From a Unitary State to the Tripartite Social Organism

GA 334 — 6 May 1920, Basel

11. The Spiritual and Moral Strength of Contemporary Peoples in the Light of Spiritual Science (Anthroposophy)

Yesterday I endeavored to show how, with the rise of a world view that is entirely influenced by a foundation in natural science, it gradually became impossible to associate moral human values in the human consciousness with what stands as a world picture before the human soul in this form. And it was pointed out how this determination of the moral human value must in turn be found from the sources of spiritual-scientific knowledge. Yesterday, I endeavored to show how humanity can come to a full awareness of its moral dignity by taking up spiritual science.

We can approach the same task from a different angle by undertaking a spiritual-scientific study of the natures of the peoples inhabiting the Earth today, by investigating the spiritual and moral forces at work in these peoples, in order to answer the question: To what extent can people of the present day strive, out of the various national forces, towards what can be called a social recovery based on ethical, moral recovery?

We have experienced as humanity that external material, namely economic, interrelations have gradually spread to almost the entire inhabited earth. The earth has become an economic area. And people were forced, according to the knowledge they had, to organize this economic area of the earth in a certain way: to bring the old state structures and folk organisms, which were created under completely different conditions, into a relationship with each other in such a way that they could be joined together, poorly and poorly, into this common economic area, which is precisely what more recent civilization has brought to humanity.

That this integration has not become possible is shown by the developments of the last five to six years; but it is also shown by the developments that we are still undergoing: the decline of our public life. Consider all the praise of modern civilization at the beginning of the 20th century, in the way that people took care of their affairs across national and state borders at lightning speed, as it were, and how telegraph, telephone and so on worked with tremendous speed that had never been imagined before, and how all the boundaries that had previously seemed insurmountable seemed to have been overcome. And lo and behold, all of that was so unfounded that today we are facing national borders that are more sharply defined than they have been in a long time, have not been defined more strictly in a long time. And what is the main thing, that which a few centuries ago, perhaps even into the 19th century, was still perceived as natural, the closing of national and state borders, today we can only see it as something völkisch perverse, perverse to humanity, something that cannot be justified by the real conditions of human development. And the question must arise: what has caused humanity to take such a terrible step backwards?

We will very soon discover the reason, at least superficially, if we ask ourselves: has the soul and spiritual life of humanity kept pace with all that has been created in material terms across the globe? We have spread the same type of railway transport across the entire civilized world and also across the uncivilized world; we have understood how to carry the other means of transport everywhere, even to carry the type of transport everywhere. We have not understood how to bring a mutual, real understanding of humanity and the world everywhere. We have, so to speak, experienced the economic and material body of a unified world culture, and we have not been able to bring about an ensoulment, a spiritualization of this material and economic body of a unified world culture. What has taken shape as an economic and material unity across the earth has remained soulless. The question must therefore be asked: How can we attain the soul of the earth's humanity, which is striving for community? There is no other way to achieve this than to decide to look at the real essence of the peoples inhabiting the earth today.

Now, of course, it is not possible to go into all the details of different peoples in a short lecture; but it is perhaps possible to sketch a picture based on certain typical characteristics of how people live on earth in terms of their essence, their soul being. And here we may say: If we look at humanity on earth with the eyes that spiritual science trains, then in oriental regions we see a type of human being that preserves an ancient culture - albeit one that declining in modern times. This type of human being had ancestors in ancient times who had an extremely high culture and civilization, although one that is very different from our own. We can see various peoples differentiating themselves from this oriental type. It will not be possible to go into this differentiation; but the type can be characterized to a certain extent.

Then we see a second type of human being. I would like to call him the middle type of human being, the one who, in particular, formed the basis of European culture, of Central European culture, who goes back to the Greek people, and who, in a certain respect, has found his continuation in the present in the Central European peoples.

And we see a third type of human being, the type of the Western peoples, which has then found its most radical expression in the American peoples.

