Introduction
In my first ever reading of the Philosophy of Freedom 30 years ago, one idea struck me with particular vigour. Like all good ideas, it is obvious in retrospect, but reading it for the first time it struck like a thunderbolt, leaving an indelible impression on my soul. The idea was simple and concise: no statement that we can make about ourselves and the world is possible without thinking. Yet, at the same time thinking itself is a faculty of soul that is barely understood. Stating it more radically, we base all the certainties that we hold dear on a poorly understood foundation.
This essay will consider the singularly most important concept in the original preface from 1884 as witnessed by it being referenced more often than any other concept. In a previous essay we looked at life the second most often occurring concept in the preface. We will also use the same methodology.
Before we look at how and where the concept occurs in the text we will need to take some preparatory clarifying steps to ensure that Steiner’s philosophical rigour is also maintained as we read through the text. This is crucial for penetrating deeper into that domain of the soul which knows itself to be connected to spiritual realms.
We need to unpack and clearly distinguish the difference between thinking (denken), cognition (Erkenntnis), to cognize (erkennen), to know (wissen), knowledge (Wissen) and science (Wissenschaft). These words have very specific meaning when Steiner uses them and it is important for a more complete understanding of the text that we clearly delimit what is to be understood by those terms. We need to understand how thinking is radically different from cognition and yet at the same time how they interact. Similarly by strictly delimiting knowledge and cognition we can gain a clearer understanding of what happens when the two interact. If we consider the nature of light and its properties then we can gain use imagery to gain a clearer understanding of thinking-cognition-knowledge. Let’s go for a walk.
Toward the Forest
Let us imagine that we live in northern climes, ca 58:00 N in the middle of winter. It is 7:30 in the morning, which means the sun will not rise above the horizon for another ca. 1 hour and 20 minutes. We leave the house and walk down the path, there is barely enough light to know whether we are walking on the path or the field next to it. In this weak grey light there are no colours only shades of light and darkness. We continue along the path towards the still darker forest and think about the lack of colour and ask ourselves the question: Is grass green? Our memory tells us that the answer is yes, but experience based uniquely on this dark morning walk would have to answer the same question with no. We continue to walk through the forest and there is more light, though still not enough to perceive anything beyond shades of light and darkness. There is, however, a greater distinction between the light and the dark. As our consciousness contemplates this on going change we might be tempted to believe that the grass is only green when light shines on it. However, if we stay with the phenomenon of light for a while longer we can also call to mind the fact that light itself is invisible. We only know of light’s existence because of matter. This is why we see beams of light if it is shone into a dusty room. If, instead of a room, we shone light through a vacuum chamber we would see nothing in the chamber yet we would see light both entering and exiting such a suitably built chamber.
A world awaiting the light
Goethe calls colours the deeds of light. This is a particularly rich maxim that captures the active nature of light and how this activity reveals aspects of the world that would otherwise remain unknown . Meanwhile on the walk still more light is available and as we exit the forest and walk up the grassy path to the little cottage we notice that there is a greenness to the path. It is still a grey-green lacking the full vibrancy that we know it will attain later when bathed in sunlight. We can play this out in our own thinking even though the physical senses currently provide contrary information.
Out of the Forest
Light blessing the world
Returning to the seed question: Is grass green? We can consider how it is similar to the thinking (denken)-cognition (Erkenntnis)-knowledge (Wissen) process. From the observer’s perspective the world was devoid of greenness, yet we are confident that greenness is a quality that belongs to the grass and not merely a personal fiction. Light gave us the possibility of recognizing that greenness is in fact a quality of grass. If we were living in light’s own experience we might express it in the following terms: I am an invisible being that can only know my own colourful nature when I encounter matter. Thinking has the same relationship to knowledge of the world. Thinking is an invisible activity which would not know of its own existence unless it met objects that manifested its own nature. Light reveals the coloured nature of reality. Thinking reveals the ideal, noetic, conceptual nature of reality.
