Soul Economy
Body, Soul and Spirit in Waldorf Education
GA 303
2 January 1922, Stuttgart
XI. Children from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Years I
At the end of yesterday’s lecture, I tried to speak to you about the development of memory during the early school years. If we now look at the attitude regarding this matter as shown by most contemporary educational theorists, we notice a complete lack of awareness of how certain impulses during the early years of students continue to affect their later lives and how these reappear transformed. This, at any rate, is what a true knowledge of the human being reveals to us. What often happens today is that adults reach certain conclusions when they try to understand the ways of their own physical organism and psyche. Although people may not be conscious of it, they then assume that these conclusions apply also to the varying ages and stages of childhood. This attitude, however, is very misleading, because, as I pointed out, the forces that work throughout childhood development need to be recognized and supported if our education is to be sound. We must meet the inner needs of children, which is what was meant by our example of the importance of authority in the life of young children.
Imagine a man who, in his fortieth year, experiences certain vague events of the soul. External circumstances may suddenly shed light on what has arisen in his soul, and he may recognize that what is in his mind had been accepted at the age of eight or nine simply on the authority of a beloved teacher. At such a tender age, he could only entrust it to memory, since he may not have been able to comprehend it until the maturity of forty years of age. (I say this, though not many will believe my interpretation.) Children, however, cannot always wait until they are forty before understanding what they have been told at the age of eight, and this is the reason they have an inner longing for authority. When, at the age of forty, new light suddenly flashes upon what was accepted at the age of eight, simply on authority, this event brings the experience of new inner life forces, which has a refreshing effect on the whole person. New inner strength (sorely needed in later life) is developed in such a process. People are blessed with revitalizing strength for the rest of life if they have accepted a great deal of material on authority—material that, through outer circumstances, reappears as if by magic from one’s organism. Today, many people age prematurely, in both body and soul, because they are denied access to this vivifying force. Too many years have gone by since one’s memory was systematically strengthened during the early school years through appropriate and reasonable methods, based on faith and belief in the authority of an adult.
Memory training aside, there are plenty of other opportunities to cultivate children’s faculties of comprehension, as I mentioned yesterday. But between the change of teeth and puberty, it is absolutely essential for teachers to work through thoughtful and sensible methods for developing students’ memory, because without this they will be deprived of too much in later life.
If my intention were to please my listeners, I should have to speak quite differently about many things. But I wish to convey only a true knowledge of the human being as revealed by decades of anthroposophic research. Consequently, much that I have to say will sound odd when compared with current opinions. Some of my findings will be seen as old-fashioned, while others may appear avant-garde; but this is not really the point. The only thing that matters is whether what I say can stand the test of a true knowledge of the human being.
If we examine the general picture of the human being as seen by so many today, we get the feeling that it came about only through external observation. It is like trying to understand how a clock works by looking only at its exterior. We can read the time this way, and we can tell whether a watch is made of gold or silver, but we will never become a clockmaker. Today, what people call biology, physiology, or anatomy shows us only what the human being looks like externally. Human nature becomes transparent to our understanding only when we learn to penetrate the human body, soul, and spirit. Only by including these three members in our investigations can we treat people according their true nature. If we use real insight into the human being to look at a certain question much discussed lately among educators—the question of fatigue in children—we have to say this: Experiments are being made to establish the causes of fatigue in children. The results of those investigations are then used in new teaching techniques intended to reduce stress in students. This sort of thing is done all over the world, and yet the whole question is based on the wrong premise. Real knowledge of the human being would never lead to such a question in the first place. You need only consider something pointed out here during our last few meetings. Recall the strong, repeated plea that all teaching during the younger years should appeal to the rhythmic and musical element in children, which, first and foremost, works on their breathing and blood circulation.
And now I ask, can the source of fatigue ever lie in the children’s breathing and blood circulation? Can it ever arise from the middle region of the human being, the very region to which we always give special attention and treatment during the child’s school years? Never. Don’t we all breathe continuously, during both sleep and waking life, from the moment we are born until we die, without ever feeling tired of breathing? Doesn’t our blood circulate tirelessly from birth until death? Never is its flow interrupted by fatigue; if this happened, the consequences would indeed be serious. Doesn’t this show us that teachers who work from a real art of education constantly appeal to these very organs, which are never subject to fatigue? This whole question has to be considered from quite a different angle. We must formulate it differently and ask, Where are the real sources of tiredness in a human being? We find them in the head and in the limb system. We must look at these two systems if we want to understand the nature of tiredness in children, which bears a completely different character according to whether it emanates from the head or from the limbs and metabolism.
The forces working from the head downward into the rest of the human organism deposit a very fine metabolic residue that wants to permeate the whole human body with fine salt-like deposits. This process, which also affects the breathing and blood circulation, is the cause of fatigue because of the head’s direct contact with the external world and because of its arhythmic, nonmusical relationship to the outer world. The rhythms of breathing and blood circulation, on the other hand, are so strongly connected to the human organism that they retain a state of equilibrium and obey their own laws. And, in the central system, what acts like a self-contained unit is not subject to fatigue, at least not to any significant degree. It is possible, of course, to damage the inner rhythms of both children and adults through the wrong kind of treatment. But there is one thing we can be sure of: that the rhythmic system, which is of such primary importance in any true art of education, never suffers from tiredness or fatigue.
The limbs and metabolism, like the head, do get tired. You can see this by watching a snake after it has eaten. The limb and metabolic system tires, or at least becomes a source of tiredness, affecting the whole human being. Yet this form of tiredness is totally different from that of the head. The head system causes tiredness by depositing salts through a precipitation of mineral substances in the human organism. The limb and metabolic system, on the other hand, always tends to dissolve physical substances through its creation of warmth. Here, too, despite its polar opposite effect from that of the head, the cause of tiredness is found in the relative independence of this system from the inner rhythms of the human organization. This tiredness stems from the limbs’ activities in the external world and from the metabolic response to food intake. Eating and drinking usually happen at irregular intervals, since there are very few people who adhere to a strict rhythm of eating and drinking. Therefore, although both head and metabolism share the same cause of tiredness, their effects have opposite natures.
Where does all of this lead? The whole question of fatigue in students needs to be put differently. If children tire easily, we should ask, What have we done wrong? Where did we make mistakes? We have no right to assume that our teaching methods are always correct. We will never reach human nature by testing children for the number errors they make after half an hour of writing, or if we test them after a certain period of reading for their comprehension of meaningless words inserted into a text. We reach human nature only by asking the right question, which, in the case of childhood fatigue, should try to determine whether we have overburdened a child’s head or limb system. We must find methods that do not place too much strain on either of these two systems.
It would be erroneous, however, to believe that we could achieve this simply by adjusting the schedule of lessons, since gym lessons in themselves will not balance too much head work, nor will arithmetic work directly into the metabolism, though it does so indirectly. It is impossible to achieve the right balance merely by readjusting the schedule; this can be done only through an artistic presentation of lesson materials—at least during the early school years. This, in turn, means that we must appeal (as I have indicated) above all to the rhythmic system, the one system of the human being that never tires. Thus we also involve the other two systems, the head and the metabolic- limb systems, in the activity of learning. Naturally, this needs to be done correctly.
I hope that by now you realize that certain doubts about new ideas and methods of education, which are frequently expressed by those who are biased, do not apply at all to Waldorf education, because, in every sense, it is based on a true understanding of the human being. And because they also try to shed light on the soul and spiritual nature of the human being, Waldorf methods can lay the foundations for an approach that works on the whole human being.
For example, it is important to see that the human head system bears forces that penetrate the entire human organism (most strongly during childhood and decreasing during successive ages), shaping it, forming it, and giving it strength. The thought-directing capacity of the head is something that, as human beings with all our predispositions, we bring with us into this world at birth or conception. Eventually these forces assume the task of forming the entire human being. If the head were not in direct contact with the external world, and if, as a result, the inner rhythms of the human being were not disturbed all the time, then (if I may say it in this way) what has incarnated at birth in the head would be fully satisfied with the physical human organization. Human beings would flow into their physical organization, which would claim their entire being. We would be completely absorbed by it and would be unable to make any contact with the suprasensory world. Because human beings would thus be separated from the spiritual world, their inner life would become increasingly artificial and false. And, conversely, if through the limb and metabolic system human beings were not in constant touch with the external world, they would be unable to permeate with glowing warmth all that flows down from the head. We would be unable to counteract these forces, which would work toward an increasingly artificial state of perfection.
Here we have two marked polarities. The head always wants to cut us off from the spiritual world by shaping our body in a way that prevents us from gaining the right relationship to the spiritual world. The head and all that belongs to it finished developing a long time ago, during humankind’s pre-earthly existence, and the process of materialization, issuing from the head, must always be counteracted by the activities of the human metabolism and limbs, which flow upward from below. In this way, a balance is achieved in our corporeality. And between these two poles is our central system—like a self-contained organism—our rhythmic system of respiration and blood circulation. This system is like a separate world in itself, like a microcosm. But despite its relative independence, it must be protected from the extreme influences of the head, which can affect it under certain circumstances, such as when the lungs are invaded by various foreign organic processes. We can observe this in the hardening of lungs and the new growth in the lungs of those suffering from lung diseases.
As human beings, we need this polarity between the head and the metabolism. The metabolism is always trying to dissolve the hardening processes from the head, and this situation can be utilized medically. If we recognize the interplay between what descends from the head and what ascends from the metabolism, we can cure pathological symptoms in the larynx, trachea, or lungs, for example, by treating the metabolic system, even when the source of illness lies in the head system. Especially in the case of children’s diseases, spectacular results have been achieved by treating a patient’s metabolism for the symptoms of illness that appeared in the head organization. The human being is a single organic entity and must be treated accordingly. This applies to all aspects of the human being, not just in sound methods of therapy, but especially in the field of education.
If one looks at the advances in general knowledge during the last centuries, one quickly notices how little has been achieved with regard to knowledge of the human being. This is mainly because the methods of investigation consider only the physical, external aspects. It is of utmost importance that anyone involved in the art of education be able to recognize quite realistically what happens in the body, soul, and spirit of growing children, especially between the great turning point at nine and the beginning of puberty. It is essential to be able to see how the physical, soul, and spiritual forces work on and affect one another in the children we educate.
If we observe children of nine to ten with real understanding, we find that everything entering the soul is absorbed and transmuted, so that the musculature, which is permeated by forces of growth, becomes actively involved. At that point in life, the muscles always respond to and work with the soul nature of children, especially where the more intimate forces of growth are active. The inner swelling or stretching of the muscles depends mostly on the development of a child’s soul forces. The characteristic feature between the ages of ten and twelve is that the muscles have an especially intimate relationship with respiration and blood circulation. They are attuned to the central system of breathing and blood circulation. Because Waldorf education appeals so strongly to this part of a child’s being, we indirectly promote the growth and development of the child’s muscles.
Toward the twelfth year a new condition arises. The muscles no longer remain connected as intimately with the respiration and blood circulation but incline more toward the bones and adapt to the dynamics of the skeleton. The growth forces are fully engaged in the movement of limbs while walking, jumping, and grasping—indeed, in every limb activity related to the skeleton. The muscles, previously related closely to the rhythmic system, now become oriented entirely toward the skeletal system. Thus, children adapt more strongly now to the external world than they did before the twelfth year. Formerly, the muscular system was connected more directly with a child’s inner being, and the rhythmic system, because of its relative independence, played a dominant role in muscle growth. A child moved in harmony with the muscular system, and the skeleton, embedded in the muscles, was simply carried along. Now, toward the twelfth year, the situation quickly changes; the muscles begin to serve the mechanics and dynamics of the skeletal organization.
