Dear Allen and BD friends, I think one can encourage all efforts to improve agriculture without our feeling threatened, because BD has to offer what nothing else can. To understand what that is one needs to be able to place Steiner correctly within the spectrum of human knowledge. I have attempted to do that in the short article that I place below. Sincerely, Don (and Eve)
Dear Friends, I have slightly revised this article. It is now in its final form and it represents my last statement on this subject, at least in essay form. I know that what I ask for here is demanding, and that I am probably talking more to the future than to the present, but nevertheless I believe that this statement needs now to be made. I welcome any responses. Sincerely, Don CRITICAL THOUGHT & MONIST CAUSALITY �Descartes and the Evolution of Human Consciousness Still implicit in nearly all religious thought is the acceptance of a pre-critical monism of Mind or spirit, the essential character of which derives from an earlier state of human awareness; from that which Owen Barfield termed �original participation� and Theodore Roszak has referred to as �the old gnosis�. A remnant of this atavistic clairvoyant consciousness exists wherever there is a pre-critical element in human thought, revealing itself in religion as a yearning for the past (that old time religion), or as a willingness to accept the seeming miraculous on a basis of faith; or holy writ as the �literal� word of God. This pre-critical element we now find being strongly questioned, not only in science, but also, for example, in the critical theology of the Jesus Seminar. A major stepping-stone in mankind�s evolutionary path towards a critical consciousness was the appearance of Rene Descartes� mind/matter dichotomy, wherein a critical thinking based upon individuality (I think therefore I am) first made its appearance. Descartes divided the world into two kinds of substance res extensa (extended substance or "body") and res cogitans (thinking substance or "mind"). These two substances constitute the Cartesian dualism, between the two halves of which there is seen to exist a total causal disjunction, i.e. the causal forces that are believed to proceed from either can have nothing whatever to do with the other, because they would cancel each other out. For Descartes dualism to be true, mind and matter would have to have had separate origins. A century or more after Descartes, �body� the lower part of his dichotomy, led to the development of a critical monism of matter (scientific materialism), which sought to overcome his dichotomy by claiming that �mind,� if it existed at all, was merely a by-product of matter. This claim then began slowly to liberate science from religion, and by doing so it further enhanced our already growing sense of individuality. Then, three centuries later, and out of the enhancement that science had already brought to human freedom, the still pre-critical upper part of the Cartesian dichotomy �mind,� gave birth to a critical monism of Mind or thought. This development first arose from the scientific works of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, for which the Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner was later to provide the needed epistemological foundation. This was a necessary development, one that overcame the one-sidedness implicit in the view that there existed only one critical monism�that which had arisen out of matter; but like all such developments it needed to establish itself slowly, especially in since its full development can be shown to be intimately tied together with the ongoing and now largely self-directed evolution of human consciousness itself. Post-Critical Thought In the interim, during the twentieth century, what is termed �post-critical� thought arose in direct response to the one-sidedness of the stream of critical thought, which derives from a monism of matter. Michael Polanyi was a post-critical thinker, and as a scientist his work belongs in a monist setting, but not in that provided by a monism of matter, and lacking another monism it very easily succumbs to a dualistic interpretation. I suggest that it really belongs in the monism of Mind of thought established by Goethe and Rudolf Steiner, but it arose at a time before there was any widespread recognition that this second critical monism even existed, its propagation having been made subject to what Owen Barfield called the �Great Tabu�. In the future, once the Great Tabu is overcome, there will be seen to exist two possible critical monisms, which on the matter of ultimate causality are diametrically opposed. On the surface they may seem merely to relate to different aspects of human experience, but this is only superficially the case, because only in one of them is the operation of the forces of causality in nature fully and truly described. How may we know which one? In part at least, we look to epistemology to answer this question, because a true critical worldview must possess a sound foundation in critical thought. Materialism has completely failed in this regard (see John Horgan�s Undiscovered Mind), whereas Rudolf Steiner�s monism of thought does indeed have a sound and non-contradictory epistemological foundation (see his Philosophy of Freedom and his 1892 doctoral thesis Truth and Science). However, even in passing this test, Steiner�s critical monism is also subject to a yet deeper test, to the biblical precept: �you shall know the tree by its fruit,� which applies to all of human endeavour. How not to be a Dualist Anyone today who accepts the truth of a critical monism of matter, and then either adds to it or simply retains a pre-critical monism of spirit (religion), embraces a causal contradiction and so becomes a dualist. A dualist, then, is one who believes that a fundamental disjunction permeates the entire universe and manifests as a total contradiction in the direction of causal logic, i.e. that the forces of causality in the universe are seen to work simultaneously in two entirely opposite directions: (a) out of matter (science) supposedly combining natural law with rationality, and (b) out of spirit (religion) in which a given belief system is combined with a faith in God's ability to work in a manner contrary to natural law, i.e. to work miracles. The vast majority of people are dualists. Rudolf Steiner was strongly opposed to any such mind/matter dualism and to all of its transcendental and metaphysical implications. In contrast to dualism, a monist contends that the causal forces in nature work in one direction only, either out of matter (a monism of matter�scientific materialism), or out of spirit (a monism of Mind or thought�Steiner's