[Old] Book Two: Goethe, Steiner and the Ancient Greeks – or – Rethinking the Nature of Substance

Table of Contents

This book – if I even manage to write it(!) – will be a big philosophical work. I intend it to be based on a number of ideas and indications I discovered in the course of my researches on the original book.

• Chapter 1: Aristotle, Plato and the Paradox of Unity
  • What I call the traditional, naive view of Ancient Greek philosophy is largely based on our historical inheritance of what has been a chain of whispers. Plato’s ideal forms (as expressed in The Republic) were seen as fixed ideas about the nature of reality, and when taken in conjunction with Democritus’ conception of the atom, it is an easy jump to the development of the modern conception of the atom as a miniature billiard ball (at least in popular science).
  • Meanwhile, “Aristotle asserted that the elements of fire, air, earth, and water were not made of atoms, but were continuous. Aristotle considered the existence of a void, which was required by atomic theories, to violate physical principles. Change took place not by the rearrangement of atoms to make new structures, but by transformation of matter from what it was in potential to a new actuality. A piece of wet clay, when acted upon by a potter, takes on its potential to be an actual drinking mug. Aristotle has often been criticized for rejecting atomism, but in ancient Greece the atomic theories of Democritus remained “pure speculations, incapable of being put to any experimental test. [Wikipedia]”
  • However, based on a re-examination of the works of Plato and Aristotle – by people such as Mary Louise Gill, Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity, and especially Joe Sachs, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Aristotle: Metaphysics and Selections from Joe Sachs’s Introduction to His Translation of Aristotle’s Metaphysics – it has been concluded that the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle were in agreement. Where Aristotle appeared to disagree with Plato it has been said that this was merely to clarify a misinterpretation of his former teacher’s ideas.
  • The conception of reality held by both Plato and Aristotle was an holistic one.
• 2. Nominalism vs Realism
  • During Christian times a Neo-Platonist view prevailed which (it is proposed) differed from those of Plato himself. Aristotle’s word for substance – ousia – lost its original meaning when translated into Latin. There was an increasing tendency towards nominalism during Medieval times from the realism of Plato and Aristotle. This became the dominant mode of academic thought from Renaissance times. The views of early Christianity are important to an understanding.
• 3. Goethean World View
  • Goethe’s world conception was part of the naturphilosophie (nature-philosophy) movement from the end of the eighteenth century. It was inspired by a renewed interest in the holistic ideas of Plato. Henri Bortoft’s The Wholeness of Nature: Goethe’s way toward a science of conscious participation in nature provides insight into aspects of this, as clarified by the philosophical writings of Rudolf Steiner.
  • An extended version of the book would included the influences of Franz Brentano on both Rudolf Steiner and Edmund Husserl – both developed person centred philosophies.
• 4. Steiner’s World View
  • I have a choice here:
    • To close this book with an exploration of Goethean scientific ideas as elucidated by Henri Bortoft; or,
    • to extend this book to cover the scientific ideas of Aristotle and Plato, in relation to an in depth understanding of the nature of substance. This would entail a full exploration of the scientific insights of Steiner as detailed in his light, warmth and astronomy courses, amongst others. In these he introduced the concept of cosmic etheric forces.
• 5. Projective Geometry, physical-space and counter-space:
  • George Adams, Nick Thomas, and others, based on Rudolf Steiner’s indications, developed a mathematical description of the two holistically linked spaces which comprise the realty which we experience as Nature.
• 6. Discussion & Conclusions
  • Plato, Aristotle, Goethe, (Brentano,) and Steiner form an arc. An understanding of Plato and Aristotle may be facilitated by an understanding of Goethe as interpreted by Steiner. Goethe saw this himself. Goethe’s understanding of nature was initially described mathematically by George Adams, and interpreted visually with the assistance of Olive Whicher. Nick Thomas took these mathematical ideas much further, but as yet his extremely challenging work has not been visualised.

Table of Contents