You will have gained a deep understanding of how human nature develops once you can see and understand what happens within children before the twelfth year—how the muscles simply carry the bones along and later begin to relate directly to the skeleton and, in doing so, relate also to the external world. Such insights free us from abstract, intellectual modes of investigation, which are so prevalent today and easily creep into the field of education. These insights also move educators toward a truly human approach to children. If we allow such things to work on our soul, we will never impose the sort of treatment on a child that Marsyas had to endure. Naturally, it is possible that some are frightened away when they see how transparent the human being becomes in the light of this knowledge of man. They may feel that the human soul is being dissected, but this is not the case; the anthroposophic approach is simultaneously artistic and an act of knowing. This way of looking at the human being is an art, and it is this that is needed if we want to grasp the importance of this whole period until puberty, or (as we can now describe it) the transition from an intimate affinity between the muscular system and the system of breathing and blood circulation before the twelfth year, and the subsequent relationship between the muscles and bones from the twelfth year until puberty.
Can you see now how an incarnating human being gradually adapts to the world? In very young children, the formative forces are centered in the brain and radiate from there. Then the center of activities shifts to the muscular system, and after the age of twelve a child’s being pours itself into the skeleton, so to speak. Only then are human beings ready to enter the world fully. Incarnating human beings must first penetrate the body before establishing a relationship with the external world. First, the head forces are active. Later, these forces are poured into the muscles, then into the skeletal system, and after sexual maturity is reached, adolescents are able to enter the world. Only then can they stand properly in the world.
This gradual process of incarnation needs to be considered if if we want to find the right choice and presentation of class material, especially for this age. Unfortunately, however, today’s educators hardly have a sound knowledge of the human being.
Now I must ask you to forgive me if I present you with something that may seem completely absurd to you. Often I feel compelled to do such a thing, because I have to stand up for anthroposophic truths. Contemporary physiologists, biologists, and anatomists will see what I am going to say as pure heresy, but it nevertheless represents the facts. Imagine that the human brain functions in a similar way. The nerves go from the brain to the sensory organs, the location of sense perception, which is then conducted back to the brain. Here in the brain is the central station, a human “London.” Then, imagine there are motor nerves going from the brain to the organs of movement, where they give rise to the will impulses of movement according the thoughts of the brain, which are, in some way, also part of this will activity.
When people speak or think about the human being today, they first turn their attention to the head. Although the head itself always has the tendency to push us into what is material and would want to kill us every day if it were given free rein, it has nevertheless become the focus of attention among the general public today, and this is the unhealthy aspect of our current evaluation of the human being. It is a natural consequence of our modern scientific outlook. The general idea is this: in the head is the brain, which is a kind of absolute ruler over everything we think or do. I wonder how such a theory would have been explained before the telegraph, since this invention offered such a plausible analogy to what happens in our brain.
The theory of the human nervous system was postulated only after the use of telecommunications made that analogy possible. And so the brain was compared to a telecommunication center, stationed, say, in London (Steiner drew on the blackboard). If this is the center in London, then here would be Oxford, and Dover over there. If London is the center, then we could say, Here is a line running from Oxford to London. And here in London messages coming from Oxford are switched over to Dover. Under certain circumstances, we could very well imagine it like this. Once such a theory has been invented, one can present the facts so that they seem to confirm it. Take any book on physiology, and in it you will find descriptions of how, in different experiments, nerves are cut and how various physical reactions in the human body lead to definite logical conclusions. Unless you maintain strong reservations from the beginning—after all, these things look very plausible—everything seems to fit together beautifully. The only snag here is that it does not stand up to what a penetrating knowledge of the human being has to say about it. There, it is unacceptable.
I will ignore the fact that sensory nerves and motor nerves are anatomically indistinguishable. One may be a little thicker, but their structures are not significantly different. According to anthroposophic research, they are uniform (I can indicate this only briefly, otherwise I would have to give whole lectures on anthroposophic physiology). It is absurd to say that sensory and motor nerves are different. The elements of sensation and will are omnipresent in the human soul, so everyone is free to call these either sensory or motor nerves, but they must be recognized as a single, unified entity, since there is no essential difference. The only difference is in the direction in which they function. The optic nerve (a sensory nerve) is open to light impressions on the eye, and peripheral events affect another nerve in turn, which modern physiology calls a motor nerve. If this nerve goes from the brain to the rest of the organism, its function is to perceive events during physical movement. A correct treatment of tabes dorsalis would confirm this.
It is the function of so-called motor nerves to perceive motor impulses and occurrences during physical movement, but not to initiate such impulses. Nerves, wherever they may be, are organs for transmitting impressions. Sensory nerves transmit external impressions, and motor nerves transmit internal impressions. However, there is only one kind of nerve. Only scientific materialism could have invented an analogy between nerves and a telegraph system. Only materialistic science could believe that, apart from the nerves, which transmit sense impressions during the process of perception, there must also be other nerves, whose special function is to initiate will impulses. But this is not the way it works. Will impulses originate in the soul and spiritual domain, where they begin and work directly into the metabolic-limb system, not via any other kind of nerves. Nerves that enter the metabolism and limbs transmit only the impressions of what a person is doing in response to soul and spiritual impulses. Through them we perceive the consequences of soul-spiritual will processes in the blood circulation, in the remaining metabolism, and in the movement of the limbs. These we perceive. The so-called motor nerves do not initiate physical movement, but allow us to perceive the consequences of our will impulses.
Unless we are clear about these relationships, we will not come to a proper understanding of the human being. On the other hand, if you can see the truth of what I am saying, you will also appreciate why I have to insist on making such seemingly contradictory statements, because they are instrumental in showing us how the human soul and spirit always work on the entire human being.
Until approximately the twelfth year, the effects of what was just described are found in muscular activity, which is so intensely connected with a child’s breathing and blood circulation. From the age of twelve until puberty, these are linked more to the forces at work in the skeleton. This means that, before the twelfth year, children perceive with their so-called motor nerves more what lives in muscle activity, whereas after the twelfth year their perceptivity tends more toward the processes taking place between muscles and bones.
Now consider the fact that volition is also involved in every process of thinking. When connecting (or synthesizing) certain mental images, or when separating (or analyzing) them, we also use our will forces, and you have to look for this will element in the appropriate area of the organism, into which it works from the domain of the human soul and spirit. The will forces involved in the process of thinking are connected with the organism as just described. Consequently, when entering the twelfth year, children develop the kind of thinking that, in the will nature, takes place in the bones and the dynamics of the skeleton. At this point, an important transition is taking place from the soft muscular system to the hard bony system that, as I like to put it, places itself into the world like a system of levers. And here is where the heresy lies, the paradox I have to place before you: When we think about something belonging to external, inorganic nature, we do so primarily with our skeleton. Anyone accustomed to the currently accepted ideas of physiology will most likely laugh when someone living in Dornach maintains that we think abstractly with our bones. But this is how it works. It would be more comfortable not to say this, but it must be said, since correct knowledge of the human being is needed so much today.
Thoughts in our brain are only pictures of what actually occurs during the process of thinking. The brain is only an instrument that produces passive mental images of the real processes going on during the activity of thinking. To become conscious of our thinking, we need these mental pictures. But the images that our brain reflects for us lack the inner force inherent in pure thinking; they lack the element of will. The real nature of thinking has no more to do with the brain’s mental images than a certain gentleman’s picture on a wall has to do with the man himself. We must distinguish a picture from the actual person. Similarly, the actual processes during thinking must be distinguished from the mental images derived from them. When thinking is directed toward outer physical nature, the entire human organism is involved to a certain extent, but especially the skeleton. In the twelfth year, a child’s thinking enters the realm of the skeleton. This is the signal for us to move on to a new range of subjects, leaving behind the subjects described yesterday—the plant in relation to the earth and the animal kingdom in relation to the human being.
Our awareness of what happens in the soul and spiritual domain of children must lead to the appropriate choices and lesson plans. The way the soft muscular system plays its part in relation to respiration and blood circulation indicates that children, from the tenth to twelfth years, should be introduced to plants and animals as described. These subjects relate more directly to our inner human nature than do more distant subjects such as mineralogy, dynamics, physics, and so on. Thus, as the twelfth year approaches, teaching, which previously had a mainly pictorial character and included living plants and sentient animals, should now appeal more to an intellectual grasp of inorganic nature.
Now we reach the point when young adolescents can place themselves as earthly beings into the world of dynamics and mechanics and experience their forces. Now the possibility arises for introducing them to the basic principles of physics and chemistry, which are subject to specific natural laws, and to the mineral realm. If these subjects were taught at an earlier age, we would interfere with evolving human nature and unconsciously damage healthy development in our students.
The ability to grasp historical connections—to gain an overall view of historical developments and the underlying impulses and social implications—represents the other side of the stage where students are able to comprehend the physical and mineral aspects of life. Only toward the twelfth year are they mature enough for both of these aspects. Historical ideas and impulses, which are expressed outwardly in definite historical periods and directly affect social life and forms, are like the skeleton of history, although—seen in a purely historical context—they may also be something quite different. The flesh, or muscles, so to speak, are represented by the lives of historical personages as well as by concrete historical events. Therefore, to introduce history between the tenth and the twelfth year, we must bring it as images that engender a warmth of feeling and inwardly uplift the students’ souls. This is possible through telling the children of biographical events and by characterizing certain concrete events that form a whole. But we must not introduce the abstract ideas and impulses behind certain historical eras. Students should meet these in their twelfth year, which is when they begin to take a stand in the outer world. Here again you can see how an inner development gradually extends outward. Now students are ready to grasp how historical impulses, manifesting in outer events, affect the lives of people.
It is important to realize this, because otherwise there is the danger of approaching children from an adult point of view. When educating young people, it is too easy to draw parallels to an adult study of the sciences, beginning with simpler content in physics and chemistry and moving gradually to more difficult parts. One may think that we should teach subjects at school in a similarly graduated way. But this does not accord with the nature of children. An adult may see something as the simplest of material, such as we find in the mineral kingdom and inorganic physical world, but children can grasp this only after they have penetrated the realm of their skeletal system, moving in the outer world according to the dynamics of the skeleton as though conforming to the principles of the lever.
Many today have grown accustomed to looking at almost every aspect of life as though it should belong to the domain of natural laws. We find historians who try to interpret the social phenomena of historical impulses as if they, too, should be subservient to the laws of nature. This attitude is encouraged even in childhood, when physical and chemical laws are taught before the twelfth year and before other subjects more closely allied to human life are studied in lessons. If school subjects are introduced in the wrong order, students project their own experiences and understanding of purely physical laws into the social sphere and into their understanding of history. And since this way of seeing the world has deeply penetrated educational practice, the general public is quite willing to look for natural laws in practically every area of life, so that one may no longer suggest that historical impulses originate in the spiritual world. Again, this is reflected in the current principles of education. Children are encouraged to develop a firm belief in what they have been taught in physics and chemistry, so that later on, as adults, they will maintain this limited view in their outlook as a whole.
What I have written on the blackboard comes from America: “Nature’s proceedings in social phenomena.” This phrase has become almost a slogan as an educational principle, postulating that children should be educated so that they will see the processes of society as if they were natural laws. Children are to regard events in community life as they do natural processes.
People have come to me again and again to tell me that this phrase should read differently in English, that it should read “progress of nature” or something similar. However justified their criticism may be from the perspective of language use, what matters is that this quote has become a catchphrase for a specific principle in educational science. Whatever the correct wording is, we must realize that its message needs to be corrected, and this is what I wish to do from a worldwide point of view. Correcting the wording is not good enough, for the meaning implies that we find only natural laws working through social impulses. And this is the kind of attitude that we inculcate in our children. We must begin to experience natural laws at work in the processes of nature, and higher, spiritual laws within the social sphere. But this is not happening. We ruin our students’ future worldviews when we introduce them prematurely to subjects such as chemistry, mineralogy, physics, dynamics, and so on. As I have pointed out so many times already, we have to keep an eye on the entire milieu of our culture to know where to promote the impulses of the art of education. Forgive me if I have again raised an argument against common practice, but in my opinion it is justified.
