Nietzsche, Steiner, and the Crisis of Modernity with Paul Bishop and Aaron French

I'm once again joined by Paul Bishop and Aaron French to discuss the overlap between the work of Friedrich Nietzsche and Rudolf Steiner, especially in relation to the spiritual and religious crisis of modernity.

Notes from Aaron French:

1) At one point I said in the Nietzsche house in Weimar there is a
picture of Heidegger in his “Nazi uniform.” I was just making a point
here; in reality it is a photo of Heidegger in his large brown overcoat
with a shiny Nazi pin on his breast, which is of course suggestive of a
uniform.

2) The book in German that deals with the history of Steiner and the
Nietzsche archives is David Marc Hoffmann, Zur Geschichte Des
Nietzsche-Archivs: Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, Fritz Koegel, Rudolf
Steiner, Gustav Naumann, Josef Hofmiller: Chronik, Studien Und Dokumente
(Berlin: De Gruyter, 1991).

3) For Steiner, the later philosophy of Nietzsche is a necessary
spiritual confrontation with the logical conclusion and endpoint of the
development of Western philosophy.

4) In terms of Kant’s inaccessible noumenal realm, Steiner came to see
Goethe’s concept of morphology as providing crucial insight into his
later Geisteswissenschaft (spiritual science), which claimed that higher
organs of perception could be developed to observe a hidden and
spiritual part of nature that was creative and alive and not mechanical.
This conception of nature, Steiner argued, was the correct
interpretation of Goethe’s “archetypal phenomena,” namely, that by
staying with the phenomena itself one could observe the spiritual
essence of the world without having to resort to abstract metaphysical
systems that explain the hidden truth—i.e., natural science—but rather
one could experience such spiritual essences phenomenologically and
empirically.

Become part of the Hermitix community:

Support Hermitix:

Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLK

Ethereum Donation Address: 0x31e2a4a31B8563B8d238eC086daE9B75a00D9E74

[astrogumbo]

this is becoming my geaux to podcast. thanks

[PetrusSolus]

In a summary statement by Rudolf Steiner in his memorial address for Nietzsche, he highlighted his own anthroposophical position as to Nietzsche’s personal level of spiritual attainment. Steiner had championed Nietzsche of course, and wrote a book on him, but as with everyone and anyone else before Steiner’s arrival (according to him), none had really attained the necessary level of development that Steiner posits in his evolutionary theory of consciousness. Same with Hegel: “he didn’t quite make it." This kind of view from him has always seemed provocative, and so, while I am unable to comment on Steiner’s degree of veracity, since I am not an anthroposophist, I am always ready to hear someone else’s views. I’ve always suspected his “evolutionary theory of consciousness” is his own formulation (that is, discovered) — even while he claims it is clairvoyantly perceived (that is, uncovered).

[privatebeatandmelody]

Steiner said that Nietzsche’s two last books was dictated by Ahriman and it was the first time in world history that it happened.

[privatebeatandmelody]

You said earlier that the Nazis tried to build a Nietzsche shrine and Steiner had to flee Berlin because of them.

[eldoradose]

Nietzsche was a critic so he wanted to dismiss any old ways completely. 
Steiner wanted to absorb the old and transform it into the new.
They both wanted the Spirit, but Nietzsche looked for it in scientific/positivist approach, jumping deeper into matter to conquer (and for him Dionizos did it). Steiner understood positivism differently, away from matter (and for him Christ did it).
If Science goes the way of Nietzsche (and also A. Comte) it will reach nihilism, the last man (from Zaratustra) and finally global madness and humanity decay. 
So Steiner propose something different, he understand "the Übermensch" more like Christianity, communion wich Christ and the Cosmos. 
Nietzsche understand "the Übermensch" as a new Dionizos. He wanted to start from the point of early Greek period, start everything again. Steiner did not want to remove anything from the evolution, he found justification for everything even in what he criticised and simply recognized the next necessary step. For Steiner we must prepare for living on different planet after Earth will die, so we need to spiritualize our bodies completely. For Nietzsche our body is all there is so consequently we can only modify it (like modern science do with genetics). Nietzsche simply couldn't get rid of his epoche and be free of it's zeitgeist, so he's only a fighter for the spirit. Steiner didn't need to fight for it, he have it from the beginning.
Steiner also only translate and modify old occult knowledge, he doesn't create his own wisdom. Nietzsche is more like M. Stirner he believe his wisdom is justified by his own individuality.

[watcher]

For over a year I meant to ask: What do you always saying at the beginning? Is it "paid patrons"? I'm confused because at most they are paying patrons - they are not paid. What is being said?

[Keldaj]

OMFG that was the worst discussion involving Steiner I have ever heard

there was one point where there was so much that could have been said about Steiner's Philosophy but instead, a line of Academic propaganda came out of his mouth to cut the wisdom of it was Horrid to listen to knowing better, it's over, the game is Up people have read steiner enough to about Ahriman was touched as if you can't see the characteristics behind what he's saying, he clearly shows you what Ahriman and the characteristics of people influenced by him are.

this disingenuous discussion does nothing but hurt people who could have heard better.

there are some Gems in there though, but Only for those with the ears to hear them.

just to be wasn't happy with Paul Bishop....very disingenuous person concerning Steiner....maybe i'm being a fanatic because I take the time to understand Steiner and I have a very limited touch on his work so far. and I GET IT!!! so hearing Paul Bishop be this way toward Steiner is like a mockery.