities of humanity scattered across the earth. And salvation cannot come until our university sciences in particular are completely imbued with the kind of attitude and approach that we have come to know in these days. Our universities will ride humanity into decline if they are not fertilized in all their parts by that cosmic knowledge that can only be gained today through spiritual science. Likewise, in the future, people's religious feelings must be based on what man can know about the spiritual and soul. Otherwise we will not get ahead. For if we direct our attention to the spiritual and soul life, we shall become accustomed to characterizing human groups throughout the world according to their own soul and spiritual qualities, and not merely according to their physical characteristics, as is often done in present-day anthropology. Anthroposophy must take the place of mere anthropology. But the matter has a very serious, practical side. Certain things that are happening in the present, that underlie the serious events of this present, cannot be understood at all if one does not have the opportunity to focus one's attention on the spiritual qualities of the members of humanity. And here I would like to draw attention to something that seems to me to be extraordinarily important. During these terrible war events, well-meaning people have often emphasized one thing for Europe, and actually Ernest Renan, the French writer who described the “Life of Jesus” and the apostles, emphasized this one thing for Europe as early as 1870; during this war period it has been repeated many times. Renan said that for the salvation of Europe it is absolutely necessary that a peaceful coexistence should occur between the French nation, the English state and the German people. In particular, this has often been emphasized during the war by many well-meaning and unbiased people who have not been beguiled by what was officially commanded as opinion or what was spread as opinion by people interested in this or that cause. Now one can say: the development of Europe in recent decades has been so contrary to what reasonable people must regard as a basic condition for the progress of civilization in Europe. Without this peaceful cooperation, these unbiased people said, Europe cannot continue. But this peaceful cooperation never really came about in recent years; at most, a semblance of such peaceful cooperation emerged.

Now, if we look at European conditions from the outside – but also with a mind to examine the spiritual and soul – we can see the essential differences between these three parts of humanity. We must not forget that since the beginning of the fifth post-Atlantean period and then during the course of that part of the fifth epoch that has just expired, Europe has developed and the French nation has increasingly become a unified nation whose members felt themselves to be a unified nation. One could say that the entire spiritual life of the French nation was directed towards feeling itself to be a unified nation, towards bearing in consciousness something of the feeling: I am a Frenchman. One can study how, in the course of the centuries, what is summarized in the four words: I am a Frenchman, has gradually come about. If one is attentive to such a thing as the development of: I am a Frenchman! we must look at the parallel phenomenon within the German development. For example, the expression “I am a German” did not develop in the same way within the now defunct German Empire, nor could it always be expressed with: “I am a German”! — To say “I am a German” with full intensity “I am a German!” meant imprisonment and incarceration. It was the worst political crime. People have forgotten. The worst political crime was to feel German. Because in this Germany, the territorial principality had engulfed everything, and it was forbidden, forbidden internally as a way of thinking, to perceive the territory inhabited by Germans as a single entity. It was only in 1848 that the idea arose among some people that those who belong to the German people could somehow be regarded as a unity. But even then it was still considered something heretical, it was seen as heretical. And then it happened that actually only the people who were historically linked to the development of the German people felt it as something very intimate, that they regarded it as their intimacy. Read about how people like Herman Grimm, who really thought about and talked about such things, looked back on their own youth, which still fell in the years before the 1950s, and how they describe how they had no way of expressing the judgment of feeling, the judgment of the mind: I am a German. There is a huge difference here. But look at this huge difference inwardly. Consider the fact that, although it was a political and police crime to call yourself a German as late as the first half of the 19th century, the unified spiritual culture of Germany had long been established by then. Goetheanism, with all that belonged to it, was there; one did not read Goethe, but he had worked; one did not understand Goethe, but he had said great things for all Germans. But these “all Germans” were never allowed to admit to the outer life that they somehow belonged together. At least it could not be a thought that could lay claim to reality, that is, something lived in the German people, as in the depths of consciousness, which of course had no external political reality. In its historical development, everything that the French felt inwardly, that which constituted their unity, became an external state reality. In Germany, everything that existed in the form of external institutions was in contradiction to the inner spirituality of the German people. This is a very significant distinction that exists between Central Europe and Western Europe. If you take that and describe these things in detail, you would get the history of the 19th century. And if these details were to live in the minds of the people of Europe, who are dependent on living and feeling together, then the feelings of horror that led to today's decline would very soon come to an end. But it will not be possible to develop such feelings in an international way without considering the human being in his entirety and knowing how to look at him in terms of his knowledge and his ability to desire; for it is only by directing human consciousness to these mysteries of the human existence that one becomes aware of the need to engage in such reflections. For these reflections, which we have now undertaken, only then teach the right thing, the thing that matters. Why has the French people become such a compact mass, in which everyone feels French, as it was forbidden for the Germans to do until the German Reich of Bismarckian coloration came into being? What is the reason for this? It is because in France the old Latin-Roman nature has been preserved, the nature which I described to you here weeks ago as being that which is primarily the juridical-national nature. From Egypt, through Romanism, the national-juridical nature entered into Latin. The French nation has taken it over. No other nation on earth understands better than the French people, from their own feelings, what the legal system is and what the state is. But if one really wants to find the right way to penetrate through that, one might say, oppressive thing that the German development still has in the 19th century, this contradicting of the external state development, which made it necessary to be imprisoned if one felt German and not Prussian, not Württemberg, not Bavarian or Austrian, if one looks closely at what , and if one studies it in detail, one really does not study it in the way that the unscrupulous school tradition today inculcates in people, which has become German intellectual life from the turn of the 18th to the 19th century. One studies how Goetheanism flows into the great spirits, who are no longer even mentioned, while the spiritual antipodes are celebrated as great celebrated as great men, one studies how Goetheanism flows into people like Troxler, like Schubert and so on, then one finds out that it was precisely the lack of talent for the state, the drowsiness for the state, the danger of being imprisoned if one wanted to be a citizen of German coloration that now predestined the German people to develop a good understanding for the spiritual, for the life of the mind. It has only been repulsed for the time being by the industrial and commercial development that has taken place since the 1870s. This has thoroughly dispelled the German spirit in Germany, and, as an invasion from abroad, has taken away all that was left of German spirituality. Goetheanism has been forgotten. The fact that a mind like Leibniz's lived among the Germans, for example, is something that high school students should know better than what Cicero wrote, but they hardly know that Leibniz lived.