If we approach modern science with the knowledge and insight gained by following paths outlined in How to Know Higher Worlds, we get the impression that the world described by natural science—according to mineral and physical law only—is not one in which we can live as human beings of flesh and blood. Theirs is a different world altogether. When we look, with eyes opened by imaginative knowledge, at the world described by modern natural science, and when we see how Children from the Tenth to Fourteenth Years 193 their picture of the world is meant to affect people today, we do not find human beings of flesh and blood there at all. We see only walking skeletons, little bone men and bone women. Theirs is a strange world indeed.
I once made an interesting experiment. The younger people here won’t remember a certain Swiss philosopher called Vogt—known as “Fat Vogt”—a typical thinker of recent times who in the 1850s somehow managed to knock together a rough-and-ready materialistic world philosophy that, like a specter, still haunts many worldviews today. I tried to imagine what would happen if real flesh-and-blood human beings were to find their way into this world of walking skeletons. Any healthy person of flesh and blood could not bear to live in such a world. But what would happen, I asked myself, if someone with at least a modicum of flesh and blood were to stray into this world of walking bones? The effects of living in a world as described by a purely materialistic view, and its intentional influences on people, would make a real person suffer the worst kinds of neurasthenia and hysteria. One could never be free of all the surrounding influences. Essentially, today’s natural science describes a world where we would all become neurasthenic and hysterical. Mercifully, the world of the natural scientist is not real or the one we live in. Very different forces, undreamed of by such people, are at work in the real world. Nevertheless, we need to extricate ourselves from this falsely uniform world of illusion, from which we receive almost everything that contributes to the general civilization of today. We must reach a true and real knowledge of the human being, and only then will we be able to educate in the right way.
Elfter Vortrag
Gestern habe ich zuletzt versucht, über die Entwickelung des Gedächtnisses zu sprechen. Gerade gegenüber dieser Gedächtnisentwickelung wird man bemerken können, daß heute der Mensch bei seinen Maximen über das Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesen recht wenig auf das Rücksicht nimmt, was sich einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis als die Fortsetzung und Umwandelung gewisser Impulse in das spätere menschliche Leben hinein ergibt. Es ist ja heute sogar vielfach so, daß der Erwachsene die Art und Weise, wie sein Organismus ist, wie sein Seelenleben ist, sich klarzumachen versucht, und von dem, was ihm als das Bequeme, als das Richtige für sich als Erwachsenen erscheint, setzt er dann auch ganz unbewußt voraus — ich behaupte gar nicht, daß das mit vollem Bewußtsein geschieht -, daß das auch gegenüber dem Kindesalter unternommen werden müsse.
Aber gerade dadurch kommt man dem Kinde gegenüber in schiefe Lagen. Bedenken Sie nur einmal das Folgende: das Kind ist ja so zu behandeln, wie es seinen inneren Entwickelungskräften gemäß ist; es erfordert schon einmal während seines Kindesalters gewisse Dinge, zum Beispiel gerade dasjenige im umfassendsten Sinne, was ich als Autoritätsgefühl geschildert habe; das Kind erfordert schon einmal durch seine Natur das, was unmittelbar und in seinem speziellen Wachstum angesehen werden muß. Nehmen Sie einmal den Fall an, irgend jemand kommt in seinem vierzigsten Lebensjahre dazu, daß ihm etwas aus der Seele heraufzieht. Durch die äußeren Erlebnisse verbreitet sich ihm plötzlich Licht über dasjenige, was da aus seiner Seele heraufzieht. Und was da aus seiner Seele heraufzieht, das hat er vielleicht auf die Autorität des von ihm geliebten Lehrers und Erziehers im achten oder neunten Lebensjahr aufgenommen. Damals konnte er es nicht anders als gedächtnismäßig annehmen, denn das innere Verständnis für eine solche Sache ist vielleicht erst mit dem vierzigsten Lebensjahr vorhanden obwohl man heute nicht daran glaubt. Man kann aber mit dem Erwerben solcher Dinge nicht bis zum vierzigsten Jahre warten; deshalb entwickelt man ja die Sehnsucht nach Autorität im richtigen Lebensalter. Aber wenn das eingetreten ist, daß, was man im achten Lebensjahre auf Autorität hin aufgenommen hat den Erlebnissen der Außenwelt gegenüber, im vierzigsten Jahre heraufschießt und dadurch ein neues Licht bekommt, dann wirkt dieser Vorgang, verknüpft mit einem Empfinden eines inneren Lebensgefühles, erfrischend auf den ganzen Menschen. Eine innere Kraft entwickelt sich an einem solchen Vorgang, die man gar sehr im späteren Leben braucht. Und wenn man recht viel von dieser Art hat, was man auf das Autoritätsgefühl hin aufgenommen hat, und was dann in dieser Weise durch die späteren Lebensverhältnisse aus dem Organismus heraufschießen kann, dann hat man das ganze folgende Leben hindurch viele Lebenserfrischungsquellen in sich. Manche Menschen altern seelisch und leiblich heute so früh, weil ihnen gerade diese Erfrischungsquelle fehlt, da es schon zu lange her ist, daß man darauf nicht gesehen hat, in einer vernünftigen, ich sage also in einer vernünftigen Weise, auch auf die Ausbildung desjenigen zu achten, was im schulmäßigen Alter nur dem Gedächtnis überwiesen werden kann, da es auf Treu und Glauben, auf das Autoritätsgefühl hin aufgenommen werden muß.
Man hat, wie ich schon gestern sagte, wirklich noch viele Gelegenheit, auch die Verständnisfähigkeiten zu pflegen neben dem, was man dem Gedächtnis anvertraut. Aber es ist zwischen dem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife für das kindliche Alter durchaus notwendig, daß man sich in eine rationelle Methode der Entwickelung auch des Gedächtnisses hineinfindet, denn man entbehrt sonst viel zu viel im späteren Leben, wenn man diese Entwickelung des Gedächtnisses nicht durchgemacht hat.
Wenn ich von dem Gesichtspunkte aus sprechen würde, durch meine Rede bloß irgendwelchen Gefallen hervorzurufen, so würde ich manches anders sagen müssen. Aber ich will eben nur die Dinge sagen, die sich aus einer Menschenerkenntnis, die durch jahrzehntelange anthroposophische Forschung gewonnen worden ist, ergeben, und deshalb muß manches gegenüber sehr verbreiteten Anschauungen der Gegenwart eben paradox klingen. Manches wird vielleicht den Eindruck des Veralteten machen, manches den Eindruck des allzu Neuen. Um alles das kann es sich nicht handeln, sondern lediglich, ob die Dinge vor einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis Bestand haben oder nicht. Wenn man der Gegenwart gegenübersteht, muß man ja in bezug auf diese Menschenerkenntnis der Gegenwart sagen, sie ist eigentlich so gewonnen, als ob man eine Uhr kennenlernen wollte, die man nur von außen anschaut. Man kann ja lernen, die Zeit anzugeben nach dieser Uhr; man kann auch erkennen lernen, ob sie aus Gold oder Silber ist, man kann aber nicht Uhrmacher dadurch werden. Nun, auch dasjenige, was wir heute Biologie, Physiologie, Anatomie nennen, ist ja nur eine Anschauung des Menschen von außen. Ein wirkliches Durchsichtigwerden der menschlichen Natur entsteht erst dann, wenn der Mensch nach Leib, Seele und Geist durchschaut wird. Aber erst eine solche Erkenntnis nach Leib, Seele und Geist gibt die Möglichkeit, den Menschen auch in entsprechender Weise zu behandeln. Und so ergibt sich auch erst vor einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis ein richtiges Urteil über eine Frage, die erst im Zusammenhange eine Beleuchtung in rechter Beziehung erfahren kann: die Frage der Ermüdung des Schülers.
Man wirft heute die Frage so auf, daß man Versuche darüber macht, wie das Kind durch das eine oder das andere ermüdet, und man möchte dann den Unterricht so einrichten, daß man nach diesen Ergebnissen geht und versucht, dasjenige zu überwinden, was den Schüler eben zu stark ermüden kann. Diese Frage ist aber über die ganze Welt hin heute eigentlich faisch gestellt. Man kann gar nicht so fragen, wenn man wirkliche Menschenerkenntnis hat. Denn bedenken Sie nur, was wir gerade in den letzten Tagen hervorgehoben haben: für das schulmäßige Alter soll der ganze Unterricht und die Erziehung so orientiert werden, daß sie auf das Rhythmische, auf das Musikalische gehen, daß sie also vorzugsweise Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem in Anspruch nehmen.
Nun frage ich Sie: liegt im Atmungs- und im Zirkulationssystem, also im mittleren Menschen, der für das schulmäßige Alter vorzugsweise in Betracht kommt, liegt da der Quell der Ermüdung? Nein, Sie atmen durch das ganze Schlafen durch, Sie atmen von der Geburt bis zum Tode, Sie haben Ihre Zirkulation von der Geburt bis zum Tode. Das wird nie durch Ermüdung unterbrochen, denn es wäre schlimm, wenn das durch Ermüdung unterbrochen würde. Man appelliert also in einer wirklichen Erziehungskunst gerade an diejenigen Organe, die der Ermüdung gar nicht unterworfen sind, und damit wird diese Ermüdungsfrage durch eine auf Menschenerkenntnis beruhende Methodik überhaupt auf eine ganz andere Grundlage gestellt.
Wo liegen eigentlich die Quellen der Ermüdung für den Menschen? Sie liegen im Kopfsystem und im Gliedmaßensystem. Auf diese muß man hinschauen, wenn man die Ermüdung in ihrem Wesen kennenlernen will. Und sie ist ganz verschiedener Art, je nach dem Kopfsystem, je nach dem Gliedmaßensystem.
Dasjenige, was vom Kopfsystem aus in den ganzen Organismus hineinwirkt, wirkt so auf ihn, daß es die Ablagerung von Stoffwechselprodukten fördert, daß es den Menschen mit allerlei salzartigen Ablagerungen durchdringen will. Das ist etwas, was in das Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem eingreift, was aber deshalb der Ermüdung unterworfen ist, weil es mit der Außenwelt in Beziehung steht, weil es in einer nichtrhythmischen, in einer nichtmusikalischen Weise von der Außenwelt abhängig ist; während der Atmungs- und Zirkulationsrhythmus so fest an die Organisation gebunden sind, daß sie ein Gleichgewicht für sich in ihren eigenen Gesetzen haben. Dasjenige, was für sich ein abgeschlossenes System ist, kann nicht ermüden, wenigstens nicht in erheblichem Maße. Man kann durch falsche Maßnahmen, die für das Kind oder auch für den Erwachsenen den Rhythmus zerstören, erkrankend wirken. Aber dessen muß man sich voll bewußt sein, daß dasjenige System, das für eine der Menschennatur entsprechende Erziehungskunst vor allen Dingen in Betracht kommt, überhaupt nicht ermüdet.
Das Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem ermüdet. Sie können das beobachten, wenn Sie eine Schlange anschauen, nachdem sie gefressen hat. Das Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem ermüdet, hat wenigstens den Quell der Ermüdung für den ganzen Menschen in sich. Es ermüdet auf andere Weise als das Kopfsystem. Das Kopfsystem wirkt Salze ablagernd, mineralische Einschläge im Organismus ablagernd. Das Glied maßen-Stoffwechselsystem wirkt so auf den Menschen, daß es ihn eigentlich durch Wärme fortwährend auflösen will. Es wirkt nach der entgegengesetzten Richtung, aber wiederum so, daß die Art, wie es wirkt, nicht vom inneren Rhythmus abhängt, sondern von dem, was ich in der Außenwelt mit meinen Gliedmaßen vornehme und was ich mit meinem inneren Stoffwechselsystem vornehme, indem ich esse und trinke. Das vollziehe ich ja auch oftmals in Unregelmäßigkeit, denn die wenigsten Menschen geben sich einem vollständigen Rhythmus in bezug auf Essen und Trinken hin. Da wirkt, ich möchte sagen, der polarische Gegensatz ermüdend auf den Menschen.