From these three types, we will be able to try to find an understanding of the essential nature of the peoples of the earth.

Let us now turn our attention to the East. Today, something is asserting itself out of oriental civilization, as exemplified by Rabindranath Tagore, whose words sound so peculiar to us, partly so familiar because they touch the innermost sides of our soul, partly so foreign because they are spoken out of completely different foundations than what can be spoken out of Central and Western European culture. One is filled with humble respect when one delves into this oriental civilization and what it has produced for the Oriental with his full humanity. One need only consider individual examples: the Vedas, or that which the Vedanta world view has produced in Indian culture; one can delve into that which has been produced by Persian culture; one can delve into that which the Babylonian-Assyrian world . In all these cases, one can say that the person who studies these things in modern times with the modern scientific method of investigation will perhaps not be moved by them, but will merely decipher all kinds of strange, exotic things from Sanskrit, from the sacred scriptures. But the one who approaches these oriental cultures with a full heart and a healthy, open, free mind will find how wonderful it is that they take us back to the primeval times of humanity, when, however, the whole way in which human beings related to the world was different from the way it has become today with us and with Western peoples. But this instinctive way, this intuitive way of relating to the world, this dreaming about the world, if we understand it correctly, gives deep, tremendously deep insights into the world nature of man, insights that we, despite all our scientific and other efforts, have not yet arrived at in the middle and western world.

If we ask: What is the basis of such things? — I must refer you to something that I have already mentioned here, I must refer you to what I have asserted in my book “Von Seelenrätseln” (Mysteries of the Soul) about the threefold nature of man, in order to gain a general idea of the nature of the peoples of the earth, of what I have already mentioned here.

I have already mentioned here that my assertions regarding the threefold nature of the individual are based on thirty years of study, and that the individual actually consists of three differently organized members: what may be called the nerve-sense human being, what may be called the rhythmic human being, and what may be called the metabolic human being.

These three aspects of human nature are not so distinct from each other that we can say: I draw a line here, the nerve-sense human being stops, the rhythmic human being begins. These three aspects are interwoven. But they can be distinguished from each other by someone who wants to differentiate them; for the soul also points back to the threefold human being. Everything that takes place in our sensory perceptions and in our imagination points to the nerve-sense human being as its tool. Everything that relates to our feeling, that is experienced in our feeling, points back to the rhythmic human being. And it is a great mistake — which will be recognized when our abstract natural science becomes healthy again — to believe that the human being's emotional and feeling life is directly connected to the nervous system. It is only indirectly connected to the nervous system. Just as our mental life is directly connected to the nervous system, our emotional life is directly connected to our breathing, our heart rhythm, in short, to the rhythmic human being; and to the nervous system only in that we perceive the rhythm and thus the world of feelings. Only the perceptions, the perceptions of our feelings, are mediated by the nervous system. The feelings themselves are directly connected to the rhythmic human being. And so the impulses of the will, the volition, are directly connected with the metabolic human being. And again, the thoughts of the will, the thoughts of our volitional impulses, they are the ones that are connected with the nervous system, not the will itself, which is directly connected with the metabolic system. I can only mention this here.

Something that I may now regard as a scientifically proven fact, although the whole of external science still resists it – it will be forced to accept it by the facts themselves – is that what appears in the individual human being as three parts of his being is not distributed in the same way among the people, insofar as they belong to the individual peoples, whom we want to consider today only according to their types. For the remarkable thing is that, especially when we look at these oriental peoples, namely at the way in which oriental peoples were formed in ancient times, when they developed their wonderful culture, we find that these oriental peoples, especially in the period in which they developed the most spiritual culture, were completely organized around the metabolism. This was the predominant factor in the primitive oriental peoples: the metabolism at work in them. The rhythmic activity and especially the nervous sensory activity receded behind the metabolism.