anthroposophy). The term 'monism' does not refer to the content of a world view, but only to the single direction of causality implicit in it and forming the basis for all of its enquiries. In science there can be any number of different areas of research, but the same direction in causal logic will need to be common to them all, otherwise it ceases to be science. For a genuine monist only one of the two opposing monisms can be true, because otherwise he or she instantly reverts to being a dualist. This is a truly uncompromising requirement upon which the very existence of science depends. Science must be monist, because it cannot accept an outright contradiction in the direction of causal logic (the one cancelling out the other) and yet still remain science. It must be either entirely materialistic or entirely spiritual in its view of reality�of ultimate causality, it cannot be in between or half and half, not even by accident, and yet still remain scientific. And if either monism, in its attempt to prove an argument, must borrow from the opposite monism, even unconsciously, then doing so automatically cancels out its scientific validity. The Choice It is, I have contended elsewhere, impossible for the supporters of a critical monism of matter to argue their case convincingly, especially in the realm of biology, without uncritically drawing the content of their argument from a monism of Mind or spirit (see essays 3,4,8,10,11 & 21 in Evolution and the New Gnosis). To do so is to create an immediate dualism, even if this fact goes long unrecognised. The outcome of such an enquiry can then no longer be viewed as science in any legitimate sense. The same, however, must be true of anyone arguing the case for a monism of Mind or thought. If one iota of their argument involves an acceptance of the causal logic implicit in materialism, then that argument immediately ceases to be valid as science, and they also become unconscious dualists. I submit that this is one of the few realms in philosophy in which we can legitimately speak of absolutes. The mutual exclusivity of the two opposing monisms relies upon the �law of the excluded middle� well established in common logic, which tells us that the sum of one and minus one is zero, and that to think or to act otherwise is to be irrational. This law of exclusion, as it applies to the realm of scientific causality, will not become widely recognized until the existence of Steiner's Monism of Mind of thought, standing in total opposition to science's Monism of matter, also becomes recognized. This Owen Barfield, among others, strove very hard to accomplish during his lifetime, because he realized that in Steiner�s work the very wellsprings of our humanity, once the exclusive property of religion, are fully returned to us, but now within the non-contradictory context of a critical monism of Mind or thought. In the future, therefore, as scientists and critical thinkers, we will all be called upon to make a choice and to justify it rationally. Only one of the options available to us is fully rational, and all of the alternatives whether monist or dualist will embody a serious contradiction in causal logic. A further option, one already suggested in the works of David Searle, is that we eliminated the words �monism and �dualism,� from the language of philosophy, and thereby attempt to ignore the difficult issues that arise from taking the direction of causality in nature seriously. Robert Zimmer and I, in our book Evolution and the New Gnosis, have contended that this is a false option, and that the only real solution to this entire dilemma, requires that a new and sympathetic hearing be given, in academia and elsewhere, to the vast and challenging works of Rudolf Steiner. This will help to prepare us for the changes which the future evolution of human consciousness will bring in its wake (see my article �Issac Newton & Harry Potter� No. 5 in our book). Don Cruse > From: Allan Balliett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:18:03 -0500 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: SCOOPED!! Fwd: New: Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture Institute > >> Status: U >> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Nov 2002 06:18:02.0265 (UTC) >> FILETIME=[C06FF890:01C28C6E] >> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:18:01 -0700 >> Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sender: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: New: Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture Institute >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Folks, >> >> This organization has an awesome website, visually, and is certainly >> presenting an interesting approach to organic ag (offering USDA accredited >> certification as well). I'm looking forward to following the developments >> here. >> >> Chrys >> >> The Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture Institute has been founded >> to re-enliven Natural Law in the profession of agriculture. The >> Institute's principal goals will be to promote and certify pure >> Vedic Organic food--food that is not only free from harmful chemical >> residues and genetic modification, but food that is lively in the >> full intelligence of Natural Law--food that is grown in accordance >> with the ancient, time-tested principles of Maharishi Vedic >> Agriculture. >> >> >> Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture incorporates in its programs the >> most rigorous existing standards for pure organic food, but goes >> well beyond current organic standards. >> >> >> The technologies used in Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture enliven >> the intelligence and vitality within the plant itself, thus offering >> the world the opportunity to eat the most nourishing, healthful and >> life-enriching food available anywhere. >> >> >> To learn more, please visit the Maharishi Vedic Organic Agriculture >> Institute webpage at http://www.mvoai.org/intro.html. >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> >> Craig Shaw >> Maharishi University of Management >> Fairfield, IA 52557 >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Phone (641) 472-1148 >> Fax (641) 472-1173 >> http://www.mum.edu >> >> >> Sustainable Agriculture program >> http://www.mum.edu/ls_dept/agriculture.html >> >> >> College of Maharishi Vedic Medicine >> http://www.mum.edu/CMVM >> >> >> Center for Natural Medicine and Prevention >> http://www.mum.edu/CNMP >> >> From or Forwarded by: Chrys Ostrander >> 33495 Mill Canyon Rd. >> Davenport, WA 99122 >> Phone: (509) 725-0610 >> >> Email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> URL: http://www.thefutureisorganic.net > >