Was folgt also aus diesem? Daß die ganze Ermüdungsfrage auf eine andere Basis gestellt werden muß, daß gefragt werden muß: Wenn nun das Kind zu früh ermüdet, was hat man denn da falsch gemacht? — Man soll nicht einfach a priori voraussetzen: der Unterricht ist richtig. Und jetzt notiert man: nach einer halben Stunde macht das Kind in einer Zeile so und so viel mehr Fehler als vor der halben Stunde; oder man notiert: das Kind merkt sich jetzt nach einer halben Stunde sinnlos hingeworfene Worte in einer geringeren Zahl als vor einer halben Stunde. Auf diese Weise kann man nie dem nahekommen, was die wirkliche Menschennatur ist, sondern allein dadurch, daß man versteht, an das Leben die richtigen Fragen zu stellen. Die richtige Frage mit Bezug auf die Ermüdung ist diese: Wenn die Ermüdung zu früh eintritt, hat man entweder das Kopfsystem oder das Gliedmaßensystem überlastet; man muß nun allerdings damit einsetzen, es nicht zu überlasten. Aber man muß nun nicht glauben, daß dies lediglich durch Verteilung des Lehrstoffes zu erreichen wäre, denn die Gymnastik kann nicht recht auf den Kopf wirken und wiederum wirkt das Rechnen nicht unmittelbar auf den Stoffwechsel, wohl aber in mittelbarer Weise. Es handelt sich deshalb nicht darum, daß man dies durch eine Verteilung nach dem Stundenplan bewirkt, sondern durch ein künstlerisches Gestalten des ganzen Unterrichts- und Erziehungswesens im schulpflichtigen Alter, so daß man in der Tat an das nicht ermüdende System anknüpft - in der Weise, wie ich es angedeutet habe -, und dadurch auch die anderen Systeme, das Kopfsystem und das System des Stoffwechsels und der Gliedmaßen, in der richtigen Weise mitzieht.
Also Sie sehen, dasjenige, was sehr häufig gerade aus dem Vorurteil der Gegenwart heraus gefragt werden kann über irgendeine bestimmte Erziehungsmethode, das kann eigentlich gegenüber der WaldorfschulPädagogik nicht gefragt werden, weil sie eben auf einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis in ihrem ganzen Umfange beruht. Und weil sie auch über das Geistige und Seelische des Menschen versucht Licht zu schaffen, kann sie auch Behandlungsmethoden, die auf den ganzen Menschen gehen, wirklich ergründen.
So handelt es sich darum zum Beispiel einzusehen, daß das Haupt-, das Kopfsystem des Menschen im Grunde genommen dasjenige in sich trägt, was, am meisten in der Kindheit, dann immer weniger, an Kräften plastizierend, gestaltend den ganzen menschlichen Organismus durchdringt, durchkraftet. Dasjenige, was dadrinnen wirkt als die dirigierenden Gedanken, hat sich eigentlich der Mensch mit seinen Anlagen durch die Geburt oder Empfängnis mit in die Welt gebracht. Das ist so weit gekommen, daß es darauf hinorganisiert ist, den Menschen zu gestalten. Würde der Kopf nicht mit der Außenwelt in Berührung treten, würde dadurch nicht der Rhythmus im Menschen gestört werden, dann wäre, wenn ich mich so ausdrücken darf, dasjenige, was da im Kopfe durch die Geburt angekommen ist, mit der materiellen Organisation des Menschen zufrieden. Der Mensch würde in seine materielle Organisation ausfließen. Die würde ihn ganz in Anspruch nehmen, in der würde er ganz aufgehen, und er würde nicht den Anschluß finden an die übersinnlich-geistige Welt. Sein Inneres würde immer künstlicher und künstlicher werden, aber er würde getrennt werden von der geistigen Welt. Und wiederum, wenn der Mensch durch sein Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem nicht zusammenhängen würde mit der äußeren Welt, würde er die Erwärmung, die Durchglühung desjenigen, was vom Kopfsystem aus immer vollkommener und vollkommener, künstlicher und künstlicher sein würde, nicht erreichen.
Das sind zwei polarische Gegensätze. Der Kopf schließt uns eigentlich fortwährend aus von der geistigen Welt, weil er unseren Leib so gestaltet, daß wir aus diesem Leibe heraus kein rechtes Verhältnis zur geistigen Welt gewinnen können; denn der Kopf mit seinem Inhalte hat im vorgeburtlichen Dasein seine Entwickelung abgeschlossen, und dasjenige, was der Kopf an uns materialisiert, das wird fortwährend entmaterialisiert durch dasjenige, was in den Kräften des StoffwechselGliedmaßenmenschen liegt. Dadurch wird in unserem materiellen System das Gleichgewicht hervorgerufen. Und dazwischen liegt dasjenige drinnen, was wie ein in sich selbst gebautes System ist, das rhythmische System, das Atmungssystem, das Zirkulationssystem, wie eine abgeschlossene Welt in sich, wie ein wirklicher Mikrokosmos, das aber dessen bedarf, daß der Kopf nicht etwa im Extrem so wirkt, wie das unter gewissen Voraussetzungen geschehen kann, wo dann die Lunge mit allerlei unrichtigen Organisationsprinzipien durchzogen wird. Das verspüren wir dann in den Verhärtungen der Lunge, in den Neubildungen der Lunge bei lungenkranken Leuten.
Und wiederum auf der anderen Seite braucht der Mensch diesen polarischen Gegensatz, der von seinem Stoffwechsel-Gliedmaßenorganismus herkommt, und der eigentlich dasjenige auflöst, was sich vom Kopfe her verhärten will. Das ist auch in der Medizin wichtig; denn wenn man den Zusammenhang erkennt zwischen dem, was vom Kopfe kommt und dem, was vom Stoffwechsel kommt, so wird man zum Beispiel manches, was an Krankheitserscheinungen im Kehlkopf, in der Luftröhre oder auch in der Lunge auftritt, obgleich es vom Kopfe herrührt, vom Stoffwechselsystem aus kurieren. Die Leute sind dann erstaunt, wenn insbesondere bei Kinderkrankheiten sich in den oberen Organen irgend etwas zeigt, und man die ganze Geschichte dadurch kuriert, daß man den Stoffwechsel verändert und dann eine wirkliche Heilung eintritt. Der Mensch ist eben ein Ganzes und muß als ein Ganzes behandelt werden. Das macht sich auf allen Gebieten geltend, sowohl auf dem Gebiete einer wirklich rationellen Therapie wie auch auf dem Gebiete der Erziehungs- und Unterrichtskunst.
Ich bitte Sie, zu beachten, daß wir ja trotz der großen Fortschritte, die wir im Laufe der letzten Jahrhunderte in der Erkenntnis haben, gerade in der Menschenerkenntnis nichts Erhebliches haben leisten können, weil die Methoden der modernen Erkenntnis im Grunde genommen nur auf das Leiblich-Physische, auf das Äußerliche gehen. Nun ist es ganz besonders wichtig, um Erziehungskunst treiben zu können, gerade für das Kindesalter, das sich an den wichtigen Lebenswendepunkt zwischen dem neunten und zehnten Lebensjahr anschließt, für das kindliche Lebensalter zwischen dem zehnten Jahre und der Geschlechtsreife, wirklich in den Menschen praktisch hineinzuschauen, zu sehen, welches die leiblichen, die seelischen, die geistigen Bedingungen der Entwickelung sind.
Wenn wir das Kind mit einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis beobachten, dann zeigt sich, daß von dem Zeitpunkte, der zwischen dem neunten und zehnten Lebensjahre bis gegen das zehnte Lebensjahr hin liegt, das Kind alles das, was es seelisch verarbeitet, so verarbeitet, daß vorzugsweise das Muskelsystem in seinen Wachstumskräften überall mitarbeitet. Es geht in dieser Zeit im Kinde eben nichts anderes vor, als daß mit dem Seelischen das Muskelsystem mitarbeitet, und zwar in seinen intimeren Wachstumskräften mitarbeitet. Das innere Schwellen, Längerwerden der Muskeln, ist im wesentlichen davon abhängig, wie die Seelenkräfte sich entwickeln. Und das Eigentümliche im kindlichen Alter zwischen dem zehnten und zwölften Jahre ist dieses, daß die Muskeln ein intimes Verhältnis zum Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem haben; sie neigen zum Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem hinüber. Und an das appellieren wir ja gerade in einer wirklich kunstgemäßen Erziehung. Also wir greifen auf dem Umwege durch das Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem in das Muskelsystem ein.
Gegen das zwölfte Jahr hin tritt beim Kinde etwas ganz anderes ein. Da wenden sich die Muskeln von ihrem intimen Verhältnis zum Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem ab und wenden sich zum Knochensystem, zum Skelett hin, entwickeln sich so, daß sie sich von da ab an das Skelett anpassen. Während sie sich vorher in ihren Wachstumsprinzipien an Atmungs- und Blutumlauf angepaßt haben, passen sie sich jetzt an die Dynamik des Skeletts an. Sie machen in ihren Wachstumskräften alles das mit, was wir im Gehen, Greifen, Springen, überhaupt im Gliedmaßensystem, im Knochensystem abwickeln. Der Muskel wendet sich von seiner Intimität zum Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem herüber zu einer Intimität mit dem Skelett- und Knochensystem. Dadurch paßt sich der ganze Mensch in einer sehr starken Weise an die Außenwelt an, noch in einer stärkeren Weise vom zwölften Jahre ab, als es früher war. Früher war er ja in seinem Muskelsystem nach innen gerichtet. Er ließ seine Muskeln wachsen, wie es das im Inneren abgeschlossene rhythmische System vermag. Er bewegte sich im Appell an das Muskelsystem, und er schleppte die Knochenform bloß mit. Jetzt, gegen das zwölfte Jahr hin, wird es ganz anders; jetzt stellt er sich mit seinem Muskelwachstum in die Mechanik, Dynamik des Knochensystems hinein.
Wer einen wirklichen Blick dafür hat, was da zwischen dem elften und zwölften Jahre mit dem Kinde vor sich geht, wie es bis gegen diese Zeit hin sein Muskelsystem behandelt und die Knochen mitschleppt, wie es dann anfängt, sich in das Knochensystem, also in die äußere Welt sich hineinzuversetzen, der hat einen tiefen Einblick getan in die ganze Entwickelung der menschlichen Natur.
Solche Dinge führen eben heraus aus jener abstrakten, intellektualistischen Betrachtung, die wir heute anwenden, und die wir auch ganz unbewußt in die Erziehung hineintragen. Sie führen dazu, den Menschen als Erzieher menschlich dem Kinde gegenüberzustellen. Wenn man sich mit solchen Empfindungen dem Kinde gegenüberstellt, macht man mit ihm wahrhaftig nicht die Prozedur, die etwa mit dem Marsyas gemacht worden ist. Die Leute könnten natürlich zurückschrecken vor einer solchen, zu durchsichtig gemachten Menschenerkenntnis, weil sie glauben, man tranchiere dann den Menschen, man schneide seelisch in ihn hinein. Aber das ist nicht der Fall. Diese Anschauung ist zugleich künstlerisch und Erkenntnistat. Es wird alles künstlerisch in der Anschauung, und das ist es, was notwendig ist, wenn man gerade dieses Lebensalter bis zu der Geschlechtsreife hin ordentlich ins Auge fassen will, diesen Übergang von der Intimität der Muskeln und des AtmungsZirkulationssystems bis zum zwölften Jahre und die Intimität von Muskeln und Knochen vom zwölften Jahre bis zur Geschlechtsreife.
