How to Arrive at a Proper Understanding of
the Social Phenomenon of the Corona Pandemic
By Brane Žilavec, 28 October 2021
Improved version: 15 November 2024
How to Arrive at a Proper Understanding of
the Social Phenomenon of the Corona Pandemic
By Brane Žilavec, 28 October 2021
Improved version: 15 November 2024
The First Basic Condition Is to Take Into
Account All Possible Aspects and Objections
The global crisis which has come into the forefront of the worldwide public attention from January 2020 to May 2023 under the ‘trademark’ of corona pandemic can be at any rate compared with the crisis of the First World War that was witnessed by Steiner himself and about which he said: “Times are grave: therefore only grave and earnest views of the world and of life can serve in these times. So it is important to sense something of a feeling that I have often described as essential: above all not to judge rashly but, instead, to look at things side by side and wait for them to speak. In the course of time they will say a good many things to us. To acquaint oneself with as many aspects as possible is the best preparation for penetrating thoroughly into the difficult and complicated conditions of life today.” [1]
Here we have one of the basic conditions for an attainment of an understanding of any thing, being or phenomenon, including the very complex social phenomena in which many people participate with different motives which are the outcome of various worldviews and ethical values of individuals. This condition demands that we are not satisfied with one single view of the ‘corona pandemic’; instead we need to pay heed to all possible views without regard to our sympathies and antipathies.
Of course, this doesn’t mean that we need to agree with all claims which were and still are presented in the diverse explanations of the social and medical aspects of the ‘corona pandemic’. Due to our life experiences and the level of knowledge of each topic we can in specific cases feel if particular claims are true or not – or just partially true. However, this is not sufficient. What is important is that we understand why they are true or false!
We can develop such capacity if we “listen with an open mind to all objections that are presented. We can do so calmly” and persistently, for we “feel obliged to acquire knowledge even if this is arduous, to make it our own – to concern ourselves with epistemology and logic.” For this purpose “we must acknowledge the need, in anthroposophic accounts specifically, to reconcile concepts drawn from the world of spirit with philosophical (scientific) concepts – that is, to enable our terms and concepts to relate everywhere to those gained from the outer sense world” [2] by means of science.
We need to be aware that today an absolute prerequisite for attainment of a proper understanding of any affair is to consider all possible viewpoints and all serious objections against conclusions we have arrived to. For this purpose we should perform the so-called ‘inner thought monologue’ before we ‘go public’. “The thought monologue which should be as lively as possible we must have rehearsed earlier, letting it take form out of the arguments for and against, which we ourselves bring forward during the preparation [of a lecture or an article], anticipating all objections as much as possible.” [3]
Hence the demand is that “we have beforehand absolutely settled the thought element within ourselves” – “completely establishing it, as long as possible” [4] in advance – before we appear to the public with our explanations of thing or phenomenon. For only in such cases when we “feel ourselves in duty bound first to prove all things we utter, to set due restraint on all our words” [5] – are we developing our sense of truthfulness that is suitable to the demands of our age.
One would expect at least that members of the anthroposophical movement are aware that “the anthroposophist, among many other capacities which he must acquire, must also acquire a feeling of how matters concerning the world can be approached from many standpoints and from many different sides” [6] – before one can claim to really know something. This is important for our capacity of formulation of personal conclusions and judgements when we are in the role of observers of social events. But in the case of all those who are presenting the fruits of their investigation to the public it is an absolute necessity.
For “an enormous amount depends on whether there are enough people who understand” that in the present age and “for many thousands of years hence, it will be crucial that we human beings acquire a feeling of responsibility towards the thoughts we take hold of.” This means that “we are not given the ability to think in order to formulate thoughts with undue haste but, rather, so that we can search. Thinking is to be seen as a process that can remain for a long time at the stage of searching for a suitable form. One should postpone formulating thoughts until responsibility has been taken for the facts – until the facts have been turned and revolved and looked at from all sides.” Only by virtue of such consistent preparations can our thinking “reach the stage where it is, at any rate, suitable for being communicated” [7] to other people.
The Second Basic Condition Is the Need
to Know the Methods of Research
Perhaps you have noticed that in many cases when authors present scientific ‘facts’ no explanation is given as to how they have arrived at their conclusions. Nor is there given any explanation about the methods of experiments which supposedly prove what they claim in regard to infectious diseases and manners of prevention and therapy. And in the rare cases when there are descriptions of the procedures of an experiment, these are not easy to comprehend due to the use of scientific jargon which is understandable only to the ‘initiated’ who work in a specific field of science. In all these cases it is not possible to know for sure if the claims are true or are just hypotheses which were accepted as real by scientists. [8] This puts people in a situation where they are deciding on the basis of their personal preferences and not on the basis of facts which can be discovered by means of objective procedures of medical research.