The spiritual scientist is surprised when he goes back to primeval times in the Orient and finds the remarkably sophisticated and refined Vedanta and Veda culture and everything that has otherwise emerged from Oriental wisdom and the Oriental world view. He is surprised that this is directly related to a particular refinement of metabolism and a decline of the other aspects of human nature.

It must be said, however, that it was precisely through this refinement of metabolism that the Oriental achieved what I mean here by his fine, his high-minded culture. Just as the plant, with its roots sunk in the soil, draws the juices of the soil directly into itself, just as it attracts everything in its surroundings with its blossoms, just as it is connected with its entire metabolism to its natural environment, to everything that it reflects like a mirror, so it is with the Oriental essence of man in those times of Asian primeval culture. There the human being does not merely absorb the substances of the environment, as we do now; he does not unconsciously inhale the surrounding air as we do; he absorbs everything that causes his metabolism with original, elementary power. In this way, he lives in that which he takes up through metabolism. And we can say that that which lives on in the human being through metabolism, that which becomes sensation in him, that which becomes thought in him, is just as much a natural expression of his being from the relationship of metabolism with his surroundings as the tree flower and fruit that we see on the tree, directly reflect the relationship to the environment; in its flower and fruit, the tree reflects what lives in its environment in terms of climate, substances and materials. The people of the Orient have, of course, taken what they have absorbed from outside and developed it into a high level of flowering and fruit. But what is now emerging in the older oriental culture appears to us as if it were born of nature itself, as if nature itself had blossomed there in human knowledge and human understanding, and man should only have become the organ of passage for what nature itself wants to create in wise and meaningful ideas about the world.

This is the peculiarity of this ancient Oriental culture that it literally provides the proof: when nature itself is allowed to speak, when it is allowed to make an organ for itself in man, then it speaks in the highest spirituality. And this ancient Oriental culture has become the highest spirituality precisely because it is only through man that what nature itself speaks is realized. This ancient Oriental culture elevated to the level of flowers that wisdom which can be fostered by nature itself, it elevated it to a new being of the senses. Nature reveals itself in supersensible contemplation. Nature does not reveal itself — and this is directly proved — through materialistic contemplation, through materialistic attitude; nature reveals itself through spiritual contemplation, through spiritual attitude. Nature does not speak of matter when it expresses its essence through man; nature speaks of spirit when man does not merely hold up to it the view of mere gross matter.

This is the wonderful teaching that comes from the ancient oriental culture. It once lived in the Orient. It also influenced the outer life in the Orient in the form of theocracy. The people who were the children of nature, cared for by nature itself, not the students of nature who developed its wisdom like trees develop their fruits, these people spoke only of the divine, the superhuman, when they spoke of the world. They spoke of what is supersensible. They also applied this view of the supersensible to social life: they founded their theocracies. This type of human being brought forth what we can call the view of the divine through human beings in the original culture of Asia. It is the view of the divine as spiritual that is the legacy of these ancient oriental times.

Christianity is based on a fact. Those who do not see the origin of Christianity in the fact of Golgotha do not understand Christianity correctly. However, it is different with the views of this Christianity, with how we understand Christianity. The views that enable us to understand Christianity by looking only at the historical, without new spiritual-scientific deepening, are those of oriental inheritance. For there one reached the superhuman, there one reached the supersensible-spiritual. Therefore, basically, even Christianity spread out from the Middle East and the West.

As an ideal, man can always consider the member that is, as it were, above that which is elementally implanted in him by nature. The Oriental has incorporated as his elementary the metabolic system as his own. The superimposed system is the rhythmic system. In this he seeks his ideal. He seeks to rise from what nature gives him to what he can conquer for himself in conscious human activity. Therefore, the goal of the oriental type, of those who strive for an ideal, is to strive for the rhythmic human being. And we see how those who, like a natural blossom of the Vedas, the Vedanta wisdom, have brought forth the most wonderful view of nature into human culture, how they regard as their ideal a special way of rising consciously into spiritual worlds through the rhythmic human being. Unconsciously, they rise to the spirituality of which I have just spoken. Consciously, they elevate it to an ideal through which the rhythmic human being can rise. This is: to regulate breathing in a certain way, to practice yoga philosophy, yoga practice, to train and educate what is in the rhythmic human being in a certain way. The rhythmic human being becomes their ideal. That which, I would say, lies one step above the metabolic human being, becomes the ideal for this human being.

