{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 146/1913-06-03/p003","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"It is natural, though it is usually ignored by science, that man as he is simply cannot know one part of his being. As he looks out upon the world it shows itself, roughly expressed, as an ascending scale from the mineral kingdom through the plant and animal kingdoms up to man. It goes without saying that man must assume some *creative force* behind all the forms he perceives around him in the kingdoms of nature. The point is, however, that man gains knowledge of the world he lives in just because the mineral, plant, and animal kingdoms are outside him and he can observe them. As to all man has within himself, however, he can only gain knowledge of that insofar as the same forces are at work in him as are active in the three kingdoms of nature outside him. The forces active within him which *transcend* those three kingdoms he cannot know by the usual methods of knowing nature—not in the least. It is just what man has within himself over and above the kingdoms of nature that enables him to build up systematically a knowledge of those kingdoms outside him. Just as little as the eye, whose purpose it is to see outwardly, can see itself, just so little can man gain knowledge of what in himself is there in order that he may acquire knowledge. This is a very simple idea, but sound.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"Lecture VII","site_heading":"Krishna, the Luke Jesus Child, and Human Creative Forces","site_heading_note":"A heading the site wrote for this unit from a summary of it; not in the edition, and not the words of Rudolf Steiner or of the translator. Cite the unit by its title and locus, never by this heading, and do not quote it.","date":"1913-06-03","location":null,"word_count":238,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/146/1913-06-03/p003","alignment_confidence":"medium","alignment_reason":"beads:embedding","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"George and Mary Adams with emendations by Doris M. Bugby","identified_edition":"AP1968","book_title":"The Occult Significance of the Bhagavad Gita","publisher":"Anthroposophic Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA146/English/AP1968/19130603p01.html","evidence":"lecture_page_line","publisher_note":"The publisher is inferred from the edition code in this lecture's source URL, not stated by the source page. The translator IS verified for this lecture: its own source names the translator (evidence: the lecture's page, rsarchive's lecture list, or the cover of the book it was published in), and that page's text was matched against this unit (see match_score and source_url). Cite the translator with confidence; attribute the publisher only as probable."},"edition_coverage":{"de":["original"],"en":["English"]},"available_versions":[{"lang":"de","edition":"original","edition_basis":null,"is_original":true,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/146/1913-06-03/p003"},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/146/1913-06-03/p003","paragraph_aligned":true}],"record":{"record_type":"unknown","scope":"volume","note":"How this text was taken down (shorthand transcript, listeners' notes or manuscript) is not on record here. Unknown is not an assurance of a stenogram: check the edition's own notes before resting an argument on one word.","evidence":null,"evidence_translation":null,"evidence_source":null},"german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"1913-06-03","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 146/1913-06-03/p003","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/146/1913-06-03/p003"},{"locus":"GA 146/1913-06-03/p004","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/146/1913-06-03/p004"}],"bead_confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"proposed","verified":false,"length_check":{"de_words":532,"en_words":456,"ratio":0.86,"partial":false},"correspondence":"established","note":"English passage numbering is edition-relative, so the same number need not name the same paragraph in the German. The German original passage(s) above are the edition-invariant anchor — fetch them (lang='de') to verify wording before quoting across editions."