Bemerken Sie, wie der Mensch sich eigentlich an die Welt anpaßt: Beim ganz kleinen Kind sitzen die plastizierenden, gestaltenden Kräfte im Gehirn; die strahlen von da aus. Dann geht die Sache an die Muskeln über. Und wenn der Mensch im zwölften Jahr angekommen ist, setzt er seinen ganzen Menschen ins Skelett hinein, und dann geht es heraus in die Welt, dann erst geht es heraus. Der Mensch geht durch sich durch und kommt dann in eine Beziehung zu der ganzen Welt. Zuerst Kräfte des Kopfes; diese Kräfte des Kopfes werden dann später in die Muskeln hineinergossen, dann in die Knochen hinein; der Mensch setzt sich in die Knochen hinein, und wenn er geschlechtsreif geworden ist, setzt er sich in die ganze Welt hinein. Da steht er erst in der Welt in Wirklichkeit drinnen.
Diese Sache muß beachtet werden, wenn man die richtige Verteilung des Unterrichts- und Erziehungsstoffes gerade für dieses Lebensalter des Kindes finden will. Aber wir sind eben heute, wirklich nicht gesegnet mit einer gründlichen Menschenerkenntnis. Und jetzt verzeihen Sie mir, wenn ich ein arges Paradoxon vor Sie hinstellen muß. Das bin ich ja oft genötigt, weil ich schon einmal dasjenige, was anthroposophische Wahrheit ist, bekennen muß. Es ist eine arge Ketzerei und ein Greuel für die heutige Physiologie, Biologie und Anatomie, aber es ist nun einmal so.
Sehen Sie, heute hat sich ja alles, möchte ich sagen, was der Mensch über den Menschen denkt, nach dem Kopfe hin geschlagen, und obwohl uns der Kopf selber fortwährend in das Materielle hineindrängt, eigentlich uns jeden Tag totschlagen will, wendet sich alle Menschenbetrachtung heute im Grunde genommen dem Kopfe zu. Das ist das Ungesunde der heutigen Menschenberrachtung. Sie geht eigentlich von der Wissenschaft aus, diese Menschenbetrachtung, denn man denkt sich: im Kopfe ist das Gehirn, alles wird vom Gehirn aus dirigiert. Nun weiß ich nicht, wie man es gemacht hätte, wenn man diese Theorie in einem Zeitalter ausgebildet hätte, wo es noch keine Telegraphen gegeben hat, wo man also nicht von Telegraphenleitungen die Analogie hat hernehmen können. Aber das braucht uns ja auch nicht weiter zu interessieren. Die Theorie von dem Nervensystem ist ja ausgebildet worden, nachdem man die Telegraphenleitungen als einen Anhaltspunkt hatte, um eine Analogie zu bilden. Und so hat man denn das Gehirn als eine Art Zentralstation, sagen wir, London. (Es wird gezeichnet.) Dann hat man, wenn das das Zentrum ist, dann hat man vielleicht da Oxford, da Dover. Und nun, indem man London als das Zentrum betrachtet, sagt man sich: es geht eine Leitung von Oxford nach London; da wird umgeschaltet, und das geht dann, weiter nach Dover. Man kann sich das ja unter gewissen Fällen so Vorstellen.
Nun, so stellt man sich das Gehirn vor. Der Nerv geht zu dem Sinnesorgan hin, die Sensation tritt auf, wird bis zum Gehirn geleitet; da im Gehirn ist die Zentralstation, das menschliche London. Dann geht der motorische Nerv vom Gehirn zu den Bewegungsorganen hin und treibt in Gemäßheit der Gedanken, die da irgendwie dazwischen sitzen, das Wollen, die Bewegung hervor.
Man kann, wenn man eine solche Theorie ausgesonnen hat, sogar die Tatsachen so registrieren, daß sie diese Theorie zu bestätigen scheinen. Sie können ja heute jedes Physiologiebuch in die Hand nehmen und Sie werden, wenn Sie nicht sehr vorurteilsvoll sind - denn die Dinge schauen alle sehr plausibel aus -, da einfach sehen, wie die Experimente mit dem Nervenzerschneiden gemacht werden, wie die Konklusionen gezogen werden aus der Reaktion und so weiter, und alles stimmt wunderbar. Es stimmt nur nicht vor einer eindringlichen Menschenerkenntnis. Da ist es schließlich nicht so.
Ich will ganz absehen davon, daß ja schließlich die sensitiven von den motorischen Nerven anatomisch fast gar nicht zu unterscheiden sind; die einen sind höchstens etwas dicker als die anderen; aber in bezug auf die Struktur ist wirklich ein wesentlicher Unterschied nicht vorhanden. Was anthroposophische Forschung in dieser Beziehung lehrt - ich kann das nur andeuten, nur Ergebnisse mitteilen, ich müßte sonst anthroposophische Physiologie vortragen -, das ist dieses, daß die Nerven durchaus einheitliche Organe sind, daß es ein Unding ist, von zweierlei Nerven, von sensitiven und motorischen Nerven zu sprechen. Da im Seelischen das Willensmäßige und Empfindungsmäßige überall durchgebildet ist, stelle ich es jedem frei, motorisch oder sensitiv zu sagen, aber er muß einheitlich werten, denn sie sind absolut einheitlich, es gibt keinen Unterschied. Der Unterschied liegt nämlich nur in der Richtung der Funktion. Wenn der sensitive Nerv nach dem Auge hingeht, so öffnet er sich den Eindrücken des Lichtes, und es wirkt wiederum dasjenige, was an der Peripherie des Menschen liegt, auf einen anderen Nerv, den die heutige Physiologie als einen motorischen Nerv anspricht. Wenn er nun vom Gehirn ausgeht nach dem übrigen Organismus, so ist dieser Nerv dazu da, daß er dasjenige wahrnimmt, was bei einer Bewegung vorgeht. Eine richtige Behandlung der Tabes gibt schon auch durchaus Bestätigung dieses Resultates.
Der Nerv also, der motorischer Nerv genannt ist, der ist dazu da, um die Bewegungsimpulse, das, was da während der Bewegung vorgeht, wahrzunehmen, nicht um der Bewegung den Impuls zu geben. Nerven sind überall die Vermittlungsorgane für die Wahrnehmungen, die sensitiven Nerven für die Wahrnehmungen nach außen, die sogenannten motorischen Nerven, die auch sensitive Nerven sind, für die Wahrnehmungen nach innen. Es gibt nur einen Nerv. Und nur eine materialistische Wissenschaftsgesinnung hat diese Telegraphengeschichte als Analogon erfunden.
Diese materialistische Wissenschaftsgesinnung glaubt nämlich, ebenso wie sie für die Sensation, für die Empfindung, für die Wahrnehmung der Vermittelung der Nerven bedarf, bedürfe sie auch der Vermittelung des Nervs für die Willensimpulse. Das ist aber nicht der Fall. Der Willensimpuls geht von dem Geistig-Seelischen aus. Da beginnt er, und er wirkt im Leibe, unmittelbar, nicht auf dem Umweg des Nervs, unmittelbar auf das Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem. Und der Nerv, der in das Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem hineingeht, vermittelt nur die Wahrnehmung desjenigen, was das Geistig-Seelische an dem ganzen Menschen in bezug auf sein Gliedmaßen-Stoffwechselsystem tut. Wir nehmen dasjenige wahr, was eine Folge ist seelisch-geistiger Willensprozesse in der Blutzirkulation, im übrigen Stoffwechsel und auch in der mechanischen Bewegung der Glieder; wir nehmen das wahr. Die sogenannten motorischen Nerven sind keine motorischen Nerven, die sind bloß dasjenige, was die Äußerungen, den Impuls des Willens wahrnimmt. Ehe man diesen Zusammenhang nicht einsehen wird, eher wird man nicht zu einer durchsichtigen Menschenerkenntnis kommen. Wenn Sie aber diesen Zusammenhang voll einsehen, dann werden Sie es auch begreiflich finden, daß ich nun eben ein Paradoxon, eine Ketzerei vor Sie hinstellen muß: denn dann wirkt das Geistig-Seelische ja eben auf den ganzen übrigen Menschen.
Beim Kinde also bis gegen das zwölfte Jahr hin äußern sich die Wirkungen nach Maßgabe des eben Geschilderten in den Muskelkräften, die ein intimes Verhältnis zur Atmung und zum Zirkulationssystem haben. Beim Kinde vom zwölften Jahre an bis zur Geschlechtsreife nach denjenigen Kräften hin, die gegen das Skelett gehen. So daß wir also vor dem zwölften Jahre mehr dasjenige, was noch in unseren Muskeln liegt, mit dem sogenannten motorischen Nerv wahrnehmen, nach dem zwölften Jahre nehmen wir mit diesem sogenannten motorischen Nerv mehr dasjenige wahr, was in unseren Muskeln und Knochen vorgeht. Nun, wenn Sie bedenken, daß in allem Denken etwas Willensmäßiges liegt — es ist ja Wille, was da wirkt, wenn ich Vorstellungen synthetisch zusammenfasse oder analytisch trenne, es ist überall Wille darinnen -, so müssen Sie diesen Willen auch im Organismus aufsuchen. Und gerade dieser Wille in der seelischen Funktion des Denkens ist in dieser Art angeschlossen, wie ich es jetzt geschildert habe. Indem wir ins zwölfte Jahr eintreten, lernen wir ein solches Denken, das nach der Willensnatur seine Vorgänge in den Knochen, in der Skelettdynamik hat. Wir machen da den wichtigen Übergang vom weichen System des Menschen zum ganz harten System, das sich, ich möchte sagen, wie ein objektives Hebelsystem in die Welt hineinstellt.
Das ist die Ketzerei, das Paradoxon, das ich vor Sie hinstellen muß, daß der Mensch, wenn er seine Gedanken über die unbelebte äußerliche Natur faßt, das nicht in unmittelbarer Weise mit dem Kopfe, mit dem Gehirn tut, sondern daß er es mit dem Skelett tut. Selbstverständlich, man kann darüber lachen, wenn man in der heutigen Physiologie drinnensteckt, daß da einer in Dornach ist, der behauptet, daß die Menschen mit den Knochen abstrakt denken; aber die Sache ist eben so. Es wäre bequemer, das nicht auszusprechen, aber es muß eben ausgesprochen werden, denn wir brauchen eine wirkliche Menschenerkenntnis. Was wir an Gedanken im Gehirn haben, das sind nur Bilder dessen, was sich im wirklichen Gedankenprozeß abspielt. Dasjenige, wofür das Gehirn das Werkzeug ist, das sind die passiven Bilder für die wirklichen Prozesse, die sich beim Denken abspielen. Daß das Denken zum Bewußtsein kommt, das ist von diesen Bildern abhängig; aber in diesen Bildern liegt nicht die innere Kraft, die im Denken wirkt, liegt nicht das Willensgemäße des Denkens. Dasjenige, was das Wesenhafte des Denkens ist, das hat mit diesen Bildern, die das Gehirn zur Voraussetzung haben, nicht mehr zu tun als ein Bild, das Sie dort auf der Wand sehen würden von Herrn X, mit dem wirklichen Herrn X zu tun hätte. Sie müssen das Bild von Herrn X von dem wirklichen Herrn X unterscheiden. So unterscheidet sich der reale Prozeß, der sich während des Denkens abspielt, von den Bildern. Während des Denkens über die physische Natur waltet eigentlich der Prozeß im ganzen, im vollen Menschen, und zwar gerade für das Denken im Skelett. Wir setzen uns auch mit unserem Denken in das Skelett hinein mit unserem zwölften Jahre. Das ist dasjenige, was uns einen wirklichen inneren Anhaltspunkt bietet für das, was wir zu tun haben in der Überleitung des Unterrichts zu dem, was ich gestern charakterisierte: das Kennenlernen der Pflanzenwelt im Zusammenhang mit der Erde, das Kennenlernen der Tierwelt im Zusammenhang mit dem Menschen bis zu dem zwölften Jahre, bis zu der Geschlechtsreife.
