introducing
some of the reasons for a founding of
the New Concord School of Philosophy


Some may think that it is a bit cheeky to try to found something that aligns itself with the original Concord School of Philosophy, created by  Bronson Alcott and friends; and, the locus in the 19th Century of many significant lectures and conversations.   I do believe, however, that not only is this justified, it is also necessary.  

The intellectual and spiritual work that was done in connection with the Transcendentalists and the Concord School of Philosophy never really disappeared from the American Character and Experiment, but had had for a time to go to sleep and dream, the same way a perennial plant ceases providing leaves and flowers and on occasion dissappears from view during the course of a Winter.  The spiritual garden of Transcendentalism came forth and flowered in the 19th Century, and then its creative forces (carried within certain specific souls) needed to rest.  In the following 20th Century all was remembered and cherished.   The garden had borne fruit, and the American Character and Experience received much nourishment from this source.

Now the time has come for this spiritual garden to be called forth again, through the same processess of individual inner work, shared conversation and friendship.  I expect the New Concord School of Philosophy to be wider and more inclusive in who participates, perhaps achieving what one of the original transcendentalists thought - suggesting that Villages (communities) could become Universitites.  Whether the reader of this page will find this justified I cannot say.  In support of this refounding, I offer this essay I wrote last fall after the fourth Concord Convocation sponsored by by Stuart Weeks, following which will be some words about myself, and what might then be the next steps required for those who may desire to take an interest.


Transcendentalism 

Comes of Age*

- the transcendentalist impulse, heretical 

Christianity and American Anthroposophy -




*this title follows the trail blazed by Owen Barfield's book of essays called: Romanticism Comes of Age, which sought to show how the romantics were a preview in time of the impulses connected to European Anthroposophy.  Here we do the same thing, only this time seeking to show the same essential connection between the transcendentalists and American Anthroposophy

introduction

Some readers of this will have no idea whatAnthroposophyis.  Rudolf Steiner, its scientific discoverer,  defined it as follows:Anthroposophy is a path of cognition from the spirit in man to the Spirit in the Universe.”  It will help to appreciate what I mean byscientific discoverer.

Anthroposophy is a name given by Steiner to a universal human capacity.  This potential is developed naturally in some cases, and only by hard work in others.  In some individuals there is a mixture of both.  Details can be found in my book American Anthroposophy.  This development involves the awakening of the will in human thinking (cognition), such that this will is able to bring about the metamorphosis of human thinking from its present state to the new (previously potential) state.

Thinking then becomes able, following this metamorphosis, to connect human consciousness to the Spirit, or Universal Consciousness (Emerson's Over-Soul).  Emerson developed this capacity more self-consciously (through hard work and instinct) and Thoreau was able to do it more naturally (instinctively).  We know, for example, the degree to which Thoreau was able to be awake within the true thoughts of the natural world.

Emerson described this condition (from one point of view) in this way, in his essay Nature, written at age 33 in 1836: Nature is a thought incarnate and turns to thought once again as ice becomes water and then gas.  The World is mind precipitated, and the volatile essence is forever escaping into the state of free thought.  Rudolf Steiner, at age 25, 50 years later in 1886, wrote this in his book A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World Conception: Thought is the last of a series of processes by which Nature is formed.

For our modern conscious, we might describe the situation this way:  The assumption of natural science is that thought is disconnected from the world (a kind of naive dualism).  Further, under the remnants of the once popular doctrine of logical positivism, such as analytic philosophy and various philosophies of language, thought itself (in consciousness) is believed to really only be available to be observed and analyzed when it enters language in sentences (this is justified by our naive experience of thinking in its discursive form, as if we were inwardly speaking to ourselves).  For both Emerson and Steiner, thought could be appreciated best right where it appeared before us in our own consciousness.  And someone like Thoreau, didn't so much think about this, but rather did it.  That is, he thought, and wrote down, or spoke, what he thought.

Steiner, in particular, described his book The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity as: some results of introspection following the methods of natural science.  One was to think about thinking - to cogitate about cogitation, using as much as possible the methods of natural science: objective observation and experimentation.  We are to seek an empirical knowledge of thought and thinking, as appears directly within our own consciousness.  Why?

Because in that most intimate sphere of our experience all the secrets of thought and the world as a co-joined unity (not a dualism, but a monism) can be perceived.

