{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 151/1914-01-21/p011","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"Yesterday I said that once there were Nominalists, persons who maintained that general concepts had no reality, but were merely names. These Nominalists had opponents who were called Realists (the word had a different meaning then). The Realists maintained that general concepts are not mere words, but refer to quite definite realities. In the Middle Ages the question of Realism versus Nominalism was always a burning one, especially for theology, a sphere of thought with which present-day thinkers trouble themselves very little. For in the time when the question of Nominalism versus Realism arose (from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries) there was something that belonged to the most important confessions of faith, the question about the three “Divine Persons”—Father, Son and Holy Ghost—who form One Divine Being, but are still Three real Persons. The Nominalists maintained that these three Divine Persons existed only individually, the “Father” for Himself, the “Son” for Himself, and the “Holy Ghost” for Himself; and if one spoke of a “Collective God” Who comprised these Three, that was only a name for the Three. Thus Nominalism did away with the unity of the Trinity. In opposition to the Realists, the Nominalists not only explained away the unity, but even regarded it as heretical to declare, as the Realists did, that the Three Persons formed not merely an imaginary unity, but an actual one.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"Lecture II","site_heading":"Twelve Worldviews: The Zodiac of Philosophical Standpoints","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 Cite the unit by its title and locus, never by this heading, and do not quote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":"1914-01-21","location":null,"word_count":228,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/151/1914-01-21/p011","alignment_confidence":"high","alignment_reason":"beads:length","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"Charles Davy","identified_edition":"RSP1961","book_title":"Human and Cosmic Thought (1961)","publisher":"Rudolf Steiner Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA151/English/RSP1961/19140121p01.html","evidence":"edition_cover_credit","note":"The lecture's own page names no translator; the cover of the book it was taken from (https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA151/English/RSP1961/HuCoTh_index.html) lists it and names the translator. Where the cover names several, it does not say which lecture each translated.","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/151/1914-01-21/p011"},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/151/1914-01-21/p011","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},"other_renderings":{"loci":[{"locus":"GA 151/1914-01-21_02","ga":"151","lecture":"1914-01-21_02","kind":"renderings","relation":"another translation or transcription of the same lecture"}],"note":"The same lecture is also served at the loci listed, each with how it relates to this one. They are ONE witness, not independent attestations: quote the rendering you fetched, and do not cite another as corroborating it. Wording differs between translations, so a quotation found in one need not occur in the other."},"german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"1914-01-21","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 151/1914-01-21/p011","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/151/1914-01-21/p011"},{"locus":"GA 151/1914-01-21/p012","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/151/1914-01-21/p012"}],"bead_confidence":"high","pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","reader"],"reader_german":["GA 151/1914-01-21/p011","GA 151/1914-01-21/p012"],"reader_part":true,"length_check":{"de_words":464,"en_words":453,"ratio":0.98,"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 151/1914-01-21/p011","passage_number":11,"text":"Ein anderes möchte ich anführen, um zu zeigen, wo die Wurzel unzähliger Mißverständnisse gegenüber den Weltauffassungen liegt. Macht man denn nicht, wenn man sich mit Weltanschauungen beschäftigt, immer wieder und wieder die Erfahrung: da glaubt der eine dieses, der andere jenes; der eine verteidigt mit manchmal guten Gründen - denn gute Gründe kann man für alles finden - das eine, der andere mit ebenso guten Gründen das andere; und der eine widerlegt das eine ebenso gut, wie der andere mit guten Gründen widerlegt? Anhängerschaften entstehen ja in der Welt zunächst nicht dadurch, daß der eine oder der andere auf gerechtem Wege überzeugt wird von dem, was