Science of freedom
Rudolf Steiner declared, “What is needed is a science of freedom”. His Philosophy Of Freedom (POF), written using the scientific method of introspective observation, is supposed to be empirical science. The problem is that in its book form it is difficult to work with.
Comparative research
Comparative research is a research methodology used mainly in the social sciences to make comparisons across different countries or cultures. A comparative research approach may work to sort out the POF, bringing to light its scientific basis and making Steiner's case for freedom. Most important it is a method accessible to anyone who wants to make the effort and it would surely change lives.
Steiner uses a comparative approach throughout the POF. In the Introduction "outer truth" is compared to "inner truth", in Chapter 1 it is "freedom" compared to "necessity". Rather than trying to learn abstract concepts, a student can compare two possible experiences from a similar situation. This makes for very effective experiential learning. It lets the student make up their own mind without the need of trying to convince anybody of anything.
Use of comparative research in the study of The Philosophy Of Freedom
The use of comparative research in the study of the Philosophy Of Freedom draws on introspective research and descriptive research in making the comparison. Below is a chart showing the comparisons made in the Introduction to the Philosophy Of Freedom.
revised 9/26/2015
|
||
Aspect |
Observed state of things |
|
The Philosophy Of Freedom, |
|
|
0.0 Human interest |
I believe I am indicating correctly one of the fundamental characteristics of our age when I say that, at the present day, all human interests tend to center in a culture of human individuality. |
|
Conformity |
Individuality |
|
Analysis |
No better expression for these phenomena can be found than this, that they result from the individual’s striving towards freedom. |
|
0.1 Search for truth |
There are two well known paths to truth; in the life outside and around us and in the heart within. |
|
|
Outer truth |
Inner truth |
Analysis |
Of the two paths, the search for inner truth is preferred today. |
|
0.2 Truth empowers |
What gives us the confidence to accomplish creative activity? |
|
Uncertainty of outer truth |
Conviction of inner truth |
|
Analysis |
Whoever is tormented by doubts finds his powers weakened. If we are baffled by a world full of riddles, we can find no goal for our creative activity. |
|
0.3 Understandable truth |
We no longer want to believe; we want to know. |
|
|
Belief |
Knowing |
Analysis |
The only knowing that satisfies us is the kind that submits to no external standard, but springs from a person's own inner life. |
|
0.4 Advance in |
||
|
Stored academic facts |
Facts of own experience |
Analysis |
We strive for certainty in knowledge, but each in his or her own way. |
|
0.5 Education |
The teachings of science should not be presented in a form that implies its acceptance is compulsory. |
|
|
Cram facts into students |
Cultivate the desire to know |
Analysis |
We try to develop the child’s capacities in such a way that the child no longer needs to be compelled to understand, but wants to understand. |
|
0.6 One's attitude toward knowledge |
I am under no illusion concerning the characteristics of the present time. |
|
|
Stereotypical attitude |
Apply individualistic principles |
Analysis |
The Philosophy Of Freedom is not meant to be the "only possible" way to Truth, but is meant to describe the path taken by one for whom truth is central (Rudolf Steiner). |
|
7. Preparation for science |
The Philosophy Of Freedom at first leads the reader into more abstract regions, where thought must have sharp outlines if it is to reach clearly defined positions. But the reader is also led out of these arid concepts into concrete life. |
|
|
Sensual pleasure |
Joy of pure thought |
Analysis |
I am fully convinced that if existence is to be experienced in all its aspects, one must raise oneself up into the realm of concepts. |
|
0.8 Scientific study of life |
There are many realms of life and for each of them specific sciences develop. But life itself is one, and the more deeply the sciences are immersed in their separate fields, the more they distance themselves from viewing the world as a living whole. There must be a kind of knowing that seeks in the separate sciences the principles that leads to the fullness of life once more. |
|
|
Science |
Philosophy |
Analysis |
Our consciousness, alive and active, has lifted itself beyond a mere passive reception of truths. |
|
0.9 Science of freedom |
The questions examined in The Philosophy Of Freedom. |
|
|
Book questions |
Science of freedom |
Analysis |
In my view, the question of freedom is the most immediate concern of the human being. These pages offer a "Philosophy of Freedom". |
|
0.10 Value of science |
What is the value of science? |
|
Idle curiosity |
Results for humanity |
|
Analysis |
Knowledge has value only in so far as it contributes to the all-around development of the whole of human nature. |
|
0.11 Relationship between |
What is the role of science in our lives? |
|
|
Worship ideas |
Use ideas for human goals |
Analysis |
Human goals go beyond those of mere science. |
|
0.12 Our relationship |
What is our relationship to ideas? |
|
|
Bondage to ideas |
Master of ideas |
Analysis |
End of chapter |
Comments
You can see above at #11 how religion develops out of the worship of ideas. We project personality and imagery on ideas and then worship them.