The 19th Century brought the full flowering of natural science.  Parallel to that development, the Romantics and the Transcendentalists offered an alternative to the materialism (all is matter, there is no spirit) then coming to dominate the thinking of the educated Western world.  In America, the transcendentalists appeared at the beginning of the 19th Century most strongly in Concord, but by the end (the 1880's) the power of that impulse wained, and by 1890 the Concord School of Philosophy had closed.

Research by Steve Burman, presented recently at the 2008 Concord Convocation (directed by local Concordian Stuart Weeks), showed that even though the Concord School ended, it ended with the knowledge that something was about to be born in Central Europe out of German Idealism (Hegel, Schilling, Goethe etc.)  This assessment was correct, for simultaneously to this waining (for a time) of the Concord School in America, in Europe Rudolf Steiner (as a young man) was bringing in the culmination of the work of German Idealism and marrying it to the scientific impulse (to the practical application of this work he later gave the name Anthroposophy).

In the early 20th Century the idea of European Anthroposophy (but not its practical realization) became known in America. Unfortunately, this took the course of too much study of things Steiner wrote and said, and not enough practice of inward disciplines.  This confusion of practice and study is where the transcendentalist/anthroposophical impulse becomes related to heretical Christianity.

Traditional Christianity has become dominated by systems of belief (rooted in an excess of biblical study), and few people actually bother to suffer the trials of practicing fully what is taught in the Gospels.  Heretical Christianity has always emphasized practice over dogma, which is why the Roman Church so often declared these folks to be heretics and tortured them and then killed them.

The Gospels themselves always hinted at the fundamental problem, by identifying two groups at the Birth: the Shepherds and the Kings. The Kings were related to the old pagan mysteries, which sacrificed their prior eminence (symbolized by the gifts of gold etc.), so that the Way of the Shepherds could begin to live into the world.  This new Way of Faith was rooted in the social form of Pastor and Flock.  The stream of Kings' wisdom (the more ancient Way of Gnosis) did not dissappear completely, but remained active wherever some kind of direct experience of the Divine Mystery was cultivated and taught. The Kings Ways taught that the individual human being did not need a pastor, and that all individuals were able themselves to be priests.

The stream of heretical Christianity, the Kings work, such as the Essenses, Gnostics, Manicheans, Pagans, Alchemists, Rosicrucians, some early natural philosophers (Newton was an alchemist and Kepler an astrologer), Transcendentalists, Romantics, Christian Hermeticists, Anthroposophists etc., was more interested in the truth than in an official institutional point of view.   By the time transcendentalism appeared in Concord, for example, the power of traditional Christianity to severely punish heretical thinking had been lost, although the capacity of traditional Christian authorities to studiously ignore contrary ideas remained.

Such was the fate of European Anthroposophy as it slowly emerged in 20th Century Central Europe - the traditional Churches ignored it. In a similar fashion, Stuart Weeks' effort, through the four years here in Concord of the annual Concord Convocations, seeking to unite transcendentalist thought and Anthroposophy, is basically ignored by local Concord Churches.  Most lovers of the work of the transcendentalists here in Concord look to the past - to Emerson, Thoreau, Fuller, and so forth, and not to the present, or the future.  Even the Convocation didn't quite know what to do with itself, for like most of the Anthroposophical Movement worldwide, the Convocation was unable to maintain the scientific discipline which Steiner modeled and taught.

Enter American Anthroposophy, or Transcendentalism Comes of Age.  What does it mean: Comes of Age?

This could be answered in several different ways.  I write that last sentence (thought) so one doesn't assume that the next sentences tell the whole tale.

We all know that time is rushing by at an almost breakneck speed.  Change forces us toward ends we hardly seem ready to see, much less master.  Both Anthroposophy and Transcendentalism need to be American - that is practical and pragmatic.  We are far past a time when mere good thoughts and idealism are to be of much use.  Americans are doers of deeds.  We create and  invent and accomplish.

American Anthroposophy, if it actually is Transcendentalism Comes of Age, must be useful to our present social crisis.  What then is American* Anthroposophy as a practice, rather than a dogma or a doctrine?  What can one do with it

*[Steiner recognized there would come to be an American Anthroposophy, see my book for details.]

Interesting enough, Steiner described  Americans as natural anthroposophists, and being English speakers, they were also instinctively in what he called the Consciousness Soul in their life of rights (their public life of law and politics).  This last means that we Americans, in spite of our human  flaws, are also at the leading edge of social transformation.  We insist, for example, that politics be moral.  We get confused (obviously) by what that means in practice, but we need our public life to be more than just a vanity of the power hungry - ruled by the appetites of the sharks, wolves and pirates.  The Republic was founded on such a need and view, and if American Anthroposophy can't help with that, then sorry, but come back later when we have the time to bephilosophical” (in the sense of contemplating our collective navels).

