Rudolf Steiner and Freedom/Free Will

speed

Member
Nov 19, 2001
5,192
26
48
Visit site
As we've had recent threads on free will and freedom, i was reminded of the philosophy of Rudolf Steiner. Steiner developed his own philosophy/religion/way of life called anthroposophy:

"Anthroposophy is a path of knowledge to guide the Spirit of the human being to the Spiritual in the universe. It arises in man as a need of the heart, of the life of feeling: and it can be justified inasmuch as it can satisfy this inner need."

Yet, Steiner tackled the idea of freedom and free will in his Philosophy of Freedom, in which, he attempted to unite "freedom of thought" and "freedom of action". Inner freedom he states, is achieved when we bridge the gap between our sensory impressions--which reflect the outer appearance of the world--and our thoughts, which give us access to the inner nature of the world. Outer freedom is attained by permeating our deeds with moral imagination. Steiner then goes on to show that these two aspects of inner and outer freedom are integral to one another, and that true freedom is only achieved when they are united. Essentially he tried to overcome Kant and Descartes.

In essence, Steiner's philosophy lies between Western philosophy's emphasis on freedom as an absence of restraint preventing us from doing and thinking whatever we want (cf. Hume and Locke) and Eastern philosophy's emphasis on freedom being achieved through a withdrawal from the constraints of outer existence, through pure inner contemplation. The Philosophy of Freedom connects the freedom of our inner life (as moral imagination) with freedom in outer life (as deeds done for their own sake, out of love); the two become interdependent aspects of our striving for freedom.


What say thee on these ideas? Does Steiner's unity work in regards to freedom/free will?




(Pardon my rather liberal paraphrasing from the ever-reliable--haha--wikipedia, but I forgot most of the details of old Steiner, and wasnt about to write a essay from scratch explaining his ideas).
 
Permeating our deeds with "moral imagination" - why does "immoral imagination" not apply?

Can this idea that western philosophy has an "emphasis on freedom as an absence of restraint preventing us from doing and thinking whatever we want" be also interpreted as an "emphasis on licence to do whatever we want with no restraining concepts of personal responsibility"?

Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom seems to place strong moral limitations upon freedom, although I don't know the specifics of these moral limitations. Is this because he considers that it is not possible to have freedom without responsibility for some reason? Does irresponsibility and lack of morals actually cause a lack of freedom somehow? Constraints that are even more limiting than those caused by having to behave in an ethical manner? Does Steiner explain this? Isn't he merely prescribing what he wants freedom to mean?
 
Well you should add "Usa" or "race" in thread name and it will get eventually better :)

I have got into Steiner's work just a little bit... It was a historical period of adopting vast spiritual knowledge of older eastern cultures in western world, and making differents fusions of logical, western approach (well, at least some people think it is logical) with eastern spiritual concepts. Looking from distance some of it were really naive, even if Steiner was obviously very spiritual and influental person of its time. It seems that his work today interests mostly people who are into western occultism, at least this is my experience, even if it is far from Steiners intentions.
 
Dushan S said:
Well you should add "Usa" or "race" in thread name and it will get eventually better :)

I have got into Steiner's work just a little bit... It was a historical period of adopting vast spiritual knowledge of older eastern cultures in western world, and making differents fusions of logical, western approach (well, at least some people think it is logical) with eastern spiritual concepts. Looking from distance some of it were really naive, even if Steiner was obviously very spiritual and influental person of its time. It seems that his work today interests mostly people who are into western occultism, at least this is my experience, even if it is far from Steiners intentions.

Yes, he was quite influential up through World War I. But, I think, he was revolutionary in trying to re-introduce the spiritual into philosophy. A shame he failed.
 
Why do you think that he has failed? It is just that a lot of people introducing occult, spiritual, eastern philosophies etc during last two century are not so interesting today because people have got chance to either have efficient modern tools to shape their personality and mind in the meantime, or easy access to original eastern teachings that are very usable for modern western man, interestingly, much more usable than for the masses in far east countries.

I think that philosophy has lost a lot of its attractivity because today we are much more into having experience, live something personaly, get to know it and have practical result, then into mental speculations about nature of things, that does not has much benefits for individual itself.