{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 191/1919-10-05/p013","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"Now it is important to really grasp how one must go beyond ordinary everyday concepts in order to arrive at the kind of thinking that is meant here. You know that there are materialistic thinkers in the world. Today the number of materialistic thinkers is very large, and you are probably all convinced in your innermost being that one should not be a materialistic thinker. At least you were convinced to a certain extent and therefore came to a more spiritual way of thinking, felt drawn to the spiritual thinking that is cultivated in this anthroposophical movement. So let us disregard ourselves here. But there are also other people who represent the spirit, and there are many such people in the world who say: Well, there are all those people walking around who think only of material processes and material beings. These materialistically thinking, materialistically feeling people are opposed by the spiritually thinking and spiritually feeling. The latter believe in the spirit and are often despised by the materialistic thinkers as fantasists. But they accept this contempt because they believe that the materialists do not realize how right they, the fantasists, are when they hold on to the spiritual. This distinction is made and observed in the world between materialistic thinking and spiritual thinking, and there is much dispute between the two camps as to which is right, the materialistic thinker or the spiritual thinker. From some of the things that have been discussed here, you should realize that basically the one who has not yet penetrated into the meaning of spiritual science is the one who argues about such things, but only the one who says, 'You are a materialist; that's fine, that's all right,' has properly penetrated into the meaning of spiritual science. You are a spiritualist, that's fine too, that's also very good. Just as you can photograph a tree from one side and photograph it from the other side: it looks different from the different sides, but it is always the same tree. If you grasp the world materially, it is only a photograph from one side. If you grasp the world spiritually, it is a photograph from a different side. Materialism looks quite different from spiritualism. But the secret is that you have neither materialism nor spiritualism in the world, but that these are actually only two photographs from different points of view. Basically, the materialist is just as right as the spiritualist and the spiritualist is just as right as the materialist. Because these concepts, spirituality and materiality, are only valid on the physical plane. As soon as one goes beyond the physical plane, these concepts are overcome. Then one no longer argues whether the world is material or spiritual, because one knows that these are two different aspects. But why does man actually argue about whether man is material or spiritual? Why does man argue about whether one has a mere bodily being or a mere spiritual being? Why do some people see only, I would say, physical corporeality in a person, while others see soul and spirit in addition to physical corporeality? Because a person is both! And the secret of life actually consists in the fact that a person is both. If you say: a thought is only a spiritual entity, it is only something spiritual, then you are right, because the thought is only something spiritual. But the thought is never in you as spiritual-soul without having a physical imprint, so that you can actually always also prove the physical imprint; it is there. So that every thought is also something material. One would like to say: The universe has impartially ensured that one can be both a spiritualist and a materialist. Because you are indeed spiritual; if you see it that way, you can be a spiritualist. But you are also a material imprint of the spiritual; if you see it that way and ignore the other, you can be a materialist, because a person is both, and because one is only an imprint of the other, because one is the same as the other. Therefore, it is really only a matter of whether man puts himself more into his physical being, then he becomes a materialist; or whether he puts himself more into his soul-spiritual being, then he becomes a spiritualist.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"Third Lecture","site_heading":"Cosmic Forces and Social Understanding Through Spiritual Thinking","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":"1919-10-05","location":null,"word_count":723,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/191/1919-10-05/p013","alignment_confidence":"high","alignment_reason":"beads:identity","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2024","book_title":"Social Understanding from a Spiritual-Scientific Perspective","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA191/English/SOL2024/19191005p01.