The Bridge Between Morality and Nature

GA 202/1920-12-11/p023 ·1920-12-11 · English MediumMedium alignmentSome paragraph re-numbering between this translation and the German original — the locus may slip by a paragraph or two.
Record: unknown. 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.

You see what has to be looked for: the human being as such. One must enter into a soul frame of mind with lively observation to regard the human being as such. We are in a western science with its chart of animals. First we have simple animals then ever more complicated animals up to the last most complicated ones on four legs, then they stand up, become upright instead of horizontal, and now we have the highest animal, the human being. One only has a row of animals and the human being is the highest member in this row. The human being is seldom considered in natural science and also seldom from social sciences, because here he or she is part of private property, namely the economic machine. The human being falls out of the social examination, out of the social examination of nature. The extraordinary thing about modern people is that they don't notice that there is nothing human here. There is absolutely nothing human here. Out of this a specific need arises. Just consider how people live in their outer social life. Let's accept that they live in the way Adam Smith sees them, because he has uttered the observation coming from that which he said, originating from the thought tendencies of numerous people. Just think of a person's outer social life. Let's accept they exist as Adam Smith suggests, because his expression of this observation does not come from there; he even expressed the thought tendencies of numerous people. Think to yourself, people see themselves as “Westerners” in their social existence: they are actually not! Private property and the economic unit exist; people do not exist here! How can one find in this concept of mankind what lies on the other side of birth and death? This must be handed over to what authorities are allowed to say. As a result of such concepts receding further and further from their flowering it has come about that with reference to the spiritual everything gradually is placed under an authority, instigating a certain aversion to even think about spirituality. In the modern proletarian science this has been taken up further. Only then seriousness took it up and said: Yes, the middle class has thought about it but actually it doesn't involve people; we have private property and the economic machine. Therefore we will not consider this trinket of special people, we are talking about pure scientific forces; this produces everything. Let's be serious about this point of view! The others are not serious; the entire week they talk about private property and economic freedom which the machine gives, and on Sunday they allow themselves to be also preached at about an immortal soul.

Read this passage in another edition
DEoriginalENEnglish
Raw JSON: /v1/steiner/en/ga/202/1920-12-11/p023.json
Cite: GA 202/1920-12-11/p023 · edition English