A non-thinking being must remain incapable of seeing the thought structures that determine the motion of a stone being thrown in such a way to skip across the surface of a lake. The thinking being will readily understand that it is the interplay of velocity, resistance, specific density, hardness and gravity that fully explain the observed phenomena. When we, as thinking beings, recognize that our conceptual content also exists or manifests in the world we feel we have arrived at knowledge. When we are cognizing (erkennen) we are recognizing that an inner content created in tandem with our own activity is also to be found in the world not created by our own activity. By means of the light of thinking we know that the grass is green even when 
appearances seem to contradict this statement. Yet at the same time we are in a position to understand that if phenomena are not permeated by the light of thinking then grass is colourless. This is the position of modern scientific theory, where colour loses its quality to become solely an invisible quantity of wavelength and frequency.
Later that morning
Generalizing this further: Thinking (denken) births concepts and ideas seemingly out of nothingness. Cognition (Erkennen) is the faculty that marries that which is produced by thinking with that which comes from the world of the senses, ie both inner and outer as specifically described in chapter 7 of GA 2. In the language of the Philosophy of Freedom, intuition meets percepts and the latter is recognized as a manifestation of the former. This marriage produces knowledge (Wissen). The human being as a conceptual artist 9/12 stands between these polarities just as the human eye allows light to reveal the colourful world of nature
Pure seeing sees only colour, the deeds of light. Pure thinking sees only concepts, the deeds of spiritual activity. However, those concepts are also the very means by which we can discern distinct objects in the world of light. When we know (wissen) something we can only know it because we have recognized, in cognition, its conceptual aspect. If a concept shines into my soul, I then become capable of recognizing its manifestation in the world of experience. If I had no concept of trees then light would project them onto my retina, but I would not know (wissen) that they are there in my field of vision, in the sea of light. Knowledge (Wissen) of the world of experience is possible because of the concepts that shine into my soul and they only live there to the extent that thinking (denken) birthed those concepts. Science (Wissenschaft) is the focus of deepening knowledge in the many realms of life (9/1-2) It is the conscious choosing of a field of experience, and the scientist directs the telescope or microscope into that realm. In the Michael Wilson translation of The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity this becomes:
Intuition is for thinking what observation is for percept. Intuition and observation are the sources of our knowledge.
Light reveals colours, thinking reveals concepts. No light means no colours, no thinking means no knowledge. Thinking is to knowledge as light is to colour. Lack of light does not mean lack of colour in an absolute sense, but only from the perspective of the unenlightened eye. Lack of thinking does not mean lack of concepts in an absolute sense, but only from the perspective of the unenlightened mind.
If we have fully grasped the above, then the significance of Chapter 5 of The Philosophy of Freedom will not escape us.
The Preface
Let us now turn our attention to the content of the preface and understand better how Steiner weaves with these concepts to create a vision of the human being that is far more exalted than the ape-man of modern science. I will continue to use the same notation as in previous analyses whereby, for example, 9/14 means paragraph 9 and sentence 14 according to the structure in the original German.
First the data. Denken occurs once at 9/14. Cognizing/cognition/cognitive (erkennen/Erkenntnis/Erkenntnis-) occur at 5/2, 6/5 and 9/5. Knowledge, knowing, science and scientific (Wissen/wissen/Wissenschaft/Wissenschaftlich) occurs at 1/3, 4/, 4/4, 5/1, 5/3, 6/1, 6/2, 8/5, 8/6, 9/2, 9/3, 9/4 (twice), 9/5 (twice), 9/6 (twice), 9/13, 9/16 (twice), 10/2, 11/1, 11/2, 11/4,12/1 (twice). Just looking at the data it certainly seems as if knowing and knowledge and its acquisition through science is Steiner’s central concern in the whole preface. I am not spoiling the plot if I say that he wants us to rethink our relationship to knowledge and its source.
One potential synopsis of the first movement of the form 1-7 can be experienced as how truth and knowledge are related. In 4 we learn that we seek knowledge (Wissen) not belief (4/1) and that it is only knowledge (Wissen) from the depth of our personality that will really satisfy us (4/4). In 5/1 we are told that we don’t want a compendium of knowledge (Wissen) that is valid for all eternity, but instead want a field of experience which can ascend to cognition (Erkenntnis) of the whole universe (5/2). We seek a sure knowledge, 5/3. Scientific teachings should not exert any form of compulsion (6/1). Nobody wants a scientific (wissenschaftliche) writing like Fichte’s that tries to compel the reading to understanding something, 6/3.