And so we see how a priesthood, a teaching profession or actually a humanity, which is both at the same time, crystallizes out of the oriental folk type, which sees the ideal in this yoga training, to organize the rhythmic human being in a special way in order to achieve something higher than what can be achieved through the elementary implanted powers.

If we look at everything that we can learn from this ancient oriental culture and see how it reaches up to the purest, finest spiritual level, and how a wonderful, concrete abundance really does flow from the spiritual — for, full of content, it may seem fantastic, full of content is this spirituality - we must say: What these people could never acquire, who were so great in the indicated areas and who sought their ideal in the training of the rhythmic human being, what is missing there, is a certain life in the right, a certain structure in a community of rights. It is impossible to somehow incorporate this into the culture that produced the Vedas, the Vedanta, and the other spiritual structures of the Orient! No matter how much one may misunderstand what can be found of this kind by applying Western concepts to it, an unbiased judgment must say: There is spiritual life there. The legal and economic life is instinctive; it remains instinctive. It rises from the foundation in which the economic, in which the legal or state life exists, and from this the spiritual life rises to the highest consciousness. And basically, Westerners live for the most part from the legacies of Orientalism in the spiritual life.

We have even seen how, in a certain direction, which is called the theosophical one, often confused with ill will or lack of understanding for our movement, how, through this theosophical direction, I would like to say, ultimately, out of full decadence, people are once again seeking to carry a new spirituality from the Orient to the West, always this trait of carrying the spiritual from the Orient to the West. Today it signifies an extreme decadence. At the time when the Orient could give Christianity the necessary spiritual depth, it was a matter of course.

A different picture presents itself when we consider the type of people who, I might say, appears most sympathetically in the ancient Greek people, but who then found their continuation in Central Europe. There we have the other aspect of human nature, so to speak, developed with elementary necessity. People are usually unaware of what is present in them as a self-evident entity. The people of Central Europe do not know that the main thing in them, in relation to which the other aspects of human existence recede into the background, is the rhythmic human being. All the virtues and vices of Central European people and those who have been infected by them are based on this predominance of the rhythmic system.

The rhythmic system is connected with what human feeling is. Human feeling encompasses everything from the virtues of fortitude to the passions of courage and so on. All that Tacitus describes, for example, about the ancient Germans is basically something of the soul that is based on the rhythmic human being, just as Oriental wisdom and sensuousness are based on the metabolism. And that which makes the Greeks into such unified human beings, what we admire so much about the Greeks when we really understand them, this sense of proportion, is ultimately based on a perfectly adapted human rhythm of inhalation, exhalation and all the other rhythms. Greek symmetry is ultimately a consequence of the human rhythmic system.

What we see dawning in Greek art, what confronts us as Greek sculpture, is not something imitated from a model. What the Greeks sculpt is formed in such a way that they feel within themselves, as if it were a second person, the rhythmically harmonious human being in action and then develop it. Or, if they dissolve, represent it as in the well-known group of Laocoön. Everything that the Greeks achieved as a plastic human form is based on their feeling of themselves from within the symmetry of the rhythmic system.

And if we look, for example, at the Greek tragedies – one could see all sorts of things that express the Greek essence: passions are to develop through tragedy, fear and compassion. And again, through the same tragedy, which arouses fear and compassion, this passion should be calmed, worked off. That is catharsis. That is what the Greeks sought as self-regulation, as the rhythmic in drama, as an image of their own essence. And we hear Aristotle say that true virtue consists in not going to one extreme or the other, not to the spiritual or the material, not to the high or the low, but in keeping to the middle way. All that the Greeks experience as self-evident is the harmonious human being, who is harmonious through his rhythm of life.

