{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 73a/1921-01-14/p017","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"Now, of course, there is no longer such skepticism about these things, but in practice it is basically still the case. And that is why it is so difficult for a real medical science to penetrate through all the possible amateurism and quackery that can flourish precisely because it is so difficult to raise awareness of what real science actually is in this field. But this is connected with our scientific view in general. It is connected with something that one believes – rightly, but in a one-sided way – to be a part of the great scientific insights of the 19th century, something that is called the doctrine of descent. In an extraordinarily astute way, in a way that has led individual researchers to the most scrupulous methods of observation, the developmental series of organisms from the imperfect to the more perfect has been sought and placed at the top of the human being, this whole human being as he stands before us today in his organization. To a certain extent, his organism in its entirety has been regarded as a transformation of the animal organism. This has only been possible because certain inner relationships of the human organism have been the subject of completely false concepts. Naturally, I can only hint at these things. They will arise out of a truly comparative genetic-morphological approach to embryology, out of a morphological consideration of the organs, out of a truly comparative genetic-morphological approach to embryology, out of the facts of embryology, in connection with the facts of life. Today, more or less everyone has the idea that, for example, we have something in the brain that can be seen as a complicated formation of what is present in the spinal cord as a nervous organism. In a sense, what is organized in the spinal cord is seen as the original, and what is present in the brain is seen as having emerged from this spinal cord in a complicated way. You cannot interpret the phenomena in this way. If you follow the facts of embryology in an unbiased way, you will get a completely different view. One will come to the view that what is present in the brain can be traced back to such a simpler organization as is present in the spinal cord, but that the spinal cord, as the further development of which the brain is to be regarded, must be thought of as lying more or less horizontally in the brain itself — if I may put it this way. In our present brain, what is spinal cord-like as a basis for our brain - going backwards from the forehead to the back of the head - is only ideally predisposed, so that one has to imagine the brain as a transformation of this formation, which today is only present in the brain in an idealized form, while what we have today in man as the spinal cord can be seen as emerging from the same formative laws as the human brain, but remaining at an earlier stage. So when we look at the spinal cord and the brain in context, we have to say that both are based on the same formative laws, but the brain has been brought to a further stage through this formation. It is only at a later point in phylogeny that the laws of formation intervene in the spinal cord, and it does not reach the same level as the brain. Therefore, the spinal cord is to be seen as the later formation, the initial stage of which lies in an earlier period in the genesis of humanity. The brain is to be placed at an even earlier stage, and it is to be seen as more advanced, so that one must say: the spinal cord is phylogenetically the later formation, which has only remained at an earlier stage, while the brain has been brought to a further stage by this formation.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"13. The Relationships Between Spiritual Science and Individual Academic Subjects III","site_heading":null,"date":"1921-01-14","location":null,"word_count":662,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/73a/1921-01-14/p017","alignment_confidence":"medium","alignment_reason":"beads:identity","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2024","book_title":"Scientific Disciplines and Anthroposophy","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA073a/English/SOL2024/19210114p01.