Federica wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 5:56 pm
Now coming to animals:
Steiner wrote:To attribute memory to animals is an error still easier to fall into than the mistake of ascribing consciousness to plants. It is natural enough to think of memory when a dog recognizes its master, whom it may not have seen for some time past. Yet in reality the recognition depends not on memory, but on something else. The attraction proceeds from the master's nature, which gives pleasure to the dog when in his presence. Every time the master's presence is renewed this causes a renewal of the pleasure. Now memory is only there when a being not only feels the experiences of the present moment but preserves those of the past. Even when this is granted, it is still possible to make the mistake of attributing memory to the dog. Surely, one might rejoin, since the dog grieves when its master goes away, it must retain some memory of him. This too, however, is a wrong conclusion. By living with him, the master's presence has become a need to the dog; it feels his absence just as it experiences hunger. If we are not ready to make clear distinctions of this kind, insight into the true relationships of life remains impaired.
Here - still from SSiO Chapter II - I must admit I fail to be convinced, clearly when it comes to domestic animals, but even in general. We know that in other places Steiner explains that, for pets, living in close contact with humans, there is some form of 'osmosis of consciousness' that may explain some particular traits of the individual animal and some capacity to remember (another case of intellectual disconnect). But even when it comes to wild animals, some of them can be taught habits, which requires memorizing instructions. Some show individual traits, even when they are not domesticated or captive. I realize the link between consciousness of self and memory:
Cleric K wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:23 pm
The latter kind of thinking can most easily be exemplified through our activity of remembering (see also the ‘what we had for breakfast’ example in FoHC). When we remember something, we focus the memory thought-images from within our intuitive context. We are interested not simply in any mental images (which would correspond to fantasy) but precisely those that fit musically within the dim intuition of the thing we try to remember. The fact that they fit in this way doesn’t in itself guarantee that our dim intuition is truthful. The memory images that explicate this intuition need to fit also with the rest of the phenomenal content. In other words, we should always be pursuing the harmony of the facts.
So to clarify what is meant by animal memory, one could maybe argue that such alterations in animal consciousness only appear to the extent that they come in contact with humans, in a way or another, and humans observe their behavior. But I'm not convinced. Another way: would it be correct to distinguish between an intentional memory, that is not necessarily coupled with the sensory spectrum - I have the initiative to recall a past event or image out of my own sense-free intention - and a simple act of drawing from the intuitive context as a reaction to sensory experience - for example, the animal remembers the owner, remembers places, habits, instructions, when specifically stimulated by certain sensory experiences?
I was reading a lecture just recently that may hold the key:
https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA172/En ... 06p01.html
Well, we need not elaborate on these specially complicated expressions of intelligence, but what stands out is that all these various animals performed feats of arithmetic. A great deal of attention was then given to the investigation of what such animals can achieve. Something quite unusual came to light in the case of the Frankfurt ape. It was possible to witness that when he was given a problem in addition to which he had to find a definite answer he pointed to the correct number in a series placed side by side. It was then discovered that this educated ape had simply formed the habit of being guided by the direction of the glance of his trainer. Then some of those who had previously been astonished said, “He has no trace of a mind; his training is everything!” In other words, the animal was taking his direction from his trainer and followed nothing more than a somewhat complicated training procedure. Just as a dog fetches a stone when it is thrown, so did the ape produce from the series of numbers the one indicated by the glance of his trainer.
Upon more thorough investigation, similar findings will undoubtedly be obtained in experiments with the other animals. Whatever, we cannot suppress our astonishment that people are so amazed when animals perform something that is seemingly human. How much more objective understanding, how much intellect, is actually associated with the so-called instinctual behavior in animals. As a matter of fact, the enormously important achievements and profoundly significant connections in the animal realm cause us to admire the wisdom underlying all happenings. We do not have wisdom merely in our heads; wisdom surrounds us everywhere like light, working everywhere, even through the animal kingdom.
...
With the proper perception, one can obviously explain such phenomena only when one thinks of objective wisdom and understanding as qualities that, along with instinctive behavior, have been instilled in things, and when one thinks of an animal as part of a complete system of interrelated objective wisdom permeating the world. In other words, they can be explained only when we are no longer limited to the idea that wisdom has come into the world through man alone, but recognize that wisdom is to be found throughout the universe. Man, by reason of his special organization, is able to perceive more of this wisdom than other beings, and is thus distinguished from them. Because of his organization, he can perceive more than they, but through the wisdom implanted in them, they can perform wisdom-filled tasks as he can. It is, however, a different kind of wisdom. The phenomena of these unusual expressions of wisdoms are really far less important to serious observers of the world than the phenomena that are always spread out before their eyes. These are far more important and, if you take this into consideration, you will no longer find incomprehensible what I am about to say.
An animal, far more intensely than man, fits into the universal wisdom and is quite intimately united with it. Its orders, so to speak, are far more compulsory than those of man. Human beings are much freer, and so it is possible for them to reserve forces for the cognition of interrelationships. The essential point is that the physical body of an animal — especially the higher ones — is fitted into the same universal interrelationships as man's etheric body. Thus, man knows more of the cosmic relationships, but animals are far more intimately united with them; they are far closer to, and more interwoven with, them. Therefore, if you take this objectively dominant reason into consideration tell yourself this: “We are surrounded not only by air and light but also by governing reason; we do not move merely through illumined space but also through the space of wisdom and governing reason.”
So we are falling into muddled thinking if we confuse the animal's more intimate union with the 'governing reason' of the Cosmos with the faculty of memory, the latter allowing for cognition of interrelationships in an intentional way, as you also pointed out. Through this faculty, humans begin to do consciously what the Cosmos
does for the animals. We gradually begin to restore the Cosmic Wisdom in our chopped up memory-thoughts. What we know as the profoundly wise 'instincts' and 'training' in animals is nothing other than Cosmic Intelligence viewed from the 4th convolution - we could say it is the Memory of the Gods working through them, insofar as it is the already accomplished Divine intents for natural creation which work on as instinctive habits that can nevertheless be quite pliable and adaptive to changing circumstances (although there are many cases in which animals migratory patterns don't adapt to changes in the environment brought by humanity, for example).
Yet this Cosmic Memory flows right through the animal soul and animates its etheric and physical bodies - there is no break in the process that allows for memory impressions to build up within the
individualized soul. This is also connected with their horizontal orientation in contrast to our vertical stance. We can also connect it with Cleric's ice skating toe-picks illustration. It is only through this individual memory faculty that we can condense encoded concepts and reach the grounds of our freedom, and eventually begin to consciously work with the memory images to form new relationships between sensory impressions, to gain insights into the intuitive context, to reorient and educate our imaginative flow, and to
freely conduct our deeds more harmoniously with the moral order of the Cosmos.