Moralische Phantasie, moralische Technik, moralische Intuition - Fragen an den ethischen Individualismus (D, E)
Lorenzo Ravagli
Category: Philosophy, Language: D, cover: HT, pages: xxx, year: 1996.
Ein hervorragender Artikel!* - und online
Anmerkungen:
deep link; da die website eine veraltete Technik (sog. "frames") benutzt,
ist aus technischen Gründen kein anderer direkter Verweis möglich; auch
Suchmaschinen können in solchen Fällen nicht anders verlinken. (Wie schrieb
Michael Muschalle? (sinngemässes Zitat) Hellsichtig sind wir alle,
wir wissen es nur nicht. :)
Gegen Muschalles "alle" spricht"Leider müssen wir hellsichtig Gewordenen fürchten,
die Wenigeren zu sein, wenn gar nicht gar zu wenige."
-- Zitat "Die
Glaubensnot der deutschen Katholiken" von Michael Schaeffler (pseudonym) aka
Alois Dempf (von der Universtaet Bonn), 1934, p94
Review © (2009) by interesting-books-selector.com
[Excerpt of an email about Ravagli sent to a friend]
Ravagli writes as clear and dense as Steiner, without needing to quote Steiner often, which is an art in itself!
One of his most outstanding article is "Moralische Phantasie, moralische Technik, moralische Intuition - Fragen an den ethischen Individualismus" in Jahrbuch für anthroposophische Kritik 1996.
In the article Ravagli goes through Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and then side-stepping to the existentialists Stirner, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche before culminating in Steiner and his Philosophy of Freeedom (aka PoSA). The name Steiner is mentioned only a few times at the start and then again only once about 80% from the end in the chapter abbout ethical individualism.
The article is neither too short nor too long and does not popularize the causal relationships while it elaborates about ethical individualism and its three constituents, moral intuition, moral phantasy, and moral technics, which lay the ground for the fundamental intuition of the whole philosophy of freedom, and which have constituent meaning for the composition of human life in the sense of the idea of freedom, derived from the three central thoughts of the Philosophy of Freedom:
| "1. Nur weil die menschlichen Individuen eines Geistes sind, können sie sich auch nebeneinander ausleben. | Only because human individuals are of one spirit are they also able to live and act side by side.* |
| 2. Der Freie lebt in dem Vertrauen darauf, daß der andere Freie mit ihm einer geistigen Welt angehört, und sich in seinen Intentionen mit ihm begegnen wird. | The free person lives in the confidence that any other free person belongs with him to one spiritual world and will concur with him in his intentions.* |
| 3. Der Freie verlangt von seinen Mitmenschen keine Übereinstimmung, aber er erwartet sie, weil sie in der menschlichen Natur liegt." 19 | The free person demands no agreement from his fellowmen, but he expects agreement, because it lies within man's nature.* |
| [... Schlusssatz der Erklärung zum dritten Satz] "Die höchste Stufe des Freiheitsbewußtseins ist mit der Erkenntnis erreicht, daß diese Freiheit ihre Erfüllung im Dienst am Weltzusammenhang findet." | [... Summary of explanation of third key sentence] The highest level of freedom in consciousness is reached with the cognition that this freedom finds its fulfilment by servicing the world as a whole.** |
| 19) Rudolf Steiner: Die Philosophie der Freiheit, Dornach 1973 f., S. 166. | *) All three quotes are from this translation of PoSA,
Chap. ix, about 75% down.
**) "Weltzusammenhang" was translated as "world as a whole" like in Riddles of Philosophy, but maybe it'd be better to use "context of the world" or "what unites the world." |
Ravagli explains the three key sentences of PoSA brilliantly - providing a good example for how every other sentence of PoSA should be meditated on. You might wonder how one could derive such profound thoughts like transsubstantiation of blood into wine, or harmony of human will with the will of the divine foundation of cosmos [my translaton of "der göttlicher Weltengrund"], and more, just from short, typically innocent looking Steiner-sentences - yet all this is contained in the three key sentences, -- if you meditate about it with dedication.
Notably, chapter 12 about moral technics contains a clear expression against mandatory exploitation by ideologies like socialism and democracy, where helping others is made mandatory. We should ask nothing, but we could expect (i.e., erwarten, like we await, or look forward to, e.g., the coming of Christ in the Holy Night) help if in need. But any help must be a free action. Solidarity can't be institutionalized based on compulsion; it must a voluntary act by free individuals - by definition of the word solidarity.
If we made solidarity compulsary, (and all western nations today take from the productive to give to those who are in need), humanity, the very source of spiritual production, would be nationalized, like the means of production in economy are nationalized in socialism (by definition of the word socialism, see Ludwig van Mises) - and this would be the last step in the completion of total enslavement of mankind, with the result that all production comes to an end.
Closing the review with a related quote from the same article:
| "Ernährt sich der Mensch durch andere Menschen (indem er ihre Arbeitskraft ausbeutet) oder von anderen Menschen (indem er sie als Objekte seiner Begierde mißbraucht), dann verletzt er ihre Würde und raubt ihnen ihre Lebenszeit." | If man feeds himself via other men (by exploiting their labor force) or from other men (by abusing them als object of his desire), then he's violating their dignity and steals their life-time. |