Mit dieser Aufmerksamkeit in der Richtung der seelisch-geistigen Organisation muß dasjenige zusammenhängen, was in der Reihenfolge der Unterrichts- und Erziehungsinhalte gegliedert wird. Gerade dieses Teilnehmen des Muskelsystems, das innerlich weich ist, im Zusammenhange mit dem Atmungs- und Zirkulationssystem, das veranlaßt, wenn man alle Dinge durchschaut, dazu, zu finden, daß das Kind vom zehnten bis zum zwölften Lebensjahre so das Pflanzliche, das Tierische kennenlernen muß, wie es geschildert wurde, also dasjenige, was noch mit dem Inneren des Menschen verwandter ist als das Außermenschliche, das Mineralische, das Dynamische, das Physische und so weiter, das nicht mehr zum Menschlichen gehört. Es muß daher der Unterricht, wenn es gegen das zwölfte Jahr hingeht, an dasjenige im Menschen appellieren, was sich jetzt als seine besondere Wesenheit herausstellt. Jetzt muß man beginnen, dasjenige, was man zuerst im Bildhaften gehalten hat, was man dann in das lebendig Pflanzliche, in das empfindend Tierische übergeführt hat, in das Begreifen, in das verstandesmäßig-intellektualistische Begreifen der unorganischen Natur überzuführen.
Jetzt sind wir erst an dem Punkt, wo sich der Mensch selber als ein physisches Wesen mit Dynamik, Mechanik in die Welt hineinstellt und als solches erlebt. Jetzt ist erst die Möglichkeit geboten, daß man mit dem, was Physik, Chemie auch in ihrem einfachsten Elemente ist, was als Erde der Chemie, Dynamik unterworfen ist, was Mineralogie, Mineralkenntnis ist, an den Menschen herankommt. Wenn man das Mineralische, das Dynamische, das Physikalische, das Chemische vorher an den Menschen heranbringt, greift man, unbewußt, schädigend in die menschliche Natur ein. Auf der anderen Seite ist dasjenige, was Erfassen der sogenannten geschichtlichen Zusammenhänge, der Überschau über die Geschichte ist, was Erfassen der treibenden Impulse im Geschichtlichen, im sozialen Werden ist, nur ein polarischer Gegensatz zu dem Erfassen des Physischen, des Mineralischen. Dafür werden die Kinder auch erst reif, wenn es gegen das zwölfte Jahr hingeht. Dasjenige, was die historischen Ideen sind, die Impulse, die durch das geschichtliche Leben durchgehen, die in soziale Gestaltungen eingreifen, die sind, obwohl sie wiederum etwas ganz anderes sind auf geschichtlichem Gebiete, dennoch gleichsam das Skelett der Geschichte, während das Fleisch, während die Muskeln die lebendigen Menschen sind mit ihren Biographien und die unmittelbaren konkreten Ereignisse im Geschichtlichen. Daher müssen wir in der Geschichtsbehandlung, die wir auch schon zwischen dem zehnten und zwölften Lebensjahre einfügen müssen, so vorgehen, daß wir abgeschlossene Bilder, an denen sich das Gefühl erwärmen kann, zu denen das Gefühl hinaufschauen kann, erzählen, Biographisches, Charakteristiken abgeschlossener Ereignisse, nicht abstrakte durchgehende Impulse. Die kommen an das Kind heran, wenn das zwölfte Jahr herangekommen ist, wo dasjenige eintritt, was eben dann durch das Stehen des Menschen in der Außenwelt bedingt ist — er geht ja ganz von innen nach außen; nun kann er auch dasjenige erfassen lernen, was als geschichtliche Impulse von außen her die einzelnen Menschen ergreift.
Das muß durchaus beachtet werden, sonst geht man von dem, was man an dem erwachsenen Menschen, an sich selbst erlebt, durch gewisse Symptome zum Kinde hinunter. Und man sagt dann: Nun ja, es ist in der Wissenschaft so, zuerst begreift man das einfache Physikalische, Chemische, nachher steigt man zu dem anderen herauf; so muß es auch der Unterricht machen. Aber das entspricht nicht der kindlichen Wesenheit. Was in dieser Beziehung das Einfachste ist, die abstrakten Linien, die durch das Dasein gehen, die sich ja im Mineralisch-Physischen erschöpfen, die werden erst wirklich von dem Kinde verstanden, wenn das Kind auf sein Skelett gestellt ist und mit seinem ganzen Menschen dynamisch-physisch, wie nach einem Hebelgesetze, nach dynamischen Gesetzen sich in der Außenwelt herum bewegt. Wir haben einmal in unsere Weltauffassung die Anschauung aufgenommen, daß wir immer mehr und mehr übergehen müssen, alles nach und nach in eine Art Naturgesetz zu verwandeln. Und so sehen wir, wie Historiker bemüht sind, das soziale Element in der Geschichte dadurch zu behandeln, daß sie die Impulse der Geschichte möglichst nahe an die Naturgesetze heranrücken.
Dieser Hang entsteht dann schon im Kinde, wenn man die physikalisch-chemischen Gesetze vor dem zwölften Lebensjahr behandelt, und wenn man das Organische oder das Menschliche erst nachher behandelt. Weil man die Dinge an die falsche Stelle gesetzt hat, trägt dann das Kind dasjenige, was es an den bloßen Naturgesetzen empfunden hat, auch in das soziale Leben und in die Geschichte hinein. Und weil das in die Erziehung untergetaucht ist, deshalb hat man für die Anschauung, daß überall Naturgesetze gesucht werden sollen, daß man nicht von historischen Impulsen, die unmittelbar spirituell, geistig sind, sprechen soll, ein großes Publikum; und das beeinflußt allerdings wiederum die Erziehungsprinzipien. Man richtet sich das Kind schon so her, daß es einen starken Glauben an das bloße Physikalische und Chemische bekommt, und den dann in die gesamte Weltauffassung hineinträgt.
Von Amerika kommt das her, was ich hier aufgeschrieben habe: «Nature’s proceeding in the social phenomena.» Es ist das geradezu ein Schlagwort geworden gerade für einen gewissen Erziehungsgrundsatz, daß man sagt: Man soll das Kind so erziehen, daß es Naturprozesse empfindet in den sozialen Vorgängen, daß es gewissermaßen nur wie eine Art Naturlehre empfindet, was im sozialen Leben lebt.
Es kommen immer wiederum Leute zu mir und sagen: Man sagt im Englischen anders, man sagt: progress of nature — oder so etwas. Aber so gut aus dem Sprachgebrauche heraus diese Kritik sein mag - es ist nur ein Zitat, und es ist tatsächlich dieses als ein Schlagwort vorhanden, gerade mit Bezug auf die Erziehungswissenschaft! Also das muß schon dabei berücksichtigt werden, daß da an dem vielleicht etwas verbessert werden könnte. Ich möchte es auch, und zwar im Weltensinne verbessern! Aber mit der sprachlichen Verbesserung ist es dabei eigentlich nicht getan, denn es drückt ja das aus, daß man eigentlich natürliche Impulse in den sozialen Impulsen sehen will. Dazu richten wir uns die Kinder her. Das ist aber dasjenige, was wir gerade beginnen müssen, daß wir das Natürliche im Sinne der Naturgesetze und das Soziale im Sinne der höheren sozialen Gesetze erleben; das können wir nicht. — Wir verderben uns unsere ganze Weltanschauung, wenn wir in ein falsches Lebensalter die Behandlung des Chemischen, Mineralischen, Mineralogischen, des Physikalischen, des Dynamischen und so weiter hineinstellen. Man muß schon - das habe ich ja jetzt schon sehr häufig erwähnt - unser ganzes Kulturmilieu ins Auge fassen, wenn man verstehen will, wo die Impulse für die Erziehungs- und Unterrichtskunst einsetzen sollen. Verzeihen Sie, daß ich Ihnen hier wiederum mit einer Art Einwurf, aber doch gerechtfertigtem Einwurf gekommen bin.
Sehen Sie, wenn man mit dieser Erkenntnis, mit diesem Schauen, wie sie in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» geschildert sind, an die heutige wissenschaftliche Weltanschauung herantritt, dann bekommt man den Eindruck, daß die Welten, die die Wissenschaften heute beschreiben, und die eigentlich alles auf das Mineralisch-Physische zurückführen, gar nicht die Welten sind, in denen wir als Menschen mit Fleisch und Blut leben. Es sind andere Welten. Denn wenn man in solche Welten, wie sie der heutige Naturwissenschafter beschreibt, und wie sie auch auf den Menschen einwirken sollen, mit der nötigen imaginativen Anschauung hineinschaut, da sind keine Menschen mit Fleisch und Blut! Da wandeln nämlich lauter Skelette herum, lauter Knochenmännlein und Knochenweiblein wandeln da herum. Es ist eine merkwürdige Welt. Ich habe das Experiment einmal angestellt, indem ich die Schilderung genommen habe, die ein richtiger Denker der neueren Zeit, der Schweizer Vogt - die Jüngeren erinnern sich nicht mehr an den sogenannten «dicken Vogt», der in den fünfziger Jahren aus dem robusten Materialismus heraus eine Weltanschauung gezimmert hat, die aber überall spukt, in allen möglichen Weltanschauungen der Gegenwart -, ich habe das Experiment gemacht: ich habe versucht, zu schauen, was entstehen würde, wenn in diese Welt, in der normalerweise eigentlich nur wandelnde Skelette drinnen sein könnten, wenn in diese Welt sich einmal ein wirklicher Mensch mit einigem Fleisch und Blut verlieren würde. Einer, der mit normalem Fleisch und Blut ausgestattet ist, kann es da nicht aushalten darinnen. Aber wenn ein Mensch mit etwas Fleisch und Blut sich hineinverirren würde, was geschähe dem? Sehen Sie, durch all die Einwirkungen, die da geschildert werden, und die auch auf den Menschen so sein sollen, wie es eben im Sinne dieser materiell gedachten Welt ist, würde er zugleich im allerschlimmsten Sinne neurasthenisch und hysterisch zusammen werden. Er könnte sich gar nicht frei machen von alldem, was da in ihn hineinwirkt. Im Grunde genommen beschreibt die Naturwissenschaft heute eine Welt, an der wir neurasthenisch und hysterisch werden könnten. Und das Gute ist nur das, daß diese Welt, die da beschrieben ist, eben nicht unsere wirkliche ist, und daß unsere wirkliche eben noch andere Kräfte hat als diejenige, die da beschrieben wird.
Nun, das haben wir aber schon nötig, daß wir aus der vereinheitlichten Welt, aus der illusionären Welt, aus der wir heute fast alles auch für unsere Gesamtzivilisation nehmen, herauskommen und zu einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis kommen; denn dadurch allein können wir auch zu einer wirklichen Pädagogik und Didaktik kommen.
Eleventh Lecture
Yesterday, I attempted to discuss the development of memory. It is precisely in relation to this development of memory that one can observe that today's maxims regarding education and teaching pay little attention to what real human knowledge reveals as the continuation and transformation of certain impulses into later human life. Today, it is often the case that adults try to understand the nature of their organism and their soul life, and from what appears to them to be comfortable and right for themselves as adults, — I am not claiming that this happens with full consciousness — that this must also be done in relation to childhood.