And we see this play of the rhythmic system in the continuation of Greek culture, in Goetheanism, in what has taken place as a newer upsurge of spiritual life in Central Europe; we see it in particular in the figure of Goethe.

Just as the Oriental, by allowing the system of metabolism to speak within him, effectively placed before himself the highest spirituality, so the rhythmic system, which brings about the actual symmetry in the human being, placed the human being himself before him. And one cannot imagine a more beautiful expression of this need to present man in his harmonious proportions, through his life rhythm, than in Goethe's book about Winckelmann, where Goethe weaves everything he has to say about the harmonious human being into this book. In this book, we find beautiful expressions such as: “When nature has reached its pinnacle in man, and man takes in everything that is around him, order, harmony, measure and meaning, he feels himself again in himself as a whole nature and rises to the creation of a work of art.” Or: If nature has reached its summit in man, then, if it could understand itself, it would exult and admire this summit of its becoming and essence.

And one can say that when such mature words, words that are so completely sweet with cultural maturity, are spoken, then they are the expression of the whole essence that lies at the bottom of it all, in a national sense.

And when Schiller wrote that letter to Goethe at the beginning of the 1890s: “I have long observed the course of your being. You take all of nature together to build man out of its individual components. You construct man out of intuition. You could actually have done that perfectly only if you had been born a Greek, or at least an Italian.” This description of the human being from the depths of human nature, this presentation of the human being to humanity, just as the Oriental presents the divine to the world, in a sense nature itself presents its essence to the world – this presentation of the human being to humanity is the essence of the Mediterranean type of human being. For him, the next step is the ideal.

What the nerve-sense human being is, that becomes the ideal for him. Therefore, we from these Central European lands unconsciously see, just as the Oriental unconsciously asserts his spirituality from his metabolism, we see from the rhythm that which is natural culture asserting itself. On the other hand, we see the ideal of working towards the idea, of working towards idealism. And in Greek culture we can already see the germ of what idealism of thought was in Plato and Aristotle.

In turn, the ideal of spirituality arises out of the nervous-sensual human being in German idealism of world-views: in the whole Central European idealism of world-views, the ideal of spirituality arises out of the nervous-sensual human being, just as the ideal of yoga arises in the Orient. And there we see how what remains instinctive, really instinctive, is the economic organization, but how a second thing appears, which was still instinctive in the Orient and is now entering into consciousness: that is reflection, pondering on the legal nature of human social coexistence.

And so we see the legal nature of social coexistence developing out of the type of the middle peoples, especially in the middle regions.

The Oriental peoples developed a spirituality in ancient times. It then declined. And even when we hear Rabindranath Tagore speak today, it is like a sound from a distant, bygone era: beautiful, delicate, but we cannot believe that it still exists. And it really isn't there either. It is, I would say, a cozy abstraction. It speaks deeply to us, but it does not actually speak of a present reality. Because in the Orient this spirituality has also come into decadence, humanity preserves, so to speak, an inheritance of the oriental primeval culture through its inclination towards the spiritual life.

In addition, there is what man has to say about man, what man has to look at about man. And that has come through the middle population. There man stands before himself. In the Orient, man stands before the superhuman, and it is from the world of the superhuman that moral ideas spring.

It is emphasized again and again, even today, by Rabindranath Tagore, that the culture of the Orient is built above all on morality, on all moral qualities, while he accuses Western and American culture of being built on mechanism, on technical mechanism, on political state mechanism, that it is empty of moral ideas. And it is the case that in the East, from the vision that arises in the way we have described it, a wealth of moral ideas wells up from the spiritual world. And basically, we still live on these moral ideas today. For the materialism of the West, as was sufficiently clear from yesterday's lecture, has not produced any moral ideas as such. Moral ideas are an ancient inheritance, for they only flow into the human soul when this human soul has a connection to the spiritual world.