Thus, in the first movement of the form we see a contemplation of the importance of truth for a healthy soul life and a rejection of imposed external truths, knowledge as well as the problematic nature of beliefs for a soul seeking truth.
Attempting a synopsis of the second movement of the form 7-13, we find described how the sciences of atomized knowledge need to be brought back to the unity out of which they were extracted, namely the unity of life. When this unity has been found it can serve the needs of the individual and humanity. In 8/5 and 8/6 the historical oriental means of attaining knowledge is compared with the modern scientific approach. In 9/2 we are reminded of all the sciences that exist to illuminate the many realms of life. However, this tendency of the sciences, 9/3, to dig deeper into their respective realms runs contrary to the experience of life being a unity. In 9/4 it is proposed that there must be a knowledge that lives in the sciences which can lead the human being back to the unity of life. In 9/5 we are reminded of how the specialized scientist intends to use cognition (Erkenntnis) to acquire knowledge of the world, whereas Steiner has a philosophical objective in mind, namely to make science organic and alive. In this context the individual sciences, 9/6, are preparatory steps for the science, 9/6, that Steiner has in mind. We are then introduced to the notion of composition theory and the work of an artist whereby ideas (fruits of thinking) are likened to the materials to be used in the composition and the scientific method, 9/13, is the technique used to craft those materials. Then, abstract thinking (Denken) acquires concrete individual life, 9/14. Consequently, ideas become life-forces, 9/15, so that we have not merely a passive acquisition of knowledge (Wissen) of things 9/16 but an active knowledge (Wissen) born of self-determining organism that reveals truths. At the inflection point of the thought form we are told that any scientific explanations, 10/2, given in the book have merely an explanatory function in relation to more intimate (am nächsten liegenden) human questions. As we move down the final side of the thought form there is a noticeable transition to distinguishing the value of different kinds of knowledge for the human being. In 11/1 it is stated that all science (Wissenschaft) would be only the satisfaction of idle curiosity if it were not in some way connected to raising the value of existence of the human personality. Further in 11/2, science only attains true value in to the extent that its results are present in the context of human meaning. This idea is further developed in 11/4 by adding that knowledge only has value when it contributes to the multifaceted development of the whole human being. Finally, in 12/1 he makes explicit the relationship between life and science, wherein the human being must gain mastery of the idea-world to achieve human goals that go beyond merely the scientific ones. Failure to consciously experience these ideas means to fall under their dominion.
Digesting this whole thought movement, we see that Steiner initially presents us as human beings innately desirous of truth and knowledge. However, mankind can no longer be satisfied with received knowledge; instead it must acquire knowledge founded on personal experience. As mankind proceeds along this path, it must gradually wake up to that fact that this knowledge has an atomizing effect on its being. The abundance of knowledge roots the human being firmly and confidently in the world, yet at the same time each individual has a responsibility to try to unite this knowledge into a whole, into a self-determining living organism. Failure to do will result in a loss of self and the ability to act in the world. As was pointed out in the essay on life in relation to this preface 8/3 takes on a central role because we have to raise concepts to the etheric realm. This process is described in paragraph 9 and only then in 11-12 are we led to reflect on the value of dead knowledge, that which satisfies mere curiosity on the one hand and a living knowledge on the other. The latter then becomes the new starting point and foundation for the full development of all the slumbering forces in the human being.
Plato
I have chosen to also look at two other philosophers, Plato and Alfred North Whitehead, to see the type of language and concepts they used when trying to understand the relationship between thinking and knowledge. This may be of interest for those readers who have a more general interest in philosophy, but it will not add anything beyond what has already been described above. If you continue to read will see there are significant convergences.
In Platonic philosophy, nous represents the faculty of the mind that apprehends eternal truths and the intelligible realm. It is the active, organizing principle that allows the human mind to grasp the underlying order and unity of the world. We can see how this concept aligns with Steiner’s view of thinking as the central, objective activity that reveals the inner lawfulness of the world.