These are things that come into consideration and that are deeper than anything that is cited today for the differentiation of the European center from the European West. And when one speaks of the need for peace between the European center and the European West, one must be clear about the fact that the whole historical development shows that such a peace can only come about when the Germans themselves feel: they are not predisposed for the external legal state life, they are predisposed to cultivate spiritual life. But it must be made possible for them; today it is made impossible for them, today they also no longer have any responsibility for it. One must know that the actual state people is the French people, because they understand best how the individual human being feels as a citizen. Thus we have spread the spiritual life and the legal and state life over the main civilization of Europe. These things are at the same time, I might say, distributed among the peoples as gifts. And economic life, the actual field of the more recent development of humanity, has been given to the English-American people. All that belongs to the understanding of economic life has therefore found its best expression in England and America. The French understand nothing of economics; they are better as bankers. The Germans have never understood economics; they have no talent for it. And when they have tried to manage the economy in recent decades, always talking about an upswing and a “place in the sun” or something similar, it meant that they were talking about something that was completely beyond their abilities and which they were failing to grasp. Because even all that emerged as economic parliamentarism in the second half of the 19th century originated in England. Those who were good parliamentarians in the economic sense are England's disciples as far away as Hungary. If you look at the people who have best mastered the art of parliamentarism in parliaments, such as in the Austrian parliament for a while, but especially in the Hungarian parliament for a long time, and if you look at where these people have learned, then you will see: In England they have learned economic parliamentarism. — And if you ask: Where did German Social Democracy come from? — then you will find: Marx and Engels had to go to England in order to distill from English economic conditions that which was then theoretically incorporated into German intellectual life and worked through to its logical conclusion. And where are the very first roots of Leninism and Trotskyism? They are to be found in English economic ideas; except that the English will take care not to think through these economic ideas of theirs to their ultimate consequences.

Thus these three fields, which I have often said must be compatible with each other, stand in a threefold relationship: German, spiritual; French, state-legal; and English, economic. How can we find a way to achieve international cooperation? By pouring the threefold structure over all these fields. For then what one person is talented for can be passed on to the other, otherwise there is no way. This is the historical impulse. This is actually how history should be studied, especially in the 19th century.

You cannot study history if you are only taught what is taught in today's schools. This history is only there to be forgotten, because you cannot use it in life. History teaching only makes sense if you can use it in your life. But you will only develop such history teaching if you understand the whole nature of the human being. And so it is with the other branches of our higher education today. The way in which these are cultivated at universities today leads to destruction. Only the fertilization of spiritual science can lead up to a new beginning. What is to happen today has in fact already been prepared by historical circumstances. But do not think that these historical circumstances can be properly understood by anyone who does not first know enough about anthroposophy to become familiar, for example, with something like the three 'beautiful' figures (see drawing on p. 229) in their mutual relationship, or with what we developed here yesterday and the day before. For only by soaring to such thoughts can one then consider the other in its deeper essence. Otherwise one has no interest in this other, otherwise one is satisfied with what school science gives one. And if one is satisfied with what school science gives one, then one is compelled to spend one's free time on the things that today's people spend their free time on.

Such things should truly be known far and wide today, so that there would be a sufficiently large number of people who would have an understanding for these things. Because today it really can't be about anything else but finding a sufficiently large number of people who, to begin with, have an understanding for such things. Until there is a sufficient number of people who have an understanding for such things, nothing can be done with them. One cannot go directly to institutions, one cannot immediately cultivate new institutions, but it is a matter of finding as many people as possible in whose cognitive abilities these things are present, then one will be able to form institutions with these people. But then even the opposing powers will never be able to resist.