If what was hinted at above about the difference between the naive dualism of natural science (thought is disconnected from the world), and if Emerson and Steiner's appreciation of the fact that thought and world are a unity (a monism) were better known, we could then begin to see something practical.  The instinctive wisdom of think globally, act locally can become a science.

Our personal thoughts are not disconnected from life, but rather represent a perception of the living inside of existence.  In fact, we often are conflicted because so much of modern life suggests we can't personally know, but have to rely on experts and scientists.   Everywhere this is rebelled against, in small ways and large.  As the world continues its movement toward increasing social chaos (an intermediate stage of an ongoing metamorphosis toward a new civilization - that is, Western Civilization is in the process of dying into a new becoming), we are more and more being thrust on our own powers of observation, judgment and thought.

We live the immediacy of our biographies, not some guy in Washington, or some academic in an Ivory Tower.  We have to deal with the effects of each other's increasing stress driven craziness, and it will be our own thinking and judgment that pulls us through.  Emerson could not have put it more succinctly: In self trust all virtues are comprehended.

Yet, we are wise to be cautious.  We know we often make mistakes, and that frequently our thoughts turn out to not be true.  Science wants to tell us that we are just material brains, whose impulses were mapped out millions of years ago by a blind chance evolution.  That's a reasonable (but false) idea, with the existential problem coming when we face what to do when there is no food and water in our house, while our neighbor appears to have plenty.  Survivalist and militia groups are getting ready to treat this as if we still lived in caves. What was once called Social Darwinism is not pretty in practice, and many of us expect more of ourselves.  The age of paternalism (dominion over)  is giving way to a rebirth of maternalism (communion with). 

As this time of less and less material wealth descends upon Americans (joining us to social conditions already common among the majority of the rest of the world), we will face difficult choices.  Is Emerson's seeming idealism of self trust and self reliance a fiction?

American Anthroposophy is about how to think.  Not what, but how.  It is practice not theory.  It is a science of thinking that gains for the individual all the confidence they need in their own capacity for sound judgment in a time of seeming social madness.  The lessons of Katrina are to be multiplied.  We can't expect the government to save us, but must learn to rely on ourselves and each other.  As a consequence this new how of thinking has both an individual and a community component (when necessary, such as when faced with a personal moral choice we have a strong and valid instinct to define that moral choice ourselves - we can also do this new how of thinking together for community, not individual, purposes, through conversation).

While some may want a kind of simple Mac-version of this new how of thinking, its deeper reality is not to be gained like service in a fast food place.  All the same a brief sketch of this new thinking can be provided.

Properly called: Living Thinking (In The Acts of the Apostles this is called the experience of holy breath), this transcendental form of cognitive activity involves four stages of development.  These may be identified as thinking about, thinking with, thinking within and thinking as.  Each stage morphs out of the prior condition through an inwardly willed sacrifice (renunciation), coupled with an intention to love more and more selflessly the object of thinking.

To continue briefly: Ordinary consciousness is basically thinking about.  We generally think about other people, for example.  When we try to see the world from their point of view, we are moving from thinking about to thinking with.  This act, however, requires the conscious or instinctive renunciation of our natural inclination to re-actively like or dislike another person.  If we reactively like them too much (an excess of sympathy), we will not see them truly (a kind of love that is blind).  If we reactively dislike them too much (an excess of antipathy) we also will not see them truly - which lesson is described in the Gospels in the Sermon on the Mount as the problem of the mote and the beam.  To think truly with another, we have to renounce these reactive feelings, and consciously (willfully) make new (redeemed) mental pictures that seek to know them from their point of view - to think with them.

The transition from thinking with to thinking within is more difficult.  The mind must learn to empty itself entirely of its given thought content as regards the object of thinking.  In the Sermon on the Mount this is expressed in the Beatitude: blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.   To be poor in spirit means to not have a thought content to which we are attached.  We have surrendered our personal and individual point of view - renounced it.  When consciousness is empty of its old coagulated thought, the duality discussed above is overcome, and the first stages of a true new and living monism arises.  Mind is no longer separate from the inside of sense experience, but within the inside of sense experience.  Just as we have an inside of which we are deeply self aware, so does everyone else, including Nature.  Remember:Nature is a thought incarnate,...wrote Emerson.