This is especially problematic when scientists are speaking about things which are happening on the cellular and molecular level inside living organisms. For we need to be aware that there exists two areas where it is no longer possible to use the methods of research of materialistic science. One limit arises when scientists investigate objects in the universe with telescopes and others devices; in this case the objects are so enormously far away that they can say whatever they want, but we do not have any means to check what is really happening there. And the same problem is when scientists investigate the realm of existence where there are objects so small that we cannot ‘see’ them even with the most powerful microscopes. This is the area of atoms and molecules, among which also belong viruses. In all these cases we cannot distinguish what are undisputable facts and what are only presumptions that are regarded as ‘facts’.
Besides these two spatial limits of materialistic research there exists also a limit in the research of living organisms. This is evident from the very fact that one of the insurmountable challenges of modern science is its striving to understand living organisms and the processes that contribute to occurrences of illness, ageing and death. For that very reason “it is difficult to reconcile what we call life with the concept which the materialistic doctor has of it. Only someone who knows by intuition what life is can really penetrate to the understanding of life. And somebody like this also knows that the effectiveness of chemical and physical laws in the human body is controlled by something” which is difficult to describe with an earthly language. “This can be recognised only by intuition. Not before the doctor himself has become another person, can he realise this. With a certain training he has to acquire the concepts and then the insight of the mode of action of our etheric body. The usual reason, the usual human intellect, is incapable to understand the spiritual; as soon as it should advance to higher fields, it fails. Hence, without intuition everything in the medical field is only discussion; one does not touch reality.” [9]
One who is attentive to this issue can see everywhere in the mainstream medical literature the lack of suitable concepts which would enable scientists to recognise the workings of the supersensible bodies in the living organisms. The first among these bodies is the etheric body, without which no living organism can exist. And without knowledge of the nature and functions of the etheric body “it is impossible – when we find two cells of the same shape – to conclude from their structure an identity of their inner function. It is necessary to know the whole connection of the facts” that have influenced the development of both cells. “That is why the modern cellular physiology which sets out from an examination of the inner structure of the cells is taking the wrong course. Never can the external appearance prove the inner nature of a thing.” Therefore, the scientific explanations of the happenings in the human organism are to a great extent only assumptions which have become essential parts of official materialistic narrative which are not questioned anymore by its followers. One can wonder how long it will take for them to realize that “all our modern theoretical science is a creation of fantasy which has come about through combinations of external facts, having regard only to their outward appearance.” [10]
In the present phase of human development it is absolutely necessary that people understand the very methods of observation and cognition which are to prove this or that assertion of scientists. Steiner himself has characterised in numerous places in his published works the methods of research and cognition which were used by him and which should be used by all other spiritual-scientific researchers if they want to come to a real understanding of any topic they are investigating. [11] This means that we can never claim anything without providing evidence and explanation of how we arrived to our conclusion. “We have sure scientific results only, since we have such research by which every human being can check the results at any time. Today the human being is right if he wants to check everything” [12] that is asserted by any expert who works in this or that area of scientific investigation, including spiritual-scientific investigation.
The Basic Principles of Spiritual-Scientific Approach to Research
In the period when I was running the nutritional courses and later in the preparation of the website New Food Culture I was following the basic principles of spiritual-scientific research which were described by Steiner in the various places in his writings and lectures.
Everybody who is more seriously occupying himself/herself with the burning questions of nutrition can notice the existence of many nutritional schools with different nutritional guidelines which often contradict to each other. The frequent consequence of this state of affairs in the area of nutrition is confusion among those who wish to find the best nutrition for themselves. The special characteristic of the anthroposophical approach to nutrition is that it enables one to understand why there exists so many different nutritional schools and why they are contradictory. For “spiritual science does not give rules, but only wants to explain how things really are. It does not stand for this or that kind of diet – what it actually does is to enable people to understand any form of diet. Then each may arrange his life as he wills, according to these great laws of existence.” [13]
The preparation of the website was great schooling of how one who is using the principles of research given by Rudolf Steiner can arrive at such knowledge of complicated questions of nutrition that are not leading to one-sided viewpoints or to confusion when one needs to be capable to distinguish what is valid for all people and what is valid only in specific cases.
This approach is not only useful in the field of nutrition; it can be used in any field of investigation. Here are four of the Main Characteristics of Spiritual-Scientific Research:
I was using these methods of investigation also in the research of various aspects of the ‘corona pandemic’. The fruits of my research are available in fourteen articles. From their content it can be seen that in them I have addressed many aspects of this social-medical crisis which are not even mentioned by many other investigators, including anthroposophical ones. [15]
Besides, you can see that the majority of articles are written in such a manner that readers don’t need to be familiar with the esoteric aspects of the ‘corona pandemic’. [16] The sole reason is that I wanted to reach the wider public and not just those members of the anthroposophical movement who are or should be aware of the spiritual background of such phenomena as was the ‘corona pandemic’.
