Author: Iwao Takahashi

Hello everyone. This is Shoji Shimura from Atelier Shimura. Continuing from last time, I would like to interpret Rudolf Steiner's "The Heart of Social Problems" using the book by Iwao Takahashi as a guide.

The Heart of the Social Question is a systematic social theory that Steiner wrote in 1919, shortly after World War I. With the collapse of traditional European civilization and rising momentum for revolution, the book was written as a guideline for conceiving what society should be like in the future.

"Reading 'The Core of Social Issues'" Author: Iwao Takahashi Publisher: Shunjusha (2024)

【table of contents】
Lecture 1: When we change, society changes
Lecture 2: The future of globalization
Lecture 3: The Spiritual Life of Modern People
Lecture 4: Theosophy and Social Issues Lecture 5: Japanese Culture at the Base of Society Lecture 6: Spiritualization of Everyday Life, Solitude and Community
Afterword

Pathology of modern society and the tripartite theory of social organism

In the first part, we identified two main themes in this book.

First, he emphasized that the "social will" that resides within each of us is essential as a prerequisite for conceiving social theory. He emphasized the importance of starting from an inner perspective of "what kind of society should I have for myself," rather than adapting oneself to existing society.

Secondly, there is the pathology of modern society, namely the problem of everything being commodified. Not only things, but also labor, land, and even spirituality have become commodities, and as a result, there is a danger that profit-making (the pursuit of efficiency and profit) will come to dominate society as a whole. He pointed out that the very foundation of society being swallowed up by economic activity is the essence of the problems of modern times.

In response to this situation, Steiner proposed the "triple-part theory of the social organism," which views society as a single living organism. He argued that society is made up of the following three distinct areas, and that a healthy society can only be established when each of these areas functions autonomously based on its own inherent principles.

1. Spiritual life (culture, education, art, scholarship, etc.)

2. Legal life (politics, state, rights, etc.)

3. Economic life (production, distribution, consumption, etc.)

This time, we will delve deeper into the relationship between "legal life" and "spiritual life."

The fundamental difference between legal life and spiritual life

Steiner believed that each of these three areas required a different ideal, which corresponds to the three ideals of the French Revolution (liberty, equality, and fraternity).

Ideals of legal life: "equality"
Let us first consider the role of legal life (the state). The fundamental premise in legal life is "equality under the law." Each of us has various differences, such as physical characteristics, abilities, and ideological beliefs. However, before the law, everyone must be treated as an individual with equal rights. A typical example of this is the right of each person to one vote in elections, where discrimination of any kind is not permitted. The most important principle in legal life is "equality."

Ideals of spiritual life: "Freedom"
On the other hand, this idea of "equality" is not applicable in the realm of spiritual life. Our inner selves and spirituality are completely different from one another, and treating everyone in the same way is extremely unnatural in light of human nature.

In spiritual life, each individual's personality and talent have absolute value that cannot be compared to others. An artist's creativity or an individual's faith are unique to that person and must be respected. Therefore, the ideal here is not "equality," but "freedom" that is not bound by anything.

The remaining concept of "economic life" is said to be sharing and helping each other, or "fraternity."

Why the distinction between disciplines is important: Preventing ideological control of the mind

Steiner clearly distinguishes between "equality" in legal life and "freedom" in spiritual life, emphasizing that each sphere must maintain its independence. This is a very important point.

What would happen if the ideal of legal life (the state) became dominant and the principle of "equality" invaded the realm of spiritual life? Pressure would arise for uniformity, with people saying, "We are all the same people, and we must have the same spirit." This is the true nature of ideology, which seeks to unite people with specific ideas and beliefs.

Steiner criticized ideology because he saw the danger that state power (legal life) could erode the inner selves of individuals (spiritual life) and paint people's spirits in a single color. "Freedom" in spiritual life is a guarantee that each individual has diverse spirituality, but it does not mean that everyone has the same way of thinking. This is why legal life and spiritual life must be clearly distinguished.

Quantitative thinking (law) and qualitative thinking (spirit)

The characteristics of these two realms can also be distinguished by their modes of thinking.

Legal Life (Quantity) : People's opinions are quantified, as in the case of one person, one vote in an election. This is an area where things are decided by the principle of "quantity," as in majority rule.