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/73a/1921-01-14/p017"},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/73a/1921-01-14/p017","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},"german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"1921-01-14","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 73a/1921-01-14/p017","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/73a/1921-01-14/p017"}],"bead_confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","meaning","audit"],"length_check":{"de_words":607,"en_words":662,"ratio":1.09,"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 73a/1921-01-14/p017","passage_number":17,"text":"Nun, heute liegt ja nicht mehr eine solche Skepsis über diese Dinge vor, aber in der Praxis ist es im Grunde genommen noch immer so. Und daher ist es für eine wirkliche medizinische Wissenschaft so schwer, durchzudringen gegenüber allem möglichen Dilettantismus und aller möglichen Quacksalberei, die gerade dadurch groß werden können, weil es so wenig möglich ist auf diesem Gebiet, für das, was eigentlich wirkliche Wissenschaft ist, Verständnis zu erwecken. Das hängt aber zusammen mit unserer naturwissenschaftlichen Auffassung überhaupt. Es hängt zusammen mit etwas, von dem man glaubt —- zwar mit Recht, aber doch eben in einer einseitigen Weise -, daß gerade ein Teil der großen wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse im 19. Jahrhundert gebunden sei an das, was man die Deszendenzlehre nennt. Man hat in einer ja wirklich außerordentlich scharfsinnigen Weise, in einer Weise, die bei den einzelnen Forschern zu den allergewissenhaftesten Beobachtungsmethoden geführt hat, die Entwicklungsreihe der Organismen von den unvollkommenen zu den vollkommeneren gesucht und hat an die Spitze den Menschen gestellt, diesen ganzen Menschen, wie er in seiner Organisation heute vor uns steht. Man hat gewissermaßen seine Organisation in ihrer Ganzheit als eine Umgestaltung der tierischen Organisation betrachtet. Nun, man konnte das nur, weil man sich über gewisse innere Beziehungen des menschlichen Organismus ganz falschen Begriffen hingab. Ich kann ja natürlich diese Dinge nur andeuten. Sie werden sich ergeben aus einer wirklichen empirischen Morphologie, einer morphologischen Betrachtung der Organe, sie werden sich ergeben aus einer wirklich vergleichenden genetischmorphologischen Betrachtungsweise der Embryologie, der Tatsachen der Embryologie, im Zusammenhang mit den Tatsachen des Lebens. Heute hat ja jeder mehr oder weniger die Vorstellung: Wir haben zum Beispiel im Gehirn etwas, was wie eine komplizierte Ausbildung desjenigen anzusehen ist, was seiner Anlage nach als Nerven-Organismus im Rückenmark vorhanden ist. Man sieht in demjenigen, was im Rückenmark organisiert ist, gewissermaßen das Ursprüngliche, und dasjenige, was im Gehirn vorliegt, das sieht man an als das auf komplizierte Weise aus diesem Rückenmark Hervorgegangene. So kann man die Erscheinungen nicht deuten. Wenn man in einer unbefangenen Weise gerade die Tatsachen der Embryologie verfolgt, dann wird man eine ganz andere Anschauung bekommen. Man wird die Anschauung bekommen, daß dasjenige, was im Gehirn vorliegt, zwar zurückführt auf eine solche einfachere Organisation, wie sie im Rückenmarkstrang vorliegt, daß aber der Rückenmarkstrang, als dessen weitere Ausbildung das Gehirn anzusehen ist, gedacht werden muß mehr oder weniger horizontal im Gehirn selbst liegend — wenn ich es so ausdrücken darf. In unserem heutigen Gehirn ist dasjenige, was sich rückenmarkstrang-ähnlich als eine Grundlage für unser Gehirn ergibt - von der Stirne nach rückwärts gehend, dem Hinterhaupte zu - nur ideell veranlagt, so daß man sich das Gehirn vorzustellen hat als eine Umbildung dieser heute nur in ideeller Anlage im Gehirn vorhandenen Bildung, während wir das, was wir heute im Menschen als den Rückenmarkstrang haben, anzusehen haben als aus denselben Bildungsgesetzen hervorgehend wie auch das menschliche Gehirn, aber auf einer früheren Stufe stehengeblieben. Wenn wir also Rückenmark und Gehirn im Zusammenhang betrachten, müssen wir sagen: Beiden liegen dieselben Bildungsgesetze zugrunde, aber das Gehirn ist durch diese Bildung zu einer weiteren Stufe gebracht worden. Erst in einem späteren Zeitpunkt der Phylogenie greifen die Bildungsgesetze im Rückenmarkstrang ein, und es kommt nicht so weit wie das Gehirn. Daher ist der Rückenmarkstrang als die spätere Bildung anzusehen, deren Anfangsstufe in einer früheren Zeit in der Genesis der Menschheit gelegen hat. In eine noch frühere Zeit ist das Gehirn mit seinem Anfang zu versetzen, und es ist anzusehen als weiter fortgeschritten, so daß man sagen muß: Der Rückenmarkstrang ist phylogenetisch die spätere Bildung, die nur auf einer früheren Stufe stehen geblieben ist, während das Gehirn durch diese Bildung zu einer weiteren Stufe gebracht worden ist.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":607,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/73a/1921-01-14/p017"}],"english":["GA 73a/1921-01-14/p017"],"method":"identity","confidence":"medium","correspondence":"established","length_check":{"de_words":607,"en_words":662,"ratio":1.09,"partial":false},"pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","meaning","audit"]},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":1.06,"band":"comparable","note":null,"word_count":8353,"original_word_count":7905,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2024","book_title":"Scientific Disciplines and Anthroposophy","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA073a/English/SOL2024/19210114p01.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 73a/1921-01-14/p017"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"medium","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."}}