But this is precisely what leads to a skewed relationship with the child. Just consider the following: the child must be treated in accordance with its inner developmental forces; during childhood, it requires certain things, for example, in the broadest sense, what I have described as a sense of authority; by its very nature, the child requires what must be regarded as immediate and specific to its growth. Suppose someone in their forties comes to realize that something is stirring in their soul. Through external experiences, light suddenly dawns on them about what is stirring in their soul. And what is stirring in their soul is something they may have absorbed at the age of eight or nine from the authority of a teacher or educator they loved. At that time, he could not help but accept it as a matter of memory, because the inner understanding of such a thing may not be present until the age of forty, even though we do not believe this today. However, one cannot wait until the age of forty to acquire such things; that is why one develops a longing for authority at the right age. But when what one absorbed in terms of authority at the age of eight in relation to the experiences of the outside world springs up again at the age of forty and thereby takes on a new light, then this process, combined with a feeling of inner vitality, has a refreshing effect on the whole person. Such a process develops an inner strength that is very much needed in later life. And if you have a great deal of this kind of thing, which you absorbed in response to the feeling of authority and which can then spring up from within your organism in this way through later life circumstances, then you will have many sources of refreshment within you throughout the rest of your life. Some people age mentally and physically so early today because they lack precisely this source of refreshment, since it has been too long since attention was paid, in a reasonable, I would say in a sensible way, to the development of that which, at school age, can only be entrusted to memory, since it must be absorbed in good faith, through a sense of authority.
As I said yesterday, there are still many opportunities to cultivate comprehension skills alongside what is entrusted to memory. But between the change of teeth and sexual maturity, it is absolutely necessary for children to find a rational method of developing their memory, because otherwise they will be deprived of too much in later life if they have not undergone this development of memory.
If I were to speak from the point of view of merely eliciting some kind of favor through my speech, I would have to say many things differently. But I only want to say things that result from a knowledge of human beings gained through decades of anthroposophical research, and therefore some things may sound paradoxical in comparison to very widespread views of the present. Some things may seem outdated, others may seem too new. That is not what matters; what matters is whether these things stand up to real knowledge of human nature. When we look at the present, we have to say that this knowledge of human nature has been gained in the same way as if we wanted to learn about a watch by looking at it from the outside. One can learn to tell the time by this clock; one can also learn to recognize whether it is made of gold or silver, but one cannot become a watchmaker by doing so. Well, what we today call biology, physiology, and anatomy is also only a view of human beings from the outside. A real transparency of human nature only arises when human beings are understood in terms of body, soul, and spirit. But only such knowledge of body, soul, and spirit makes it possible to treat people in an appropriate manner. And so, only with a true understanding of human nature can a correct judgment be made on a question that can only be illuminated in the right context: the question of student fatigue.
Today, the question is raised in such a way that experiments are carried out to determine how children become tired through one thing or another, and then the aim is to organize teaching in such a way that these results are followed and attempts are made to overcome whatever may cause pupils to become too tired. However, this question is actually being asked in the wrong way throughout the world today. One cannot ask this question if one has a true understanding of human nature. Just consider what we have emphasized in recent days: for school-age children, all teaching and education should be oriented toward the rhythmic and the musical, so that it primarily engages the respiratory and circulatory systems.
Now I ask you: is the source of fatigue to be found in the respiratory and circulatory systems, that is, in the middle part of the human being, which is primarily relevant for school age? No, you breathe throughout your sleep, you breathe from birth to death, you have your circulation from birth to death. This is never interrupted by fatigue, because it would be terrible if it were interrupted by fatigue. In true education, therefore, we appeal precisely to those organs that are not subject to fatigue, and thus this question of fatigue is placed on a completely different basis by a methodology based on knowledge of human nature.
Where do the sources of fatigue actually lie for humans? They lie in the head system and in the limb system. These must be looked at if one wants to understand the nature of fatigue. And it is of a very different kind, depending on the head system and the limb system.
That which acts from the head system into the whole organism affects it in such a way that it promotes the deposition of metabolic products, that it wants to permeate the human being with all kinds of salt-like deposits. This is something that interferes with the respiratory and circulatory systems, but which is subject to fatigue because it is related to the outside world, because it is dependent on the outside world in a non-rhythmic, non-musical way; whereas the rhythms of respiration and circulation are so closely bound to the organism that they have a balance of their own in their own laws. That which is a self-contained system cannot become fatigued, at least not to any significant degree. Incorrect measures that destroy the rhythm of the child or even the adult can have a sickening effect. But one must be fully aware that the system that is most important for an art of education appropriate to human nature does not tire at all.
The limb metabolism system tires. You can observe this when you look at a snake after it has eaten. The limb metabolism system tires, or at least has within it the source of fatigue for the whole human being. It tires in a different way than the head system. The head system acts by depositing salts, mineral deposits in the organism. The limb metabolism system acts on the human being in such a way that it actually wants to dissolve him continuously through heat. It works in the opposite direction, but again in such a way that the way it works does not depend on the inner rhythm, but on what I do in the outside world with my limbs and what I do with my inner metabolic system by eating and drinking. I often do this irregularly, because very few people adhere to a complete rhythm in terms of eating and drinking. I would say that the polar opposite has a tiring effect on humans.
So what follows from this? That the whole question of fatigue must be placed on a different basis, that we must ask: If the child tires too early, what has been done wrong? — One should not simply assume a priori that the teaching is correct. And now one notes: after half an hour, the child makes so many more mistakes in a line than before the half hour; or one notes: after half an hour, the child now remembers fewer meaningless words than before the half hour. In this way, one can never come close to what real human nature is, but only by understanding how to ask the right questions about life. The right question with regard to fatigue is this: if fatigue sets in too early, one has either overloaded the head system or the limb system; one must now begin not to overload it. But one must not believe that this can be achieved merely by distributing the teaching material, for gymnastics cannot really affect the head, and arithmetic does not directly affect the metabolism, but only indirectly. It is therefore not a question of achieving this by distributing the material according to the timetable, but by artistically designing the entire teaching and education system for school-age children in such a way that one actually ties in with the non-fatiguing system – in the manner I have indicated – and thereby also involving the other systems, the head system and the system of metabolism and limbs, in the right way.
So you see, what is very often asked about a particular educational method, precisely because of the prejudices of the present, cannot actually be asked of Waldorf education, because it is based on a real understanding of the human being in all its dimensions. And because it also attempts to shed light on the spiritual and emotional aspects of the human being, it can also truly explore treatment methods that address the whole person.
For example, it is important to understand that the human head system essentially contains within itself that which, most strongly in childhood and then less and less, permeates and energizes the entire human organism with plasticizing and formative forces. What works within as the directing thoughts is actually brought into the world by the human being with his predispositions through birth or conception. This has progressed to the point where it is organized to shape the human being. If the head did not come into contact with the outside world, if this did not disturb the rhythm within the human being, then, if I may express it this way, that which arrived in the head at birth would be satisfied with the material organization of the human being. Human beings would flow into their material organization. It would take up all their attention, they would be completely absorbed in it, and they would not find a connection to the supersensible, spiritual world. Their inner life would become more and more artificial, but they would be separated from the spiritual world. And again, if humans were not connected to the outer world through their limb-metabolic system, they would not achieve the warming, the glowing of that which would become more and more perfect, more and more artificial, originating from the head system.
These are two polar opposites. The head actually excludes us continuously from the spiritual world because it shapes our body in such a way that we cannot gain a proper relationship to the spiritual world from this body; for the head with its contents has completed its development in pre-birth existence, and what the head materializes in us is continuously dematerialized by what lies in the forces of the metabolic-limb human being. This creates balance in our material system. And in between lies that which is like a system built within itself, the rhythmic system, the respiratory system, the circulatory system, like a self-contained world, like a real microcosm, but one that requires that the head does not act in an extreme way, as can happen under certain conditions, where the lungs are then permeated with all kinds of incorrect organizational principles. We then feel this in the hardening of the lungs, in the new formations in the lungs of people with lung disease.
And on the other hand, the human being needs this polar opposition, which comes from his metabolic-limb organism and which actually dissolves what wants to harden from the head. This is also important in medicine; for when one recognizes the connection between what comes from the head and what comes from the metabolism, one will, for example, cure many of the symptoms that occur in the larynx, trachea, or even the lungs, even though they originate in the head, by treating the metabolic system. People are then astonished when, especially in the case of childhood diseases, something appears in the upper organs and the whole problem is cured by changing the metabolism, resulting in a real healing. Human beings are a whole and must be treated as a whole. This applies in all areas, both in the field of truly rational therapy and in the field of education and teaching.
Please note that despite the great advances we have made in knowledge over the last few centuries, we have not been able to achieve anything significant in our understanding of human beings, because the methods of modern knowledge are basically only concerned with the physical, the external. Now, in order to be able to practice the art of education, especially for children who are approaching the important turning point in their lives between the ages of nine and ten, for children between the ages of ten and puberty, it is particularly important to really look inside the human being and see what the physical, emotional, and spiritual conditions of development are.
If we observe the child with a true understanding of human nature, we see that from the period between the ages of nine and ten, the child processes everything it experiences emotionally in such a way that the muscular system in particular contributes to its growth forces everywhere. During this period, nothing else happens in the child except that the muscular system works together with the soul, and indeed works together with its more intimate growth forces. The inner swelling and lengthening of the muscles depends essentially on how the soul forces develop. And what is peculiar about childhood between the ages of ten and twelve is that the muscles have an intimate relationship with the respiratory and circulatory systems; they tend toward the respiratory and circulatory systems. And this is precisely what we appeal to in a truly artistic education. So we intervene in the muscular system indirectly through the respiratory and circulatory systems.
Towards the age of twelve, something completely different happens in children. The muscles turn away from their intimate relationship with the respiratory and circulatory systems and turn towards the bone system, the skeleton, developing in such a way that from then on they adapt to the skeleton. Whereas previously their growth principles were adapted to respiration and blood circulation, they now adapt to the dynamics of the skeleton. Their growth forces participate in everything we do in walking, grasping, jumping, and in general in the limb system and the bone system. The muscle turns away from its intimacy with the respiratory and circulatory systems toward an intimacy with the skeletal and bone systems. As a result, the whole human being adapts to the outside world in a very powerful way, even more so from the age of twelve than it was before. Previously, the muscle system was directed inward. They allowed their muscles to grow as the internally closed rhythmic system is able to do. They moved in response to the muscular system and merely carried the bone structure along with them. Now, around the age of twelve, things become quite different; now they place themselves with their muscle growth into the mechanics and dynamics of the skeletal system.
Anyone who has a real insight into what happens to the child between the ages of eleven and twelve, how it treats its muscular system and drags its bones along with it until around this time, how it then begins to put itself into the skeletal system, that is, into the outer world, has gained a deep insight into the whole development of human nature.
Such things lead us away from the abstract, intellectualistic view that we apply today and that we also carry over into education quite unconsciously. They lead us to confront the child as an educator in a human way. When we confront the child with such feelings, we truly do not treat them as Marsyas was treated. People might, of course, recoil from such a transparent understanding of human nature, because they believe that it means dissecting the human being, cutting into their soul. But that is not the case. This view is both artistic and cognitive. Everything becomes artistic in perception, and that is what is necessary if one wants to properly consider this age of life up to sexual maturity, this transition from the intimacy of the muscles and the respiratory-circulatory system up to the twelfth year and the intimacy of muscles and bones from the twelfth year to sexual maturity.
Notice how human beings actually adapt to the world: in very young children, the plasticizing, formative forces are located in the brain; they radiate from there. Then the matter passes to the muscles. And when human beings reach the age of twelve, they put their whole being into the skeleton, and then it goes out into the world, only then does it go out. Human beings pass through themselves and then enter into a relationship with the whole world. First, the forces of the head; these forces of the head are then later poured into the muscles, then into the bones; human beings put themselves into their bones, and when they have reached sexual maturity, they put themselves into the whole world. Only then do they truly stand within the world.
This must be taken into account if we want to find the right distribution of teaching and educational material for this particular age of the child. But today we are really not blessed with a thorough knowledge of human nature. And now forgive me if I have to present you with a terrible paradox. I am often compelled to do so because I must confess what is anthroposophical truth. It is a terrible heresy and an abomination to today's physiology, biology, and anatomy, but that is how it is.