In Mediterranean culture: the human being stands before himself; he receives moral ideas as an inheritance. Ideas of right arise, the regulation of human relationships in such a way that the individual human being faces the individual human being in social life. One might say: by coming into his own being, the human being comes to ask: how do I follow that which is the moral idea? A need arises in the human being that the Oriental did not have, precisely at the time when his spiritual culture flowed most purely into his being. Within this entire culture of the Orient, the further back we go into older times, the word and the essence of freedom have no meaning. Man is a member of the world order; he is incorporated into the world order. Freedom is something that basically has no meaning. One cannot speak of it. For the commandments of the moral life, which are connected with the contemplation of the Divine-Spiritual, have such an effect on man that, by contemplating them from his spirituality, they are realized by him as a matter of course. He feels no human relationship to them. Just as he must eat, so he feels that he must obey the commandments if he only recognizes them.

What is so naturally connected with the spiritual world in the original oriental wisdom — although it no longer springs forth in the declining oriental culture — becomes an issue in the moment of world-historical development when man confronts man, when Mediterranean culture emerges. And this becomes a particularly important issue when the culture, the actual cultural direction of the Western peoples emerges. That is the third type.

Just as the Oriental was originally predisposed for the metabolic, the Mediterranean for the rhythmic human, so the Western human is predisposed for the nervous-sensory human. And anyone who can also follow the highest that has developed in spiritual and material, in inner and outer civilization in Western Europe and in America – apart from the Romance peoples, who have taken a very different path, who have inherited from the ancient Latin peoples, who do not represent this purity, represent what is Western European, what is Western in general. If we look at the other Western population, it is the population in which the neuro-sensual human being predominates. This neuro-sensual human being, who has produced the type that , with concepts, with ideas, to understand everything, which in particular goes to the abstract, which goes to that which does not place man before man as in the Central European, which does not place the superman before man as in the Oriental, but which places nature before man.

That is the peculiar thing: if one ascends with the natural organization to the nerve-sense human being, then external nature stands before the human being. Just imagine what an absurdity it would be for the Oriental to ask whether he is somehow connected with animality in a materialistic way. He perceives the spiritual world, the supersensible world, directly, precisely because he is the metabolic human being. The Westerner does not have this view of the spiritual world. He has reflection on the spiritual world, he has abstraction. For him, what presents itself to him, even if it is the human being himself, becomes extra-human nature for him. For Goethe, it is human being against human being, and he wants to understand the human being. Schiller says: It is you who wants to build up the whole human being out of all the details of nature. But it is the human being that Goethe wants to build up; and basically he only wants to understand nature in order to ultimately see the human being in nature everywhere.

Among Westerners, among nerve-sense human beings, Darwinism arises in the form in which the 19th century experienced it. There, the human being is not what stands in the first place; there, so to speak, the idea of the human being dawns, there one no longer knows anything about the human being as such, there the human being becomes the highest animal. The animal series is studied, everything about the forces that play a role in this animal series is studied. Not man is understood, but the highest animal is understood. And man is only considered the highest animal. The human element recedes. But in return there is the most pronounced sense of knowledge of nature, there is that wonderful deepening into the details of everything that is the view of development, for example in Darwinism.

Of course, something like Darwin's Origin of Species could never have emerged from an oriental point of view. Nor could Goethe have written something like that. What he has written, I have tried to present again and again: it is of a completely different nature. It is not Darwinism in the later sense, it is something different.

But because this Western type of human being is a nerve-sense human being, I would like to say, in retrogressive development, the ideal of knowledge of nature, the ideal of material knowledge, the living in of the material arises.

And basically it is the way of thinking of the Western world, which has been introduced into Central and Eastern Europe for a long time. For that which has grown up in Central Europe itself is a continuation of Greek culture. What has grown up in Russia out of its own Russian nature is even a continuation of ancient Orientalism; but that which modern culture of the 19th century has become more and more is that which is out of the nerve-sense human being of the West.

