The Evolution of the Earth
9th, March, 1905
This lecture is something
like a continuation of that which I held about the origin of the human
being. We come today back to times which are in the distant past, and
we get to concepts which are very far to the present materialistic thinking.
Hence, allow me that I tie on a few introductory words about the relation
of my topic to the contemporary ideas.
It has absolutely to be
clear to everybody who has penetrated and understood the scientific
knowledge of the present that today the theosophical ideas about the
origin of the earth can be taken as something very speculative, maybe
even very fantastic. However, do not believe if one goes deeper into
the matters that then a real contradiction appears between the scientific
and the theosophical ideas. We have to get absolutely clear about the
fact that the naturalist is only able to verify and to explain what
takes place in the external sensory world and is to be grasped with
the scientific reason. I am of the opinion completely that about such
difficult questions, as this is one, also from the theosophical point
of view only somebody should speak who is also familiar with the whole
scientific education of our time, so that he has an idea of it, how
much he violates the generally accepted ideas. However, I would like
to put an example of mutual understanding on the top of my lecture for
those who oppose these advanced views from the materialistic point of
It was at the end of the
sixties, when for the last time an even if pessimistic; nevertheless,
decidedly idealistic philosophy appeared which made a deeper impression
on a bigger public. It was Eduard von Hartmann's (1842–1906)
Philosophy of the Unconscious (1869). I only want to say what
has resulted historically. Hartmann bore down on the ideological ideas
which originated from Darwinism. When one noticed which great impression
the Philosophy of the Unconscious caused, many opposing writings
appeared. Among these one appeared anonymously with the title The
Unconscious from the Standpoint of Physiology and the Theory of Evolution
(1872). The most significant philosophers said that it was the
best writing against Eduard von Hartmann and his philosophy. The writing
was sensational. The naturalists realised that it was written by a naturalist
and that Eduard von Hartmann was disproved thoroughly. The second edition
of the same anonymous writing appeared soon afterwards, however, with
the name of the author, namely with the name of Eduard von Hartmann!
It was an ingenious mystification! Indeed, I am not a Hartmannian or
follower of the Philosophy of the Unconscious, but this philosophy
stands higher and contains more than one can otherwise bring forward
from the pessimistic side. Hartmann showed that one only needs to scale
down his point of view to understand the matters in question still much
deeper than the opponents. Thus spiritual science or theosophy may also
express itself in such a way like those who believe to be the best naturalists.
I have said this to show that one may also disprove theosophy in similar
way. However, theosophy may give this rebuttal better than any other.
We have to take into consideration
that we deal with very difficult chapters and that it is exceptionally
laborious to penetrate into these regions. However, it is even more
difficult to find the appropriate means of expression within our language
only shaped for the external sensuous world. One has to use everything
possible to dress the fine, subtle concepts and the views which are
taken from purely spiritual worlds into clear language. Nevertheless,
I attempt to pictorially and clearly express what is familiar to me
as experience in these higher fields. You find the relevant periods
of the big world evolution also shown in the theosophical literature.
But you find them shown more schematically than I will do it today.
I do not make any objection to this schematic description which may
also be useful and gives clear concepts of this evolution to the reason.
One can learn this from the theosophical man