Today, one discovers something remarkable when one looks at what people think about European life, about the way in which this European life should unfold from person to person. I must always share with you the details of what is happening. Today I would like to give you just a small sample of what we have had to deal with as important matters. Mr. Ferriere, who I told you about, who spread the defamation that I was the advisor of the former German Emperor, was even called the “Rasputin” of the German Emperor and the like, has been exposed by Dr. Boos has been shown up in an “open letter”, and in a parenthesis in this letter from Dr. Boos, I also stated what I once explained here about my relationship - or rather, lack of relationship - to the German Kaiser. Now the man had to admit that he had lied. But he confesses in a very peculiar way, and this way is characteristic. I will try to reproduce the French sentences in German as clearly as possible. I am actually quite happy to reproduce them in German, because it is only through this that they acquire a certain character that I would like to give them. So, after Dr. Boos's letter, it says here:

“We [the editorial staff] have communicated the above letter from Dr. Roman Boos to our correspondent” — that is, Mr. Ferrière —, “who answers us as follows: 'The above document is typical of the psychologist. Here it shows what Latin irony becomes under Germanic eyes. Truly, these people' — he means those who have Germanic eyes — 'take everything seriously. But my readers, they, they have not been put off! My article contains jokes — de la plaisanterie — but no malice — méchancetés. And if I was badly informed — I declare this as my fault, in the conviction that my interlocutor will not hold it against me. — Elegantly, it is assumed that 'he will not hold it against me'! — 'By interlocutor, I mean the sociologist, of whom I spoke as a sociologist [Dr. Steiner], and not the signatory of the above letter, whose name I did not mention in my article [Dr. Boos]. In fact, au fait, what can you do about this affair?"

So a man is capable of apologizing with such uselessness after not just lying, but slandering in the worst possible way. But one exposes oneself to the danger of being taken 'klobig' again if one takes things so 'seriously', if one maintains that slander is not a 'plaisanterie' but a 'méchanceté'.

Then it continues, and now comes something particularly beautiful:

"At the time I wrote my article, I knew Mr. Rudolf Steiner only from his printed works. Since that time, I have come to know him through people who know him well. My opinion has changed completely, and I had prepared an article in which I express my respect for the moral significance of his personal work. I admit that the letter from M. R. Boos has somewhat cooled my ardor.

Cute, isn't it? Very cute! He would have written the most beautiful article of praise if he hadn't been given such a telling-off! But I cannot bring myself to agree that this is a characteristic of the Latin race (compare “Germanic” above), because it would be somewhat insulting if lying and slander were considered something elegant and praiseworthy in the Latin race, something that is only “plaisanterie”. It cannot be a peculiarity of the Latin race... Now the gentleman continues:

"I could answer this letter a lot of things, but what would be the use of that? - à quoi bon? - One of the Latin qualities is to be brief. I was wrong to leave the terrain of verifiable facts. I withdraw my erroneous assertions and I conclude that the rumors that are circulating, even if they come from several different sources and from people who are well informed, may be false. I take note of this.

So, firstly, the man is so naive that he believes he has to believe all the rumors that are going around, because he is only now taking note of them. But secondly – yes, one again exposes oneself to the danger of being “clunky” in one's thinking or, as Ferriere says, “Germanic”: if one tries to think such “elegant” thoughts through, it is impossible, because, one is obviously not allowed to do so, otherwise one belongs to those people of whom it is said here: “Vraiment, ces gens-là prennent tout au sérieux.” But you just can't help but wonder: so the man is taking action to ensure that people don't believe all the rumors that are going around; but if people are like him, then they are precisely the ones who spread the rumors the most into the most diverse milieus. Only, you can't look for the thought behind the words in the case of such people.

They see from such a document that it is truly not a matter of teaching such people reason. One has only to make the other public aware of what kind of disgraceful people are walking around in the world and writing articles and slandering. Because it is not at all a matter of refuting these people, but merely of rendering them harmless, because the fact that these people exist is the harm.

If nothing is done on the part of spiritual wisdom, we shall go more and more rapidly towards the time when such a mentality will spread more and more. For in the end the materialists of all colours and all environments will say more and more of those who take things spiritually: Oh, those people, yes truly, they take everything so seriously! — It will soon be serious to even speak of the spirit. It is serious, yes; but one should not be serious! As long as such an attitude spreads - and it is spreading - there will be no ground for improvement in Europe. These are the people who have made Europe what it is. But we must work to ensure that a sufficiently large number of people develop an understanding for the need for change. Today, this should really be obvious, at least to those who have in some way come into contact with humanities.

Next Friday I will speak in particular about the development of imperialism in the world, that is, I will give an episodic lecture, a historical consideration of the development of imperialism from the earliest times, from Egyptian imperialism up to today's imperialisms. I would like to give a brief overview of the historical development of imperialism.