Thus we must view the three human types, from which the various nations have further differentiated. We must realize how, admittedly, the most spiritual spirituality was instinctively present in primitive Oriental humanity; how the soul-centered apprehension of man was present in the Greeks and showed only an echo at the end of the 18th and at the beginning of the 19th century in Central European culture, which has emerged in Goetheanism, and how we are under the influence of the nervous-sensory culture, how we must think out of it. It certainly does not produce any moral ideals directly. Does that mean it has no moral value? Yesterday I presented you with examples of the moral worldview of naturalistically thinking people, from which one might conclude that this newer naturalism has no moral value at all. That is not the case. Of course, it has no moral content. Its moral content is old inheritance and must be old inheritance. But it has a moral value. What is its moral value? It has the moral value that man forms a picture of nature as a picture of the world, which, precisely, does not give him any moral ideas. By immersing himself in his environment, the Oriental received the moral ideas with his picture of nature. And so, as he followed nature as a natural man, he followed the moral and spiritual world as a moral man.

The Mediterranean man puts man before himself. He received the image of man by looking into the world. But at the same time, I would like to say, the moral idea became abstract. It had to assert itself as an inheritance. But man still felt the warming of this moral idea. And in essence, much of the religious life of the time in which the Mediterranean peoples set the tone was this warm feeling for the moral order of the world. It is only when he has the morality-free image of nature around him that man feels abandoned and lonely in the face of his moral feelings. Man looks out into the world in which he stands as a natural being to which he belongs as a natural being. It gives him nothing moral. If he wants morality, he must bring it forth from the source of his innermost being. He stands there before the world, which gives him no directive. He must seek the directive. Freedom has no meaning in the oriental spiritual culture. Freedom acquires its meaning out of naturalism. This materialism, which arises out of the nerve-sense human being of Western peoples, has a moral significance. This culture demands of man that he become conscious of his freedom and give birth to his morality out of himself. If one were to remain with mere naturalism — which was the result of yesterday's reflections here — then one would, like the personalities whose statements I quoted yesterday, trample morality into the ground. But if we had not gone through this dangerous stage of human development, where morality is called into question, where morality is given in the freedom of human decision, humanity could not develop to freedom! This is the meaning of human development, from an original spiritual culture to the material culture of the West, which is particularly geared to economic life, which has basically brought an ethics of utility to the surface, but which must give people the consciousness of freedom with regard to the actual moral impulse.

We obtain a basis for considering the differentiations of peoples when we start from these three types of human beings. But we never attain a characteristic of full humanity, which we need today for the human being, if we take that which emerges from these one-sidedness.

What can be learned from such a consideration is that when a human being develops out of any local culture, no matter how large the locality, that which is predisposed in him, it is a one-sidedness. The wonderful primeval culture – a one-sidedness, Western culture with its materialism – a one-sidedness.

All this gives an idea of how one-sided what lives in the individual peoples is. Therefore, the modern human being, who now understands that a uniform culture must grow over the whole earth, not only materially and economically, but also spiritually, must develop spiritual and moral ideas from foundations other than the national. Humanity is predisposed to this, for in its various nations it brings forth the one-sided talents. But the individual human being must rise above the national. He only rises above the national when he does not base on any nationality anything other than what belongs to his own nationality, but when he is able to shape the general humanity out of this nationality.

In my book, 'Philosophy of Freedom', which appeared for the first time at the beginning of the 1990s, I tried to lay the ethical foundations of the world view. There I have tried to show people the way to freedom and morality at the same time, so that nothing can be found in this book that would be born out of a one-sided, nationalistic direction. Everything is thought out so that the Oriental can think like the Westerner and like the Mediterranean man. There is absolutely no mention of any national differentiation in it.