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/191/1919-10-05/p013"},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/191/1919-10-05/p013","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},"paired_german":{"status":"paired","german":[{"locus":"GA 191/1919-10-05/p013","passage_number":13,"text":"Nun handelt es sich darum, daß man wirklich erfasse, wie man über die gewöhnlichen Alltagsbegriffe hinauskommen muß, um zu solchem Denken zu kommen, das hier gemeint ist. Sie wissen, es gibt in der Welt materialistische Denker. Heute ist die Zahl der materialistischen Denker sehr groß, und Sie alle sind ja wahrscheinlich in Ihrem innersten Wesen überzeugt, daß man kein materialistischer Denker sein dürfe. Wenigstens waren Sie bis zu einem gewissen Grade überzeugt und sind deshalb zu einem mehr spirituellen Denken gekommen, haben sich hingezogen gefühlt zu dem spirituellen Denken, das gepflegt wird in dieser anthroposophischen Bewegung. Wir wollen also von uns selbst hier absehen. Aber es gibt ja auch andere Leute, die den Geist vertreten, und zahlreiche solche Menschen in der Welt, die sagen: Nun, da läuft all das Menschenzeug herum, welches nur alles für materielle Vorgänge und materielle Wesenheiten hält. Diesen materialistisch Denkenden, materialistisch Fühlenden, stehen die spirituell Denkenden und spitrituell Fühlenden gegenüber. — Die letzteren glauben an den Geist und werden dafür von den materialistisch Denkenden oftmals als Phantasten verachtet. Sie nehmen diese Verachtung aber hin, weil sie glauben, daß die Materialisten nicht einsehen, wie recht sie, die Phantasten, haben, wenn sie an dem Spirituellen festhalten. Man macht diesen Unterschied und bemerkt diesen Unterschied in der Welt zwischen materialistischem Denken und spirituellem Denken, und man streitet viel untereinander, wer Recht hat, der materialistische Denker oder der spirituelle Denker. Aus manchem, das hier besprochen worden ist, sollten Sie erkennen, daß im Grunde genommen der noch nicht in den Sinn der Geisteswissenschaft eingedrungen ist, der über solche Dinge streitet, sondern erst der ist richtig in den Sinn der Geisteswissenschaft eingedrungen, der sagt: Du bist Materialist; das kann man sein, das geht ganz gut. Du bist Spiritualist, das kann man auch sein, das geht auch sehr gut. — Gerade so, wie man einen Baum photographieren kann von der einen Seite und photographieren kann von der anderen Seite: er schaut von den verschiedenen Seiten verschieden aus, aber es ist immer derselbe Baum. Wenn man materiell die Welt erfaßt, so ist das nur die Photographie von der einen Seite. Wenn man spirituell die Welt erfaßt, so ist das die Photographie von einer anderen Seite. Der Materialismus sieht ganz anders aus als der Spiritualismus. Aber das Geheimnis besteht darin, daß man weder in dem Materialismus noch in dem Spiritualismus die Welt hat, sondern daß das eigentlich nur zwei Photographien von verschiedenen Standpunkten aus sind. Im Grunde genommen hat der Materialist ebenso Recht wie der Spiritualist und der Spiritualist ebenso wie der Materialist. Denn diese Begriffe, Spiritualität und Materialität, haben nur auf dem physischen Plane ihre Gültigkeit. Sobald man über den physischen Plan hinauskommt, sind diese Begriffe überwunden. Da streitet man nicht mehr, ob die Welt materiell oder spiritueil ist, weil man weiß, daß das zwei verschiedene Aspekte sind. Aber, warum streitet denn eigentlich der Mensch darüber, ob der Mensch materiell oder spirituell ist? Warum streitet denn der Mensch darüber, ob einer ein bloß leibliches Wesen oder ein bloß seelisches Wesen hat? Warum sehen die einen in dem Menschen bloß, ich möchte sagen, physische Körperlichkeit, die anderen neben der physischen Körperlichkeit auch Seelisch-Geistiges? Weil der Mensch beides ist! Und das Geheimnis des Lebens besteht eigentlich darin, daß der Mensch beides ist. Wenn Sie sagen: Ein Gedanke, der ist bloß eine geistige Entität, der ist bloß etwas Geistiges -, so haben Sie recht, denn der Gedanke zs/ bloß etwas Geistiges. Aber niemals ist der Gedanke als Geistig-Seelisches in Ihnen, ohne daß er einen physischen Abdruck hat, so daß Sie eigentlich immer auch den physischen Abdruck nachweisen können; der ist da. So daß jeder Gedanke auch etwas Materielles ist. Man möchte sagen: Das Weltenall, das hat unparteiisch dafür gesorgt, daß man sowohl Spiritualist wie Materialist sein kann. Denn man ist in der Tat seelisch-geistig; faßt man das auf, so kann man Spiritualist sein. Man ist aber durchaus auch ein materieller Abdruck des Seelisch-Geistigen, faßt man das auf und läßt das andere aus dem Auge, so kann man Materialist sein, weil der Mensch beides ist, und weil das eine nur ein Abdruck des anderen ist, weil das eine dem anderen gleich ist. Deshalb handelt es sich wirklich nur darum, ob der Mensch mehr sich setzt in sein physisches Wesen, dann wird er Materialist; oder ob er sich mehr setzt in sein seelisch-geistiges Wesen, dann wird er Spiritualist.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":719,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/191/1919-10-05/p013"}],"english":["GA 191/1919-10-05/p013"],"method":"identity","confidence":"high","correspondence":"established","length_check":{"de_words":719,"en_words":723,"ratio":1.01,"partial":false},"pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","meaning","audit"]},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":1.04,"band":"comparable","note":null,"word_count":6474,"original_word_count":6251,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2024","book_title":"Social Understanding from a Spiritual-Scientific Perspective","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA191/English/SOL2024/19191005p01.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 191/1919-10-05/p013"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"high","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."}}