},"paired_german":{"status":"paired","german":[{"locus":"GA 146/1913-06-03/p003","passage_number":3,"text":"Es ist ebenso natürlich, wie gewöhnlich von der Wissenschaft unbeachtet, daß der Mensch so, wie er heute einmal im Leben darinnen steht, einen Teil seines Wesens eigentlich gar nicht kennen kann. So wie die Umwelt um den Menschen herum sich ausbreitet, so stellt sie sich dar — wenn man sie gleichsam im groben zeichnet -, aufsteigend von dem mineralischen Reich durch das Pflanzenreich und durch das Tierreich bis herauf zum Menschen. Und voraussetzen muß der Mensch ja ganz selbstverständlich, daß hinter alle dem, was er an Formen ringsherum wahrnimmt, die schaffende Kraft stehe in allen Reichen der Natur, die den Menschen umgeben. In der ganzen uns umgebenden Natur muß zunächst vorausgesetzt werden die schaffende Kraft. Nun handelt es sich darum, daß der Mensch, wenn er den Blick in seine Umwelt richtet, dadurch, daß das mineralische, pflanzliche und tierische Reich außerhalb seiner sind und er sie beobachten kann, sich Erkenntnisse erwirbt. Aber von demjenigen, was der Mensch an sich selber hat, kann er sich eigentlich nur insoweit Kenntnisse erwerben, als in ihm die Kräfte walten, die in den genannten drei Reichen der Natur draußen auch sind. Und insofern er Kräfte in sich trägt, die über die Reiche der Natur hinausgehen, kann der Mensch eigentlich mit den gewöhnlichen Erkenntnismitteln sie gar nicht erkennen, kann gar nichts davon wissen. Denn durch das gerade, wodurch der Mensch über die Reiche der Natur herausragt, kann er ja erkennen, durch das kann er sich eben ein Wissen erwerben. Geradesowenig wie das Auge, das sehen muß, sich selbst sehen kann, ebensowenig kann der Mensch das an sich selber erkennen, was da ist, damit er erkennen kann. Es ist ein einfacher Gedanke, aber ein Gedanke, der durchaus gilt. Es ist unmöglich, daß das Auge sich selber sieht, weil es zum Sehen da ist; es ist unmöglich, daß diejenigen Kräfte im Menschen, die zum Erkennen da sind, sich selber erkennen. Und diese Kräfte, die zum Erkennen da sind, das sind gerade diejenigen, welche darstellen das, was mit der Menschheit über die Tierheit herausragt.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":334,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/146/1913-06-03/p003"},{"locus":"GA 146/1913-06-03/p004","passage_number":4,"text":"Der materialistische Darwinismus macht es sich nun leicht. Er vergißt die ebenso natürliche wie einfache Erkenntnis, daß die eigentliche Erkenntniskraft, durch die der Mensch über die Tierheit herausragt, für das gewöhnliche Erkennen eben unerkennbar sein muß. Er konstatiert zwar, daß sie unerkennbar ist, und leugnet sie deshalb und betrachtet deshalb den Menschen nur insoweit, als der Mensch gerade auch noch der Tierheit angehört. Sie sehen, worauf der eigentliche Trugschluß, die Täuschung des materialistischen Darwinismus beruht. Diejenigen Kräfte, welche die eigentlichen Erkenntniskräfte sind im Menschen, kann der Mensch an sich selber nicht erkennen. Das ist so natürlich, wie an sich selber sich das Auge nicht sehen kann. Aber das Auge kann ein anderes Auge sehen, und weil das Auge ein anderes Auge sehen kann, so kann es unter Umständen an sich glauben. Nun, mit dem Erkennen ist das nicht so der Fall. Das Erkennen kann sich selber nicht erkennen, aber es wäre immer wenigstens noch logisch möglich, daß der Mensch einem anderen Menschen gegenübertritt und das Erkennen, das heißt dasjenige, was den Menschen über die Tierheit herausführt, am anderen Menschen erkennen würde. Aber auch das ist unmöglich, und zwar aus den Gründen, die schon aus unseren bisherigen Betrachtungen hervorgehen.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":198,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/146/1913-06-03/p004"}],"english":["GA 146/1913-06-03/p003","GA 146/1913-06-03/p004"],"method":"embedding","confidence":"medium","correspondence":"established","length_check":{"de_words":532,"en_words":456,"ratio":0.86,"partial":false},"pairing_state":"proposed","verified":false},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":0.83,"band":"watch","note":"This witness is somewhat shorter than the original. Minor omissions or condensation are possible.","word_count":4377,"original_word_count":5266,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"George and Mary Adams with emendations by Doris M. Bugby","identified_edition":"AP1968","book_title":"The Occult Significance of the Bhagavad Gita","publisher":"Anthroposophic Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA146/English/AP1968/19130603p01.html","evidence":"lecture_page_line","publisher_note":"The publisher is inferred from the edition code in this lecture's source URL, not stated by the source page. The translator IS verified for this lecture: its own source names the translator (evidence: the lecture's page, rsarchive's lecture list, or the cover of the book it was published in), and that page's text was matched against this unit (see match_score and source_url). Cite the translator with confidence; attribute the publisher only as probable."},"entity_parity":{"status":"ok","checked_against":["GA 146/1913-06-03/p003","GA 146/1913-06-03/p004"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"medium","note":"Every load-bearing name in the German counterpart appears in this English passage. That is a check on NAMES only: a translation can keep every name and still reverse who acts on whom, change a number, or soften a claim. Read the German for anything you intend to rest an argument on."},"note":"quote_safe certifies the bytes of this text. This block is about the translation as a WITNESS: who made it, and whether it carries the same names as the original. See witness_completeness for how much of the original this witness holds."}}