Spiritual life (quality) : The value of an artwork or an idea cannot be measured by "quantity," such as the number of supporters or market price. Even if it is a minority opinion, its value is not diminished. What is important here is "qualitative" depth.

Correctly recognizing and avoiding confusion between different principles in different fields is the foundation of a healthy society.

The power to shape society: "social acumen" and empathy for others

In order to build a healthy society, along with our inner "social will," "social acumen" is also important. This can be rephrased as the ability to try to understand others and empathize with them.

Attitude of “systemic stakeholderism”

Iwao Takahashi uses the suggestive term "whole-body stakeholderism" to explain this social sensibility. This refers to the attitude of trying to understand someone, not by listening while remaining in one's own position, but by stepping aside one's own perspective, placing oneself in the other person's position, and trying to relive the other person's feelings and thoughts as if one's soul were merging with theirs.

Putting yourself with all your being in someone else's shoes and trying to understand at a soul level what they really feel and want is an incredibly difficult practice, but it is essential for developing a true sense of community and for people in a community to connect with each other.

When Steiner proposed this idea, immediately after World War I, conflict between the working class and the capitalist class was intensifying. Steiner argued that social problems could not be resolved unless intellectuals and capitalists adopted the spirit of "whole-body involvement" and re-experienced the harsh conditions faced by workers and were able to truly empathize with them.

The danger of externally imposed consciousness

However, there was a major problem with social movements at the time: external coercion that threatened spiritual freedom.

Skepticism about "class consciousness"

Marxism at the time defined a group called the proletariat (working class) and believed that workers should awaken to "class consciousness."

Steiner questions whether this class consciousness really arose spontaneously from within each worker, pointing out that it was rather a consciousness that was instilled and forced from the outside by the external theory of Marxism.

Whether it's a state or a social movement, when a particular consciousness (in this case, class consciousness) is forced upon an individual's mind, it infringes on the "freedom" of spiritual life. Marxism was born out of a concern for exploitation by capitalism and was a morally just ideological ideology. However, it cannot be denied that as a result, its theory has become rigid as an ideology, exerting a coercive force on the inner workings of workers and imposing a framework on them that states, "This is how the working class should think."

Control of the mind by scientific omnipotence

There was another major trend underlying the social problems of the time: the domination of the mind by natural scientific thinking, or the belief that science is universal (materialism).

Natural science, like legal life, is based on "quantitative thinking." Collecting data and analyzing society quantitatively is certainly an effective approach. However, if this quantitative way of thinking takes over society as a whole, even the inner world of human beings will be measured numerically. Steiner warned that this will result in the suppression of the "qualitative thinking" that is inherent in spiritual life.

The "quantification" of labor and human value

This quantitative thinking also infiltrates the way we think about economic activity, especially "labor." Labor is essentially a qualitative activity that demonstrates an individual's abilities and spirituality. However, when quantitative thinking dominates society, labor is quantified using a uniform indicator called "wages" (the commodification of labor).

As a result, a trend emerges in which the higher the hourly wage or salary, the more valuable the work, and ultimately the more valuable a person is. A person's value is determined by the amount of their wages. This is an issue that we who live in the modern world must face seriously.

Steiner argues that work (self-realization and contribution to others) and wages (a means of earning a living) should be considered separately, because work is an expression of the spiritual life and has absolute value that cannot be measured in monetary terms.

Change begins with inner "social impulse"

Ironically, the biggest problem facing the working class at the time was that their very minds, which were supposed to be the parties to the social revolution, were dominated by a materialistic and mechanistic spirit (which also influenced Marxism) that was imposed on them from outside. They themselves were unaware of the fact that what they believed to be their inner will was in fact nothing more than an ideology imposed from outside. Therein lay the deep-rooted problem.

Ideologies imposed from the outside stifle the inherent, pure "social impulses" that lie deep within each individual.

Following Steiner's ideas, we come to the conclusion that the only way to truly solve social problems is for each of us to stop relying on external theories and authorities, discover our own inner social impulses, and participate in society from that perspective. The pure impulse to "build a better society" that wells up from within us is the key to opening up the future.

This is a reading guide by Shoji Shimura (CEO of Atelier Shimura).
We mainly feature books related to culture, art, and thought.
It will also be updated on YouTube every Monday.
Please subscribe to our channel and enjoy our videos.