This is made especially clear in GA 2, where Steiner delineates the theory of knowledge implicit in Goethe’s worldview. Specifically, we find in Chapter 9 that he emphasizes that the laws of thought are not imposed by the subject but arise from the content of thought itself. This resonates with the Platonic nous, which perceives the inherent structure and truth of the world. Nous is that faculty by which the human mind finds a bridge to the eternal forms in Plato’s philosophy. For Steiner, thinking and the conceptual world (Begriffe) is on one side of the bridge of knowledge and on the other is the perceived world (Wahrnehmung). Cognition is where these two worlds meet, cognition is that bridge.
Noesis, in Platonic terms, refers to the act of intellectual apprehension—the direct, intuitive grasp of truth or the essence of things. This concept is closely related to Steiner’s description of thinking as a higher experience within experience (Chapter 8). Thinking is the activity that allows us to penetrate beyond the surface of sensory perception and grasp the inner essence of phenomena, this self-revealing nature of thinking – that it not only explains the world but also reveals its own nature – parallels the Platonic idea that noesis is a self-sufficient, self-evident act of understanding.
Steiner and Plato overcome the dualism between the subjective and the objective in remarkably similar ways. In Plato, nous and noesis allow the soul to transcend the world of appearances and access the eternal forms, thereby uniting the knower with the known. Steiner argues that thinking is the activity that unites the perceived world with the conceptual world, creating a unified understanding or knowledge of reality.
In both Plato and Steiner, concepts and ideas (or forms) play a central role. For Plato, the forms are the eternal, unchanging realities that are apprehended by nous through noesis. For Steiner, the concept or idea (organism of concepts) is the essence of the world that is revealed through thinking. Thus, in this sense, Steiner’s epistemology can be seen as a modern development of Platonic thought, grounded in the idea that thinking is the organ of truth and the means by which the human being participates in the deeper reality of the world.
Alfred North Whitehead
In Alfred North Whitehead’s philosophy, the terms “prehension“ and “concrescence“ can be equated to Steiner’s concepts of thinking (Denken) and cognition (Erkennen) as bridges between perception and conceptual understanding.
Whitehead’s prehension refers to the process by which an entity grasps or integrates aspects of other entities into its own experience. This prehension is the process by which eternal objects come into being. In Steiner’s epistemology, thinking plays a similar role as the active process allows for the birthing or coming into being of concepts. Whitehead’s non-static eternal objects have an aspect of potential which are also very similar to Steiner’s understanding of the word concept, which can also be understood as a living idea. Thinking, like prehension, is not merely passive but an active engagement with the world that reveals its inner lawfulness and meaning.
Whitehead’s concept concrescence describes the process by which multiple prehensions are synthesized into a coherent, unified experience. It is the culmination of the relational process, where diverse elements are brought together into a single reality. This aligns with Steiner’s concept of cognition (Erkennen), which represents the unified act of knowing. Cognition is the result of the integration of perception and thinking, where the fragmented sensory world is brought into harmony with the conceptual world. Just as concrescence is animated and sustained by prehension, so also cognition relies on the oxygen of thinking.
If we seek in Whitehead for something that aligns with knowledge (Wissen) in Steiner’s philosophy we find this reflected in Whitehead’s two types of prehension: Physical Prehension which is the direct, sensory experience of the world and Conceptual Prehension which is the integration of abstract ideas and relationships. This pairing of physical and conceptual prehensions is implicit in Steiner’s concept of knowledge because percept (Wahrnehmung) includes all experience, i.e. both inner soul experiences and outer ones experienced by means of the physical senses. In Steiner’s epistemology the differentiation between inner and outer experience does not exist for the cognizer prior to the onset of thinking.
Another concept from Whitehead philosophy is the notion of Knowledge as Process. For Whitehead, knowledge is not a static possession but a dynamic process. It is always in the making, as entities continuously interact with and incorporate aspects of the world. This process-oriented view of knowledge aligns with Steiner’s emphasis on thinking with its concept birthing nature as a component that feeds into the process of cognition on one side and perception (all experience) on the other.
Next time
In the next essay I would like to look at how the words true-truth (wahr-Wahrheit) are used and developed in this preface. This word pair is used far more sparingly than thinking-cognition-knowledge and life-organism. Nevertheless, a hunch, a feeling tells me that an investigation of this will lead us deeper into the thought form that inspired Steiner to write the Philosophy of Freedom.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.