After learning to letit think in me, which is the way Steiner puts it, or by learning tothink on our knees, which is the way the author of Meditations on the Tarot: a journey into Christian Hermeticism puts it - by stepping so strongly away from our own point of view, we are now on the threshold of learning to think as, not just within.  This final struggle involves renouncing the centrality of our own self.   We think fully of the other, as if the self didn't exist.

Now this process of learning to think about, then with, then within and finally as is circle and spiral-like in nature.  Ordinary consciousness does not disappear, but  the will in thinking is strengthened.  Moreover, something already possessed by ordinary consciousness becomes raised out of instinct and into full self-consciousness.

When, for example, a mother selflessly thinks for and about the needs of her children, she instinctively can intuit what she needs to do that is the good, or that moral action called for by the circumstances she faces.  When our consciousness is focused on other-need, to the exclusion of what is for our own benefit, we become knowing doers (Steiner's phrasing).  We find, by this selflessness, those thoughts which the situation calls forth.  We know then instinctively and semi-consciously the inside of the circumstances of our lives.  There is here no need to even know we do this, but at the same time, we do in fact act inwardly in our thinking in this fashion.  Obviously not all our thinking is other-directed, and we all know the consquences of any excessive self-directed thought - this can lead to actions we later regret.  All the same, we must take care of ourselves -  keep ourselves in balance in life - otherwise we can't effectively do the doing for others we might otherwise hope to do.

Now natural science, for example, stops at thinking about Nature.  In general the scientist keeps his own consciousness and Nature apart (having assumed already a disconnect).  He doesn't even conceive that Nature could have consciousness.  Not looking for it, he cannot find it.  Were he to decide to look for it, the door to the inside of Nature is through his own inside.  We don't approach any kind of real intimate relationship with another human being by focusing solely on their surfaces - what we see through our senses.  To know them, we have to learn of their inside, which we call: getting to know each other.  The same process is required with regard to Nature.

We know today the moral emptiness of thinking of another human being as a thing - as an object without an inwardness or its own meaning.  For example, we have mostly overcome making slaves of other human beings.  We have not yet overcome making a slave of Nature.  We are working Nature to death, and because we are interdependent with Nature, we are in effect murdering ourselves and our posterity.  As Einstein pointed out: "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

This then is Living Thinking (holy breath), which is precisely what is needed to deal with the crises of our time.  We have to learn to not just think about the elements of existence  (the living people, the living social processes), but with, within and as these elements.  Existence has an inside, just as does each human being we meet.  That inside can be known.

With the above thoughts we can now appreciate more deeply something hidden in the instinctive wisdom: think globally, act locally.  To think globally means not just to think and try to understand the whole world, but to think holistically - to grasp with thinking the whole situation, including its inside.  To think globally means to go beyond the stark tendency of natural science to concentrate solely on analysis, but instead to consciously practice synthesis.

In fact, science doesn't know at all what to do with the current social crisis of the world, for it never asks the relevant questions.  Religion doesn't do all that well in this realm either, tending to believe it has a monopoly on spiritual truths (although the tradition of social good works and service accomplishes much) .  Government, as Katrina taught us, is also mostly useless.  We are then mostly on our own.  As social chaos perhaps increases, what then will we choose to do?

In point of fact, the metamorphosis of Western Civilization involves the movement from a dead and dying paternalism (dominion over) toward a new and living social maternalism (communion with), including a movement away from I toward Thou.  What I can or cannot do alone is far outweighed by what we can do together.

Thinking, which frequently has to be individual (in order to be truly moral), when it is applied to the questions of serving the needs of several, has to acquire another quality.  We have to think-together, to take council together.  I-thinking acquires morality through selflessness, but at the same time we-thinking requires not just selflessness, but a capacity to weave the thoughts of many into a whole.  In our we-thinking conversations we have to unite the separate thoughts into a unity.  An individual trying to dominate the conversation does not serve the whole, but only himself as an isolate.  He raises his thought above the potential of the unity of all present thoughts.

We know too that this isn't easy.  There are whole disciplines connected to how to achieve what some call consensus.  First Nations communities would often discuss for days at a time serious issues which were to affect the whole.  No individual was expected to sacrifice their individual judgment and freedom to the whole - everyone was still free to go their own way.  But whatever community there was, that had to find some level of shared agreement through the social processes of conversation or communion with.

