Second Discussion

GA 314/1924-04-23/p051 ·1924-04-23 · English HighHigh alignmentThis translation's paragraph count matches the German original — the locus maps cleanly to the same paragraph in DE.
The speaker of this passage is not asserted. Q&A / discussion session: interleaves participants' questions with Steiner's answers. A given passage may be a questioner, not Steiner — confirm the speaker before quoting.
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.

The direction you indicated yesterday is this: I make a diagnosis and then have the diagnosis before me. I know that when this turns out, these remedies are available to me. I can choose from among them. Now you wanted to know: how can one actually choose? The answer can only be given by saying: If I can choose between several remedies, I must assume that I have not yet completed the diagnosis and must continue the diagnosis until I arrive at a definite remedy. There is no such thing as an arbitrary choice. This was truly a happy case, and I was amazed. The fact that one goes from the condition of the child to the allantois of the grandmother is something that does not otherwise occur in the diagnosis. I was extremely astonished that this was the motif; on the other hand, the result shows that one must try to penetrate to the last cause.

Read this passage in another edition
DEoriginalENEnglish
Raw JSON: /v1/steiner/en/ga/314/1924-04-23/p051.json
Cite: GA 314/1924-04-23/p051 · edition English