The underlying theme that runs through the entire book is that man is not yet fully human when he feels that he belongs to a human differentiation, to a nation, to a people, and that he is only fully human when he outgrows this differentiation. Of course, a person is Russian, a person is English, a person is French; but the Frenchman, the Russian, the Englishman are not human as such, but the human being must grow out of his nationality. This is precisely what a real understanding of this nationality shows.

But then one comes to build morality on human individuality. And when it is built on human individuality, then one arrives at the basis on which morality must rest in social life: in social life, morality must rest on the trust that the individual can have in the individual. This trust must be there. This is what education must work towards, the education that alone can bring about an improvement in our social conditions.

In certain circles, it is repeatedly mentioned that only compulsion, only power, only organization can bring order to the human social organism. No, organization will never bring order; rather, the social organism can only flourish to the extent that one person can have trust in another, that morality is anchored in the human individuality.

What I have tried to substantiate in my Philosophy of Freedom has been called “ethical individualism”. This is because what emerges as ethics, as a moral idea, must in fact arise out of the individuality of the single human being.

But now comes the significant part. Yesterday I read you a passage from a personality who corresponded with the materialist Moleschott. It says: the moral impulses are in every human being, therefore they are different in every human being. — You see, that is materialism. The real insight is exactly the opposite. It is true: the ethical foundation is in every human individual. But in the highest sense, it is a wonderful fact that it is the same in every human individual; it is not a kind of predetermined sameness, not an organized sameness, but a given sameness that appears among human beings. And again and again we approach every human being to establish, together with each person, trusting moral impulses.

This is what makes ethical individualism, when it is properly grasped, when it is understood as the true act of human freedom, a universal ethic at the same time, and what gives us hope that we will come to it as moral human beings. Just as we do not find it right when we meet each other on the street for one to push the other as he passes by - people will naturally step aside - so, when the human consciousness of which I spoke to you yesterday and the day before takes hold of people from spiritual-scientific foundations, it will generate such feeling, such thinking in people, that what is morally alive among them will become as natural as not bumping into each other when walking past each other. We can, if we live side by side as human beings, understand people in whatever situation in life; we can bring morality out of human nature itself. This shows how, starting from spiritual-oriental primeval times, to human feeling in the middle of the earth, to human abstraction, to human understanding of the world, to understanding both the world and nature, how this is the way to finally bring man to truly grasp freedom.

But only if he rediscovers morality from a spiritual-scientific basis. In the Orient, morality was given through the content of ethical ideas, but these still work through man as if by natural necessity. Out of this natural necessity, the content of morality was thrown out. Man stood, as it were, morally naked before nature, morally naked before nature. He is to give birth to morality again within himself, in his individuality. He will only give birth to it again if he can give birth to it out of the rediscovered spiritual essence of his innermost being.

That is what spiritual science, spiritual knowledge wants: to give birth to a moral will that can truly effect our social advancement. Spiritual science wants this because it believes it must recognize that this is necessary for humanity in general and for humanity in the near future in particular, that social recovery can only come from spiritual recovery.

In the comments from yesterday and the day before, you have heard a great deal about how often the attacks that are made against this spiritual science today are shameful. I could tell you many more such things, but I do not wish to do so at this moment. But I would like to say this today in conclusion: however the attacks may assert themselves, if they were able to destroy the efforts being made today in the field of spiritual science for this world-historical moment, spiritual science would have to arise anew! For their hope is not based on the subjective will of an individual or a few, or even of a sect; no, their hope is based on the fact that humanity needs this spiritual science and everything that is vitally connected with it with regard to the most important matters of the soul in the present and the near future. They are counting on the hopes of spiritual science, that it will flourish because humanity needs it, and will demand it as it demands a renewal of spiritual life. This may perhaps be trampled down for the moment by malevolence, by lack of understanding. But it cannot be overcome in the long run. Because what humanity will need will be given to it, no matter how dreadful, how malicious or how misunderstanding its opponents may be. What is to be done for the good of humanity will be done because it must be done for inner, for spiritual and divine reasons.