da oder dort gelehrt wird. Nehmen Sie nur einmal die Wege, die die Schüler großer Männer wandeln müssen, um zu dem oder jenem großen Manne hinzukommen, dann werden Sie sehen, daß darin für uns zwar etwas Gewichtiges in bezug auf das Karma liegt, aber hinsichtlich der Anschauungen, die heute in der äußeren Welt existieren, muß man sagen: Ob der eine nun ein Bergsonianer oder ein Haeckelianer oder dies oder jenes wird, das ist — wie gesagt, Karma erkennt ja die heutige äußere Weltanschauung nicht an -, das ist schließlich wirklich von anderen Dingen abhängig als davon, daß man durchaus nur auf dem Wege der tiefsten Überzeugung dem anhängt, zu dem man gerade geführt worden ist. Gekämpft wird hinüber und herüber. Und ich habe gestern gesagt: Es gab einmal Nominalisten, solche Menschen, welche behaupteten, die allgemeinen Begriffe hätten überhaupt keine Realität, wären bloße Namen. Sie haben Gegner gehabt, diese Nominalisten. Man nannte in der damaligen Zeit - das Wort hatte damals eine andere Bedeutung als heute — die Gegner der Nominalisten Realisten. Diese behaupteten: Die allgemeinen Begriffe sind nicht bloß Worte, sondern sie beziehen sich auf eine ganz bestimmte Realität.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":295,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/151/1914-01-21/p011"},{"locus":"GA 151/1914-01-21/p012","passage_number":12,"text":"Im Mittelalter wurde ja die Frage «Realismus oder Nominalismus» ganz besonders für die Theologie eine brennende auf einem Gebiete, das heute die Denker nur noch wenig beschäftigt. Denn in der Zeit, als die Frage «Nominalismus oder Realismus» auftauchte, im 11. bis 13. Jahrhundert, da war etwas, was zu dem wichtigsten menschlichen Bekenntnisse gehörte, die Frage nach den drei «göttlichen Personen», Vater, Sohn und Heiliger Geist, die ein göttliches Wesen bilden, die aber doch drei wahre Personen sein sollten. Und die Nominalisten behaupteten: Diese drei göttlichen Personen existieren nur im einzelnen, «Vater» für sich, «Sohn» für sich, «Geist» für sich; und wenn man von einem gemeinsamen Gotte spricht, der diese drei umfaßt, so ist das nur ein Name für die drei. - So schaffte der Nominalismus die Einheit in der Trinität hinweg, und die Nominalisten erklärten gegenüber den Realisten die Einheit nicht nur für logisch absurd, sondern sie hielten sogar für ketzerisch, was die Realisten behaupteten, daß die drei Personen nicht bloß eine gedachte, sondern eine reale Einheit bilden sollten.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":169,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/151/1914-01-21/p012"}],"english":["GA 151/1914-01-21/p010","GA 151/1914-01-21/p011"],"method":"length","confidence":"high","correspondence":"established","length_check":{"de_words":464,"en_words":453,"ratio":0.98,"partial":false},"pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","reader"],"reader_german":["GA 151/1914-01-21/p011","GA 151/1914-01-21/p012"],"reader_part":true},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":0.96,"band":"comparable","note":null,"word_count":6302,"original_word_count":6568,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Charles Davy","identified_edition":"RSP1961","book_title":"Human and Cosmic Thought (1961)","publisher":"Rudolf Steiner Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA151/English/RSP1961/19140121p01.html","evidence":"edition_cover_credit","note":"The lecture's own page names no translator; the cover of the book it was taken from (https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA151/English/RSP1961/HuCoTh_index.html) lists it and names the translator. Where the cover names several, it does not say which lecture each translated.","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":"discrepancy","checked_against":["GA 151/1914-01-21/p011","GA 151/1914-01-21/p012"],"missing_from_translation":["Haeckel"],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"high","bead_length_ratio":0.98,"likely_cause":"unresolved","note":"NAME MISMATCH between this English passage and its German counterpart. A name the German carries is absent here (or a name appears here that the German does not carry). Two things cause this and they need telling apart: the translation really drops or reassigns what the original distinguishes, OR the paragraph alignment paired the wrong passages. `bead_confidence` does NOT settle which: this corpus's embedding aligner pairs topically-related paragraphs at full confidence, and a sampled high-confidence mismatch proved to be a wrong pairing. Read the German passages listed and confirm they are counterparts BEFORE drawing any conclusion about the translation."},"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."}}