A lot of common place sayings are relevant here.  The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, for example.  Many hands make light work is another.  The 12 Steps of AA are fully rooted in community practices.  So is the social process called: non-violent communication. Everywhere we look at the social commons (the social below, which is more and more separate from the influence of the dying hierarchical organizations), group social processes are coming to the fore precisely because they are more effective.  They work.

The core of this working is conversation.  True conversation at this level is a skill, perhaps even an art (some call it the Royal Art).  This was the heart of the transcendentalist impulse - the circle of friends.  Community (shared) problems need to be solved by that particular community itself, through the conversation of social equals.  What is being suggested here is that in this practice of the Royal Art of Conversation, we together find the true inside (thoughts) of the social immediacy we share.  Not only its truth, but a kind of truth which is co-creative.  We (together) participate in this socially creative art, by then which the many crises of the coming times are solved in ways never before thinkable, because we didn't yet need to think them.  Another common place saying comes to mind: necessity is the mother of invention.  Social Necessity, it appears, is undergoing radical change.

This then is Transcendentalism Comes of Age: Finding the needed true thoughts through those conversations as are made necessary by our shared trials of life, in each circle of friends of which we are a member.


about the author of this esssay

My name is Joel A. Wendt, and I am 68 years old.  I am not a native of Concord, but was born in Montana, and lived in the Rocky Mountain West for most of the first third of my life.   The second third I lived mostly in Northern California, and the last third mostly in New England.  I originally came to Concord in 1987 to be part of Stuart Weeks' work: The Center for America Studies at Concord.  I am not an academic, although I have degrees in pre-seminary (BA University of Denver 1963) and Law (JD University of Montana 1967).   During the years I lived in Berekely California (1969 to 1982), I fell out of the ecomomic life style of the middle class (into which I was born) to become essentially working-poor (through the good fortune of  flaws of character).  Since that time I have worked mostly in restaurants, mental health facilities and the last three years of my work life, I worked in a light industrial factory in Wilton NH.  I have five adult children, through two marriages, who presently all live in California. 

All of my mature life I have also been a philosopher (a writer and thinker, my business card reads: social philosopher ... and occasional fool).  I have written and self published several books that can be read for free on my website (Shapes in the Fire), or purchased in book form at my book store (Joel Wendt's Theory of Everything Emporium).   I moved once more to Concord in the fall of 2008 and currently reside at Peter Buckley Terrace, an adult public housing building, which is two blocks from the Concord Library  (I am retired on a small social security pension).   On May 25th, 2003 I read a short paper  (along with others) at the original Concord School of Philsophy building on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of Emerson's birth (a small meditation on the spiritual path bioneered by Ralph Waldo Emerson, including a report of some practical applications).   I am very interested in meeting people who want to further their intellectual and spiritual life through conversation and friendship, as did the original transcendentalists in the 19th Century.  It is this mutual activity from which I expect The New Concord School of Philosophy to emerge.  I can be contacted by e-mail at: hermit@tiac.net.

Two last important points:

One: I'll not be urging upon any new friendships, that may develop through what happens next, my personal views and experiences expressed above.  I am not intent on teaching Rudolf Steiner, or Anthroposophy or Heretical Christianity.  I am interested in the sound intellectual and spiritual stimulation that can arise from conversation among companions sharing the same trials and difficulties of this time.

Two:  One of the temptations will be to turn this work into a group mostly studying and reading Emerson, Alcott, Thoreau and others.  Emerson would not approve of such a path, for he is clear that it is our own thoughts that are essential.  From the American Scholar lecture given at Harvard in 1837  "Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst. What is the right use? What is the one end which all means go to effect? They are for nothing but to inspire. I had better never see a book than to be warped by its attraction clean out of my own orbit, and made a satellite instead of a system. The one thing in the world, of value, is the active soul. This every man is entitled to; this every man contains within him, although in almost all men obstructed and as yet unborn. The soul active sees absolute truth and utters truth, or creates. In this action it is genius; not the privilege of here and there a favorite, but the sound estate of every man. In its essence it is progressive. The book, the college, the school of art, the institution of any kind, stop with some past utterance of genius. This is good, say they - let us hold by this. They pin me down. They look backward and not forward. But genius looks forward: the eyes of man are set in his forehead, not in his hindhead: man hopes: genius creates. Whatever talents may be, if the man create not, the pure efflux of the Deity is not his; cinders and smoke there may be, but not yet flame. There are creative manners, there are creative actions, and creative words; manners, actions, words, that is, indicative of no custom or authority, but springing spontaneous from the mind's own sense of good and fair. " [emphasis added]