The main motive for my writing was the need to respond to one-sided and insufficient views of the ‘corona pandemic’ by anthroposophical doctors and some other anthroposophists who have accepted the viewpoint in favour of vaccination against so-called ‘Covid-19’. Of course, there were also enough anthroposophists who were able to recognise that my “articles about the various aspects of the corona pandemic are true examples of spiritual research” which can help people to recognise the workings of evil. Therefore “let’s hope that people in the anthroposophical movement begin to see what is really going on.” [17]
The realisation of what is really going on will be possible to attain among the members of anthroposophical movement only when all anthroposophical spiritual researchers use the methods and principles of investigation that were used by Steiner himself in all his activity. [18] For without an agreement about what the methods of spiritual-scientific research are, we cannot speak about spiritual science. Instead we are left just with different opinions and belief systems.
Spiritual Science Enables Us to Become Capable
to Criticise the Work of the Experts
In the period of the ‘corona pandemic’ there were many who were wondering why there are so many people who “have the tendency to surrender their sense of freedom and succumb to the fetters of public opinion.” The reason for this phenomenon was disclosed by Steiner himself in his lecture where he described the spiritual origin and nature of ‘public opinion’. In it he explained that “there is an utter impossibility that within the world of public opinion there can still be independent judgement” – that is, the capacity for formulating judgments that are based on facts and objective verification of all possible factors that contribute to the emergence of a medical or social crisis. For “public opinion is of less value than the judgements which an individual can reach on a path of progress” of one’s own personality. Steiner has also foretold that “in the future, men will be still more exposed to the pressure of public opinion” than was the case in his time. He has at the same time explained that an effective defence against this pressure is the development of greater inner power inside people which will be “possible only through spiritual science.” [19]
Many people who were encountering all kind of views, opinions and judgments in regard to the medical aspects of ‘corona pandemic’ – especially when they were uttered by laymen – would agree with the following objection: “You are not qualified to pronounce an opinion upon what experts nowadays officially proclaim. Only consider what the medical students have to learn!” [20] And after finishing study each of them needs years of practical experiences before she or he can be regarded as an expert in a specific medical field.
But if that were the absolute principle, we would be under the complete authoritarian rulership of the medical experts – without any right to evaluate the quality of their work which can have such a tremendous impact on our health when we need their help. Spiritual science is capable of overcoming this real life contradiction by pointing out that “we must allow the expert to create, but we must be able to criticise the expert. And this faculty of judgment we shall not acquire by specialising, but only by cultivating in an all-round way our powers of understanding and our faculty of judgment. This, however, can never come about through expert knowledge in some particular branch of science, but only through the all-embracing knowledge of the spirit” [21] that is enabled by anthroposophical spiritual science.
This is especially important for the present age when the main task of humanity is to develop ethical individualism. Therefore we need to know that “the construction of concepts and representations necessary for spiritual science, and peculiar to it, does not qualify us to become experts in any particular sphere, but it gives us the power of judging.” This will “enable us to use our judgment when we stand in the presence of authority. We shall not have expert knowledge but when in certain cases the expert acts on the strength of what he knows, we shall be able to form our own judgment about it.” [22]
From anthroposophical perspective knowledge alone is the source of what “makes possible and fosters the freedom and independence of our thinking. Spiritual science may not qualify us to enter the medical profession, but if we can penetrate to the reality of spiritual science it makes us capable of forming a right judgment upon the results of medicine in public life” [23] or upon any other aspect of modern medicine which has an impact on the quality of our lives.
All this is possible because “spiritual science feels intimately related with the most practical fields of life, and where it is appropriately pursued, it places the greatest value on the fact that thinking – the most certain guide – experiences a practical development within the real practical life.” For this purpose “spiritual science should not be anything that hovers unworldly and otherworldly anywhere in the cloud-cuckoo-land and wants to take away the human being from the usual everyday life. Instead, it should be something that can serve our life with all that we think, act, and feel at every moment.” [24]
Each person with healthy common reason and a basic sense of truth can notice that we live in a time when the spreading of untruths, which are diverting attention from real problems, has become the common practice in media, among the politicians and representatives of medical organizations. This is evident from the constant repetition of particular phrases – such as “trust the science” or “science is settled in regard to vaccination” – while at the same time they don’t even mention all available evidence about the extraordinary extent of corruption of science that is coming to the surface thanks to the ‘corona pandemic’ itself. For that very reason we need people who are courageous and capable to criticise the experts – both the corrupt ones and those who are ‘spellbound’ by a one-sided materialistic view of the world.
For complementary perspectives see:
❖ The Need for Cultivation of the Inner Sense for Reality by Means of Spiritual Science
❖ The Need to Distinguish between Illusions and Realities in Regard to Human Health and Disease
NOTES