You see, today everything that people think about human beings has shifted toward the head, and although the head itself constantly pushes us into the material world, actually trying to kill us every day, all human observation today is basically turned toward the head. That is what is unhealthy about today's view of humanity. This view of humanity actually originates from science, because people think: the brain is in the head, everything is directed from the brain. Now, I don't know how it would have been done if this theory had been developed in an age when there were no telegraphs, when it was not possible to draw an analogy from telegraph lines. But that doesn't really concern us. The theory of the nervous system was developed after telegraph lines were used as a point of reference to form an analogy. And so the brain was seen as a kind of central station, let's say London. (It is drawn.) Then, if that is the center, then perhaps Oxford is there, and Dover. And now, considering London as the center, one says to oneself: there is a line from Oxford to London; there is a switch, and then it goes on to Dover. One can imagine it that way in certain cases.
Well, that's how one imagines the brain. The nerve goes to the sensory organ, the sensation occurs, is conducted to the brain; the brain is the central station, the human London. Then the motor nerve goes from the brain to the organs of movement and, in accordance with the thoughts that are somehow in between, produces the will, the movement.
Once you have devised such a theory, you can even record the facts in such a way that they seem to confirm this theory. You can pick up any physiology book today and, if you are not very prejudiced – because everything looks very plausible – you will simply see how experiments are carried out with nerve cutting, how conclusions are drawn from the reaction and so on, and everything fits together wonderfully. It just doesn't fit with a profound understanding of human nature. That's not how it is, after all.
I will completely disregard the fact that, anatomically speaking, the sensory nerves are almost indistinguishable from the motor nerves; at most, some are slightly thicker than others, but in terms of structure, there is really no significant difference. What anthroposophical research teaches in this regard — I can only hint at it, only communicate the results, otherwise I would have to lecture on anthroposophical physiology — is that the nerves are entirely uniform organs, that it is absurd to speak of two kinds of nerves, sensory and motor nerves. Since the volitional and the sentient are formed throughout the soul, I leave it up to each individual to say whether they are motor or sensory, but they must be evaluated uniformly, for they are absolutely uniform; there is no difference. The difference lies only in the direction of their function. When the sensory nerve goes to the eye, it opens itself to the impressions of light, and what lies at the periphery of the human being in turn acts on another nerve, which today's physiology refers to as a motor nerve. When it now goes from the brain to the rest of the organism, this nerve is there to perceive what is happening during a movement. Proper treatment of tabes dorsalis also confirms this result.
The nerve called the motor nerve is there to perceive the movement impulses, what happens during movement, not to give the impulse for movement. Nerves are everywhere the mediating organs for perceptions, the sensory nerves for external perceptions, the so-called motor nerves, which are also sensory nerves, for internal perceptions. There is only one nerve. And only a materialistic scientific mindset has invented this telegraph analogy.
This materialistic scientific mindset believes that, just as it needs the nerves to mediate sensation, feeling, and perception, it also needs the nerves to mediate the impulses of the will. But that is not the case. The impulse of the will emanates from the spiritual-soul. That is where it begins, and it acts in the body, directly, not indirectly via the nerves, but directly on the limb metabolism system. And the nerves that enter the limb metabolism system only mediate the perception of what the spiritual-soul aspect of the whole human being does in relation to its limb metabolism system. We perceive what is a consequence of spiritual-soul processes of will in the blood circulation, in the rest of the metabolism, and also in the mechanical movement of the limbs; we perceive that. The so-called motor nerves are not motor nerves; they are merely what perceives the expressions, the impulse of the will. Until this connection is understood, it will not be possible to arrive at a clear understanding of human nature. But once you fully understand this connection, you will also find it understandable that I must now present you with a paradox, a heresy: for then the spiritual-soul aspect has an effect on the whole rest of the human being.
In children up to about the age of twelve, the effects described above are expressed in the muscular forces that are intimately related to respiration and the circulatory system. In children from the age of twelve until puberty, these effects manifest themselves in the forces that act on the skeleton. So before the age of twelve, we perceive more of what is still in our muscles with the so-called motor nerve, and after the age of twelve, we perceive more of what is going on in our muscles and bones with this so-called motor nerve. Now, if you consider that there is something volitional in all thinking — it is will that is at work when I synthesize or analytically separate ideas, there is will in everything — then you must also seek this will in the organism. And it is precisely this will in the soul function of thinking that is connected in the way I have just described. As we enter the twelfth year, we learn a kind of thinking that, according to the nature of the will, has its processes in the bones, in the dynamics of the skeleton. Here we make the important transition from the soft system of the human being to the very hard system, which, I would say, places itself into the world like an objective lever system.
This is the heresy, the paradox, that I must present to you: that when human beings form their thoughts about inanimate external nature, they do not do so directly with their heads, with their brains, but with their skeletons. Of course, if you are immersed in today's physiology, you may laugh at the idea that there is someone in Dornach who claims that human beings think abstractly with their bones; but that is how it is. It would be more convenient not to say this, but it must be said, because we need a real understanding of human beings. The thoughts we have in our brains are only images of what is happening in the actual thought process. The brain is the tool for the passive images of the real processes that take place during thinking. The fact that thinking becomes conscious depends on these images; but these images do not contain the inner power that acts in thinking, nor do they contain the volitional aspect of thinking. The essence of thinking has no more to do with these images, which are based on the brain, than a picture of Mr. X that you might see on the wall has to do with the real Mr. X. You have to distinguish the image of Mr. X from the real Mr. X. This is how the real process that takes place during thinking differs from the images. When thinking about physical nature, the process actually takes place in the whole, complete human being, and specifically in the skeleton. We also sit down with our thinking in the skeleton at the age of twelve. This is what gives us a real inner reference point for what we have to do in the transition of teaching to what I characterized yesterday: getting to know the plant world in connection with the earth, getting to know the animal world in connection with the human being up to the age of twelve, up to puberty.
This attention to the soul-spiritual organization must be connected with what is structured in the sequence of teaching and educational content. It is precisely this participation of the muscular system, which is soft internally, in connection with the respiratory and circulatory systems, which leads us, when we look at all things thoroughly, to find that from the age of ten to twelve, the child must learn about the plant and animal worlds as described, that is, what is even more closely related to the inner being of the human being than the non-human, the mineral, the dynamic, the physical, and so on, which no longer belong to the human realm. Therefore, as the twelfth year approaches, teaching must appeal to that in the human being which now reveals itself as his or her special essence. Now we must begin to transfer what we first held in images, what we then transferred to living plants and sentient animals, into understanding, into intellectual understanding of inorganic nature.
Now we are at the point where the human being places himself in the world as a physical being with dynamics and mechanics and experiences himself as such. Only now is it possible to approach human beings with what physics and chemistry are in their simplest elements, what is subject to the earth of chemistry, to dynamics, what is mineralogy, knowledge of minerals. If one approaches human beings with the mineral, the dynamic, the physical, the chemical beforehand, one unconsciously interferes with human nature in a harmful way. On the other hand, what is the grasping of so-called historical connections, the overview of history, what is the grasping of the driving impulses in history, in social development, is only a polar opposite to the grasping of the physical, the mineral. Children only become ready for this when they approach the age of twelve. What historical ideas are, the impulses that run through historical life, that intervene in social formations, are, although they are something completely different in the historical realm, nevertheless, as it were, the skeleton of history, while the flesh, the muscles, are the living human beings with their biographies and the immediate concrete events in history. Therefore, in our treatment of history, which we must already introduce between the ages of ten and twelve, we must proceed in such a way that we tell complete stories that can warm the feelings, that the feelings can look up to, biographical stories, characteristics of completed events, not abstract, continuous impulses. These reach the child when the twelfth year has arrived, when what is then conditioned by the human being's standing in the outside world occurs — he goes completely from the inside to the outside; now he can also learn to grasp what, as historical impulses from outside, grips individual human beings.
This must be taken into account, otherwise one descends to the child from what one experiences in the adult human being, in oneself, through certain symptoms. And then one says: Well, yes, that's how it is in science, first you understand the simple physical and chemical aspects, then you move on to the other aspects; that's how teaching must be done too. But that does not correspond to the child's nature. What is simplest in this regard, the abstract lines that run through existence, which are exhausted in the mineral-physical realm, are only really understood by the child when the child is placed on its skeleton and moves around in the outside world with its whole human being, dynamically and physically, as if according to a lever law, according to dynamic laws. We have once incorporated into our worldview the idea that we must increasingly transform everything, little by little, into a kind of natural law. And so we see how historians strive to treat the social element in history by bringing the impulses of history as close as possible to the laws of nature.
This tendency arises in children when the laws of physics and chemistry are taught before the age of twelve and the organic or human aspects are taught only afterwards. Because things have been put in the wrong place, children then carry what they have perceived in the mere laws of nature into social life and history. And because this has become submerged in education, there is a large audience for the view that natural laws should be sought everywhere, that one should not speak of historical impulses that are directly spiritual and intellectual; and this, in turn, influences educational principles. Children are already being trained to have a strong belief in the purely physical and chemical, which they then carry over into their entire worldview.
What I have written here comes from America: “Nature's proceeding in the social phenomena.” It has become a catchphrase for a certain educational principle, which says that children should be educated in such a way that they perceive natural processes in social events, that they perceive what lives in social life as a kind of natural science, so to speak.
People keep coming up to me and saying: In English, they say something different, they say: progress of nature — or something like that. But as valid as this criticism may be in terms of linguistic usage, it is only a quotation, and it is indeed used as a catchphrase, especially in relation to educational science! So we have to take into account that there might be room for improvement here. I would also like to improve it, in the global sense! But linguistic improvement is not really enough, because it expresses the desire to see natural impulses in social impulses. We train children to do this. But what we need to start doing is experiencing the natural in the sense of the laws of nature and the social in the sense of the higher social laws; we cannot do that. — We spoil our entire worldview when we introduce the treatment of chemistry, minerals, mineralogy, physics, dynamics, and so on at the wrong age. As I have already mentioned many times, we must consider our entire cultural milieu if we want to understand where the impulses for the art of education and teaching should begin. Forgive me for coming to you again with a kind of interjection, but it is a justified interjection.
You see, when one approaches the scientific worldview of today with this insight, with this vision, as described in my book “How to Gain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds,” , one gets the impression that the worlds described by science today, which actually reduce everything to the mineral-physical, are not at all the worlds in which we live as human beings of flesh and blood. They are different worlds. For when one looks into such worlds as described by today's natural scientists, and as they are supposed to affect human beings, with the necessary imaginative perception, there are no human beings of flesh and blood! There are only skeletons walking around, only little bone men and bone women walking around. It is a strange world. I once conducted an experiment in which I took the description given by a true thinker of modern times, the Swiss Vogt – younger people no longer remember the so-called “fat Vogt,” who in the 1950s constructed a worldview out of robust materialism, but which haunts everywhere, in all possible worldviews of the present – I conducted the experiment: I tried to see what would happen if a real human being with some flesh and blood were to get lost in this world, which normally could only contain walking skeletons. Someone with normal flesh and blood cannot survive there. But if a human being with some flesh and blood were to stray into it, what would happen to them? You see, due to all the influences that are described there, and which are supposed to affect humans in the same way, as is the case in this materially conceived world, he would simultaneously become neurasthenic and hysterical in the worst possible sense. He would not be able to free himself from all the influences acting upon him. Basically, science today describes a world in which we could become neurasthenic and hysterical. And the only good thing is that this world that is described is not our real world, and that our real world has other forces than those described there.
Well, we really need to get out of the unified world, the illusory world, from which we take almost everything for our entire civilization today, and come to a real understanding of human beings; for only then can we arrive at a real pedagogy and didactics.