SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sat Jul 10, 2021 3:41 pm
AshvinP wrote: ↑Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:04 pm
It seems to me, as idealists, we are forced to make simple distinctions to speak about these things concretely. So Steiner uses concept and percept in this simple way to hightlight, above all else, that it is our own spiritual activity which brings ever-higher objective meaning to ideal relations. That is the living essence he wants us to discover for ourselves at the very beginning of our journey into spiritual realm. It still blows my mind that he did that successfully 120 years ago and, even blows my mind more, that so many pro philosophers have no idea he did that. I myself didn't really consider this seriously until recently. so I am not trying to pass judgment. Its almost as theoretically implausible that people would not know the physical Sun exists even though they cannot stare at it directly. Anf if pro philosophers do not realize it, then the average person definitely does not, as I recently found out from many twitter users on TOE with Kurt question about metaphysics. That is at the core thing we are trying to point towards here - the shoemaker, student. etc. who reflects on what they were thinking a few minutes ago is still NOT recognizing this reality of their own activity. That is why Steiner calls it "exceptional state". Steiner. Jung, and Barfield also show how this state only became possible relatively recently in human history. It is truly an amazing thing. (I know SD you probably understand this but just wanted to sum this critical point up one more time).
Forced by what?
Steiner's "occult" animism (Spiritual being and communication of and with Sun, Earth etc. planetary, elemental and nature spirits etc. etc.) is for me much more interesting than "Steiner, the system philosopher". Description's of Steiner's visits to Finland draw attention to his intent listening, and on the other hand how he "roared, tore and panted" when he spoke, giving a nice demonstration of certain traditional shamanic arts.
In his liminal character and role Steiner and his legacy of course includes both aspects, and in my reading of this thread, those aspects are reflected and re-enacted in the roles taken by participants in the discussion. In that sense, also active resistance or non-commitment towards 'system philosophy' -interpretations is
loyalty to the text and texture of Steiner and his legacy, and the spiritual processes he went through and vented in his writing and speeches, in his
intent listening.
I thought we already clarified with DS that Steiner does not call "it" (as if there was such an object), "exceptional state", but that translation is just a meaning getting lost in poor translation?
Steiner, as part of the occult, theosophic and anthroposophic spiritual movement of his era, taught and took disciples, and as we know, such relations tend to create both mess and further creativity. In hindsight, and very meaningfully to my own lived experience, the spiritual movement culminated in finding a boy called Jiddu Krishnamurti and elevating/recognizing/worshipping him as a "Universal Master" grade dude, or whatever (I'm not well read in the specific theosophist terminology, or have forgotten).
Jiddu played his role as well as he could, by getting of the high horse and teaching the antiguru stuff both in word and deed. And if you followed that strain of antiguru teaching carefully, U.G Krishnamurti as spiritual twin of Jiddu helped to destroy any and all "legacy" attached to Jiddu the adulterer, whom he never stopped ridiculing and badmouthing.
As Cleric pointed out earlier on the thread, Steiner remarked that if all of his writings were to be burned and he was forced to choose one to save, it would be
The Philosophy of Freedom - what you are calling his "system philosophy". So, for Steiner himself, his 'system philosophy' was of critical importance to everything else including his spiritual science. Why is that? The answer is contained in the title of PoF itself - because he is seeking harmony with the course of planetary evolution towards humanity's
spiritual freedom. People who can recall and recite truths of "occult animism" (the term "animism" is not at all indicative of his view on spiritual beings, but I will go with it for now) are not
spiritually free, even if the content of what they are saying is 100% correct. Steiner only sees value in teaching each individual the methods by which they can
discover for themselves via experience and Thinking these occult conclusions he has reached. And the foundation for that Self-discovery is laid out mostly in PoF.
I am not sure what you mean by "clarifying with DS [exceptional state] is meaning getting lost in poor translation"? I don't think so at all - he is using "exceptional state" because observation of one's own thinking is truly an unusual state for modern humans to engage in. There was a little bit of confusion over whether it
is the "firm point" or
leads to the "firm point", but that is mostly irrelevant distinction. The common thread I see in most "criticisms" or even "support" of Steiner is some manner in which to deny that he was elevating Thinking to pre-modern role of bearing the world's Unity in the most objective manner we can conceive, i.e. he was
not presenting a smorgasbord of spiritual options for people to explore and play around with - in fact that was the exact opposite of his approach and related to the reason he parted from theosophy and started Anthroposophy (Anthro + Philo-Sophia = "wisdom of the human being").
His critics deny that to make him a nutcase speculating "subjectively" on the most fantastic spiritual realities, and his "supporters" deny that to make it easier to keep the "good stuff" in his philosophy while throwing out the rest of his spiritual science or, at least, tucking it away deep in a closet of their minds somewhere so they never really feel the need to deal with it and what it means. A common theme of all my essays here has been that what we call "subjective", "mental", "ideal", "meaningful", etc. in the modern age is
not merely personal and optional like my preference for colors or tastes. That, more than anything else, is the metaphysical and spiritual illness of the modern age that we are constantly criticizing on this forum. Yet when it comes to essential matters of the soul and spirit, we lapse right back into that same illness so that we may declare them lacking any "objective" reality which can be systematically explored and illuminated within us.