Hygiene: a Social Problem

Well, if I were to discuss this very question, on which I have indicated that I do not wish to take sides, I would have to give a whole lecture. However, I would like to point out the following. Those who, based on their findings, are compelled to point out that there are deeper causes than primary causes for diseases accompanied by germs or bacteria, namely the occurrence of the germs themselves, are not claiming that the germs do not exist. It is quite different to claim that the bacilli are there and that they occur in the wake of the disease than to seek the primary cause in the bacilli. I have developed what needs to be said in this regard in detail in this course, which is now being held. But that takes time. This also applies to certain elements that must be dealt with beforehand. This cannot be quickly settled in a question and answer session. Nevertheless, I would like to point out the following. The human constitution is not as simple a matter as is often imagined. Human beings are multi-faceted beings. I described this at the beginning of my book “Von Seelenrätseln” (Mysteries of the Soul), explaining that human beings are three-part beings, beings that can be called sensory-nervous beings, rhythmic beings, and metabolic beings. That is what human beings are. These three parts of human nature interact with each other, and if the human being is to be healthy, they must interact in such a way that there is a certain separation between the areas. For example, the sensory-nervous human being, who is more than what modern physiology imagines, cannot simply transfer his effects to the metabolic human being in any other way than through the rhythmic movements of the circulatory and respiratory processes, which extend to the outermost periphery of the organism. This interaction, however, can be interrupted in a certain way. Now, this interaction has a very specific effect. When such questions are asked, forgive me, but one must then also answer appropriately; now, I want to be as discreet as possible, but it is nevertheless necessary to say a few words that must also be heard appropriately. For example, it is certainly true that processes take place in the human abdomen that are integrated into the whole organism. If they are integrated into the whole organism, then they work in the right way. If they are increased by any processes, either directly in the lower abdomen, so that they become more active there, or if the corresponding processes — for such corresponding processes are always there — are reduced in intensity in the human head or in the human lungs, then something very peculiar occurs. It then becomes apparent that the human organism must develop processes within itself for its normal life, which, to a certain extent, are only allowed to develop to the extent that they engage the whole human being. If the process is increased, it localizes itself, and then, for example, a process occurs in the human abdomen whereby what is going on in the human head or lungs is not properly separated from what corresponds to certain processes in the abdomen. The processes always correspond to each other in such a way that they run parallel. As a result, however, what should only be present in the human being to a certain extent in order to maintain his vitality, the vitality carried by the spirit and soul, is raised above a certain level. Then it becomes, I would say, the atmosphere for all kinds of lower organisms, for all kinds of small organisms, and these small organisms can then develop there. That which is the creative element of the small organisms is always within the human being, but it is spread throughout the entire organism. When it is concentrated, it becomes a breeding ground for small organisms, microbes; they find a breeding ground there. But the reason why they can thrive there is to be found in extremely subtle processes in the organism, which then turn out to be the primary cause. I am really not speaking out of any antipathy towards the germ theory. I fully understand the reasons why people believe in germs. You can believe me when I say that if I did not have to speak as I do now for objective reasons, I would acknowledge these reasons, but it is precisely here that knowledge leads to the recognition of something else, and then forces one to say: I see a certain landscape, there are many exceptionally beautiful cattle, well cared for. I now ask: Why are there certain living conditions in the area? They come from the beautiful cattle. I explain the living conditions in this area by explaining that beautiful cattle were brought in from somewhere else and have spread there. — I will not do that, will I, but I will examine the primary causes, the diligence and understanding of the people, and that will explain to me why these beautiful cattle thrive on this soil. But I would be giving a superficial explanation if I simply said: It is beautiful here, life is good here because beautiful cattle have moved in. It is basically the same logic when I find the typhoid bacillus and then conclude that people have typhoid because the typhoid bacilli have moved in. To explain typhoid, other things are necessary besides simply referring to the typhoid bacilli. But one is misled in a completely different way when one indulges in such false logic. Certainly, the primary processes that provide the basis for the existence of the typhoid bacilli are then the basis for the typhoid bacilli, but they also cause all kinds of other things that are not primary. And it is very easy to either completely confuse or conflate what is secondary with the actual original clinical picture. These are the things that lead to the correct conclusion on this point, or that show how what is justified in a certain sense must be kept within its limits.