As you likely know, Rudolf Steiner was highly critical of Kant's epistemology in his own doctoral dissertation in 1892, which was expanded to become the book, "Truth and Knowledge", the veritable introduction to Steiner's own magnum opus, "The Philosophy of Freedom", which was first published in November 1893, while Steiner was in Weimar…
As you likely know, Rudolf Steiner was highly critical of Kant's epistemology in his own doctoral dissertation in 1892, which was expanded to become the book, "Truth and Knowledge", the veritable introduction to Steiner's own magnum opus, "The Philosophy of Freedom", which was first published in November 1893, while Steiner was in Weimar working at the Goethe-Schiller.
Steiner would expand upon his criticism of Kant in the first lecture of GA 201, which was previously cited. And here is the reason, which you amplify in your dissertation presented, it seems, to the review panel of the California Institute of Integral Studies. Steiner presented his dissertation to Heinrich von Stein, of the University of Rostock, who was an authority on Plato, and had written a huge volume of several parts on Plato and Platonism. So, he felt he needed to "bone up" on Plato, for the benefit of Professor Stein, and yet Stein agreed on everything Steiner had written about Kant's epistemology as being the path away from Plato. So, Steiner got his PhD very readily. It interests me, Max, that CIIS, as you seem to admit, knows very little about the work of Rudolf Steiner, and even in 2019. How can this be?
Your work described in "The Redemption of Thinking" is well done, but it only describes what constitutes the a priori and a posteriori dimensions of the human being as a physical human being on earth. Steiner also describes the lines of demarcation which describe the etheric body (left-right), and astral body (above and below}. Kant only emphasized the (before-behind) dimension, which accords the physical body. Thus, Spiritual Science is needed for the full spectrum. Thinking, which is seated in the Etheric Body, Feeling, which is seated in the Astral Body, and Willing, which is seated in the Physical Body. Kant is an icon of this third, through his three books, written in 1781, 1788, and 1790. He was definitely knocking on the door.
thanks, as always, for sharing your thoughts on this, Steven
yes, to begin with I benefitted from Steiner’s treatment of Kant but I also felt I had to overcome the prejudices against Kant that it had instilled in me before I could really understand Kant’s work on its own terms. I still side with Steiner but it’s not possible to get a charitable reading of transcendental idealism, or Kantian ethics, for that matter, from his work so you have to supply the good will yourself. That was my experience anyway.
We shouldn’t be too hard on CIIS for not incorporating more of Steiner’s work in their curriculum. I don’t think there’s another comparable college that incorporates more, and as everyone knows, Steiner is “hors categorie” and thus is exceedingly difficult for academia to relate to.
I’m surprised Steiner’s treatment of Plato was embraced by anyone, let alone a scholar of Platonism but I guess shouldn’t be because misunderstanding Plato seems to be par for the course in academia.
I've never submitted anything for academic approval, and so I admire your achievement. I know that Steiner is difficult for many people, and have lost contact with serious scholars because of it, e.g., Eliot Deutsch. Integral Studies has been my focus for many years, of course, outside the classroom due to this lack of interest and encouragement. Aurobindo led to Fourth Way, which led to Steiner, which led to Gebser, and most recently, the wealth of the evolutionary focus of Pierre Teihard de Chardin. For me, it is about making the bodies suitable for the impressions needed for higher consciousness.
You see, Steiner indicates here that what was once alive in the human organism and conscious in the soul back in the Egyptian Mysteries of the 3rd Cultural Epoch, has now died in the organism, like a piece of lignified wood, and also become unconscious in the soul in our 5th Cultural Epoch. So, we have a definite death process to overcome in this day and age. That is why he attributes Parsifal here to the Consciousness Soul, and the Holy Grail to redemption in the modern era. It seems that we all bear the wound of Amfortas, and need to overcome it with conscious apprehension. It has been a long struggle for me.
As you likely know, Rudolf Steiner was highly critical of Kant's epistemology in his own doctoral dissertation in 1892, which was expanded to become the book, "Truth and Knowledge", the veritable introduction to Steiner's own magnum opus, "The Philosophy of Freedom", which was first published in November 1893, while Steiner was in Weimar working at the Goethe-Schiller.
Steiner would expand upon his criticism of Kant in the first lecture of GA 201, which was previously cited. And here is the reason, which you amplify in your dissertation presented, it seems, to the review panel of the California Institute of Integral Studies. Steiner presented his dissertation to Heinrich von Stein, of the University of Rostock, who was an authority on Plato, and had written a huge volume of several parts on Plato and Platonism. So, he felt he needed to "bone up" on Plato, for the benefit of Professor Stein, and yet Stein agreed on everything Steiner had written about Kant's epistemology as being the path away from Plato. So, Steiner got his PhD very readily. It interests me, Max, that CIIS, as you seem to admit, knows very little about the work of Rudolf Steiner, and even in 2019. How can this be?
Your work described in "The Redemption of Thinking" is well done, but it only describes what constitutes the a priori and a posteriori dimensions of the human being as a physical human being on earth. Steiner also describes the lines of demarcation which describe the etheric body (left-right), and astral body (above and below}. Kant only emphasized the (before-behind) dimension, which accords the physical body. Thus, Spiritual Science is needed for the full spectrum. Thinking, which is seated in the Etheric Body, Feeling, which is seated in the Astral Body, and Willing, which is seated in the Physical Body. Kant is an icon of this third, through his three books, written in 1781, 1788, and 1790. He was definitely knocking on the door.
thanks, as always, for sharing your thoughts on this, Steven
yes, to begin with I benefitted from Steiner’s treatment of Kant but I also felt I had to overcome the prejudices against Kant that it had instilled in me before I could really understand Kant’s work on its own terms. I still side with Steiner but it’s not possible to get a charitable reading of transcendental idealism, or Kantian ethics, for that matter, from his work so you have to supply the good will yourself. That was my experience anyway.
We shouldn’t be too hard on CIIS for not incorporating more of Steiner’s work in their curriculum. I don’t think there’s another comparable college that incorporates more, and as everyone knows, Steiner is “hors categorie” and thus is exceedingly difficult for academia to relate to.
I’m surprised Steiner’s treatment of Plato was embraced by anyone, let alone a scholar of Platonism but I guess shouldn’t be because misunderstanding Plato seems to be par for the course in academia.
I've never submitted anything for academic approval, and so I admire your achievement. I know that Steiner is difficult for many people, and have lost contact with serious scholars because of it, e.g., Eliot Deutsch. Integral Studies has been my focus for many years, of course, outside the classroom due to this lack of interest and encouragement. Aurobindo led to Fourth Way, which led to Steiner, which led to Gebser, and most recently, the wealth of the evolutionary focus of Pierre Teihard de Chardin. For me, it is about making the bodies suitable for the impressions needed for higher consciousness.
You see, Steiner indicates here that what was once alive in the human organism and conscious in the soul back in the Egyptian Mysteries of the 3rd Cultural Epoch, has now died in the organism, like a piece of lignified wood, and also become unconscious in the soul in our 5th Cultural Epoch. So, we have a definite death process to overcome in this day and age. That is why he attributes Parsifal here to the Consciousness Soul, and the Holy Grail to redemption in the modern era. It seems that we all bear the wound of Amfortas, and need to overcome it with conscious apprehension. It has been a long struggle for me.
https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA144/English/RSP1972/19130207p01.html