You can set up all of Part I of The Philosophy Of Freedom as the choice between thinking or not thinking. Not thinking is to remain at the perceptual level (percept) while thinking is to add the concept. This is outer truth and inner truth. There are 12 topics in each chapter and in each one an experience of the percept is described (outer truth) followed by a description of thinking activity. In each case you chose to think or not think. So there are 96 specific case studies in the first 8 chapters including the introduction. This is the science of inner freedom. I can map this out as I did for the Introduction above and make it a comparison study between thinking and not thinking in 96 specific situations.
"The world of ideas is the primal source and principle of all being...Only what derives existence from the Idea means something on the tree of universal creation."
I see this statement as pointing to "service" to ideas in regards to working in harmony with them, but not in the sense of being controlled by them. We are controlled by ideas and lose our freedom in chapter 1 when we are compelled by natural laws. Points #11 and #12 in the Introduction transition from the Introduction to Chapter 1 where we are controlled by ideas (motives); we are controlled by natural laws (ideas, principles, laws of human behavior)
It seems to me we are also controlled by ideas when we devote science to knowledge for knowledge's sake, regardless if it has any value for humans. If science has no value for human life then it is just idle curiosity.
These ideas are not abstract in that they are the real directing principle in things. We use these principle/laws to accomplish our aims and to remain in harmony with the laws of creation as in Moral Technique.
12.3 Moral Technique
[4] Moral imagination, in order to realize its ideas, must enter into a determinate sphere of percepts. Human action does not create percepts, but transforms already existing percepts and gives them a new character. In order to be able to transform a definite object of perception, or a sum of such objects, in accordance with a moral idea, it is necessary to understand the object's law (its mode of action which one intends to transform, or to which one wants to give a new direction). Further, it is necessary to discover the procedure by which it is possible to change the given law into the new one. This part of effective moral activity depends on knowledge of the particular world of phenomena with which one has got to deal. We shall, therefore, find it in some branch of scientific knowledge. Moral action, then, presupposes, in addition to the faculty of moral concepts1 and of moral imagination, the ability to alter the world of percepts without violating the natural laws by which they are connected. This ability is moral technique. It may be learnt in the same sense in which science in general may be learnt.
As knowers, natural laws take precedence as we want to discover the directing principle that exists within an event. There can only be one idea, directing principle, at work in an event.
In morality, natural laws, like “Justice”, do not take precedence as we individually select our own moral ideals from many possibilities. Each individual person will likely select a different ideal principle when they are all faced with an event. That is because we have different capacities of intuition and different circumstances.
What does it mean to do “Good”? By gaining knowledge of the laws ruling an event we understand the “objects law” so we can form a plan on how to change it without doing harm. This would have to include the relationship of the object to other things since nothing exists isolated.
Or you can say that an ideal principle does take precedence over individual aims, but we select that ideal principle, free from bias and informed by knowledge of the situation, within the realm of universal conceptual thinking or “reason”.
The voice of the idea appears out of a selflessness to thought. This would be an experience of science, a “devotion to the universal in thought” according to the Creed. The voice of the idea would be a divine voice in that it has the characteristics of something divine; universal, eternal, harmony, inspired feeling, enthused will etc. and is surely the cause for the invention of religion. But this all is found within thinking. Today we can just call it science.
Are you still seeing something else?
Here is my take on that question. Ideas are enlivened when we see how they “stem from the Idea” or how they fit into the whole (wholistic reasoning). This is the scientific method according to Steiner. That would make the selection of a moral intuition a wholistic reasoning process.
I take TPOF's "intellectual intuition" as assumed since it is involved in all acts of knowledge.
scientific method: “consists of showing the concept of a certain phenomenon in its relationship with the rest of the world of ideas” (Goethean Science X)
“All genuine philosophers have been artists in the conceptual realm. Human ideas become their artistic materials and scientific method their artistic technique. Abstract thinking takes on concrete individual life. Ideas turn into life-forces. Then we do not merely have knowledge about things, but have made knowledge into an actual self-governing organism ruled by its own laws. Our consciousness, alive and active, has lifted itself beyond a mere passive reception of truths.” TPOF 0.8
I think you are explaining it in your description of scientific theories. There is a difference between the experience of reading about Einstein's relativity theory and Einstein's experience of producing it. The big deal is that he is talking about "genuine philosophers" not scientists. Genuine philosophers who use the scientific method as their technique. Philosophy then becomes a science rather than merely abstract thought. The best example is The Philosophy Of Freedom.
If we are dealing with ideas that are directing principles of anything, such as the principles of perception, conception; such as the cognitive processes, that would turn philosophy into science and refer to ideas that are life forces in directing inner thinking processes, perception processes etc.. It seems like he is referring to "inner" forces as he speaks of an "alive and active consciousness". It would be the difference between abstract philosophy and genuine philosophy whose ideas are grounded in the science method.
Maybe there is also a difference between a scientific theory and a philosophy of life in regards to becoming a life force within a person. Kants philosophy changed the world. Steiner's Philosophy Of Freedom would definitely change a person and the world in a dynamic way if it could become alive in a person as a coherent wholistic philosophy of life. It changed my world in a different way than string theory could. A philosophy of life goes beyond science.