Understanding organisms by intuiting life: Kant, Goethe, and Steiner.

IF 1 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Christoph J Hueck
{"title":"Understanding organisms by intuiting life: Kant, Goethe, and Steiner.","authors":"Christoph J Hueck","doi":"10.1007/s40656-025-00681-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper investigates the enduring philosophical challenge of how a living organism may be understood, through the epistemological perspectives of Immanuel Kant, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, and Rudolf Steiner. Kant's analysis of the necessity of judging organisms as purposive and self-generating wholes is presented as foundational to any systematic account, insofar as it addresses the very conditions under which an organism can become an object of cognition. However, due to Kant's strict separation of sensory intuition from conceptual understanding, he regarded purposive self-generation as merely heuristic, lacking causal legitimacy within empirical nature. In contrast, Goethe's participatory and intuitive method, articulated in The Metamorphosis of Plants, integrates empirical observation with imaginative reproduction to achieve an intuitive grasp of an organism's life and transformation. Conceived as a dynamic bridge between perception and concept, Goethe's approach was subsequently interpreted and philosophically developed by Steiner. Steiner argued that an organism's essential nature can be apprehended through a productive, intuitive mode of cognition that mentally reconstructs the organism's formative principles and self-generative force. His position, which bears affinities to Fichte's notion of intellectual intuition, both elucidates and extends Goethe's method by asserting that the organism's formative force is accessible through active, intuitive cognition. Thus, Steiner demonstrated how Goethe's approach transcends Kant's limitation on the knowability of organic life, enabling the empirical observation of spiritual efficacy in material nature. This paper ultimately contends that the Goethe-Steiner method offers an empirical yet intuitive framework and method for understanding the life and formation of living organisms.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"47 3","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12267350/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-025-00681-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper investigates the enduring philosophical challenge of how a living organism may be understood, through the epistemological perspectives of Immanuel Kant, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, and Rudolf Steiner. Kant's analysis of the necessity of judging organisms as purposive and self-generating wholes is presented as foundational to any systematic account, insofar as it addresses the very conditions under which an organism can become an object of cognition. However, due to Kant's strict separation of sensory intuition from conceptual understanding, he regarded purposive self-generation as merely heuristic, lacking causal legitimacy within empirical nature. In contrast, Goethe's participatory and intuitive method, articulated in The Metamorphosis of Plants, integrates empirical observation with imaginative reproduction to achieve an intuitive grasp of an organism's life and transformation. Conceived as a dynamic bridge between perception and concept, Goethe's approach was subsequently interpreted and philosophically developed by Steiner. Steiner argued that an organism's essential nature can be apprehended through a productive, intuitive mode of cognition that mentally reconstructs the organism's formative principles and self-generative force. His position, which bears affinities to Fichte's notion of intellectual intuition, both elucidates and extends Goethe's method by asserting that the organism's formative force is accessible through active, intuitive cognition. Thus, Steiner demonstrated how Goethe's approach transcends Kant's limitation on the knowability of organic life, enabling the empirical observation of spiritual efficacy in material nature. This paper ultimately contends that the Goethe-Steiner method offers an empirical yet intuitive framework and method for understanding the life and formation of living organisms.

通过对生命的直觉来理解有机体:康德、歌德和施泰纳。
本文通过伊曼努尔·康德、约翰·沃尔夫冈·歌德和鲁道夫·施泰纳的认识论观点,探讨了如何理解活的有机体这一持久的哲学挑战。康德对判断有机体作为有目的的、自我产生的整体的必要性的分析,被认为是任何系统解释的基础,因为它解决了有机体能够成为认识对象的条件。然而,由于康德将感觉直觉与概念理解严格分离,他认为有目的的自我产生仅仅是启发式的,在经验本质中缺乏因果合法性。相比之下,歌德在《植物的变形》中阐述的参与性和直觉性方法,将经验观察与想象复制相结合,以实现对生物体生命和转化的直觉把握。作为感知和概念之间的动态桥梁,歌德的方法随后被施泰纳解释和哲学发展。斯坦纳认为,一个有机体的本质可以通过一种富有成效的、直观的认知模式来理解,这种认知模式在心理上重构了有机体的形成原则和自我生成力。他的立场与费希特的智力直觉概念有相似之处,他通过断言有机体的形成力可以通过积极的直觉认知来获得,从而阐明并扩展了歌德的方法。因此,施泰纳证明了歌德的方法如何超越了康德对有机生命可知性的限制,从而能够对物质自然的精神功效进行经验观察。本文最终认为,歌德-施泰纳方法为理解生命和生物体的形成提供了一种经验而又直观的框架和方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信